In several interviews in British media, where he spoke (uncensored) about censorship in the West being more intense and more rediculous than in China. About the fact that he -while freely talking on TV- is somehow not allowed to freely talk about the truth. And about how "the sense of guilt around the persecution of the Jewish people" is weaponized against Arabs via the "Jewish community's significant influence in the media, finance and culture in the US".
The latter btw is the bullshit he originally argued. So he is in fact openly telling us to blame all that evil Jewish influence while at the same complaining that he is not allowed to speak about exactly what he is allowed to repeatedly say in interviews...
I don't remember the original wording, but I'm pretty sure instantly switching over to "the jews controlling media, culture and finance are the reason I got cancelled" (the oldest page in the book about the jewish world conspiracy) is more than enough to evaluate his views...
The FAA obviously. It's publically available data, so it's totally useless to keep one person from publishing the data when anyone can take over and continue.
This kind of nutjob small brained bigotry is ruining our country and embarrasssing us gloablly. Other countries see these anti-human laws and realize we're crumbling and don't really stand behind our American "values" or our consitution.
You would hope this is the case but in reality the right-wing nutjobs everywhere just copy/paste US culture war idiocy, usually even without making the slithest necessary adaption to make them fit.
Despite the fact that all they want is EQUAL rights.
And that's the lie. Try to tell those "equal rights and quotas" people the same should apply to men in jobs heavily dominated by women and a sizeable and very loud part of them will explode in your face screaming and slavering because you dared to even mention the idea of equality.
Yeah, sure. Listing the 7 countries (from the article btw...) that signed an acquisition and cross-servicing agreement with Japan as one unit is so disrespectful... 🤡
To fair, there are these so-called "environmentalists" fighting nuclear... in their breaks between protesting wind turbines and solar panels. And who actually finances those is not exactly secret.
But that would solve something. And that's not wanted.
So instead we will lament ballooning costs and build times for nuclear and invent narratives how that's totally not caused by nuclear being a shitty alternative to renewables and storage.
This way we can spend another few decades on building a none-solution while just accidently also having sunk so much money already that changing to an actual solution doesn't make sense anymore.
Oh, sorry. Were we expected to stop burning fossil fuels? Doesn't seem to work for some reason, but don't worry. Building nuclear will totally solve this. Any decade now... (And no, we totally did not build to little anyway, just to make sure it will never solve anything even if the unimaginable happens and build times and costs become manageable...)
Surprising no? But still sad as they are -again and again- too stupid to lash out at the actual reason and are easily manipulated to target someone else. And that's usually either low income classes or foreigners, not coincidently because those are lacking a lobby.
Why spend so much on propaganda against vaping. Just do it like they did in my country and pay a few lobbyists so they increase the taxes on liquids by 5000% so the tabacco companies can take over that market with harmful e-waste disposables, too. sigh
No, that's the monarch (where it still exists) or the president in parliamentary democracies (not presidential democracies).
The PM is in fact the leader of government and relies on the good graces of the governing party or parties, not unlike the US president candidate effectively needs to unite his party behind him.
The difference is mostly the ability to get removed/replaced hy his party but usually no term limits, where presidents are term-limited and there are explicit regulations how the parliament can remove them (something that is already inhently given in parliamental systems where the government leader is selected via parliamental majority in the first place).
You aren't wrong with your criticism in general (from a purely journalistic pov). But actually typing DEI into Google and clicking the first hit, would be more constructive than ranting.
Basically yes. Or: the term is fine; in the eyes of people who never heard or thought about its racist origin.
And your were entirely on the right track when your first comment started with explaining the origin first. When that's your starting point and you then get the response "But I've been saying it for years", it's probably far more successful to go with "Yes, but it can be offensive for people knowing its origin, so why not use available alternative terms?" than with "bro it's been fucking racist for years". In one case people have a high chance on thinking about it, in the other they will instictively feel attacked and get defensive about it.
In several interviews in British media, where he spoke (uncensored) about censorship in the West being more intense and more rediculous than in China. About the fact that he -while freely talking on TV- is somehow not allowed to freely talk about the truth. And about how "the sense of guilt around the persecution of the Jewish people" is weaponized against Arabs via the "Jewish community's significant influence in the media, finance and culture in the US".
The latter btw is the bullshit he originally argued. So he is in fact openly telling us to blame all that evil Jewish influence while at the same complaining that he is not allowed to speak about exactly what he is allowed to repeatedly say in interviews...