Slashdot Mirror

> robots.txt is only a suggestion. Nobody is obligated to obey it.

However, https://web.archive.org/ does honor it. (If you know of a bigger public archive, please let me know.)

That poor decision to honor robots.txt even when the crawl is instigated by a human is one of the reasons https://archive.is/ was created.

https://archive.is/faq#Why_doe...

> robots.txt is only a suggestion. Nobody is obligated to obey it.

However, https://web.archive.org/ does honor it. (If you know of a bigger public archive, please let me know.)

That poor decision to honor robots.txt even when the crawl is instigated by a human is one of the reasons https://archive.is/ was created.

https://archive.is/faq#Why_doe...

When they analyze all the data that exists, that's the opposite of cherry picking. [Geoffrey Landis]

Indeed. I made this same point after Jane/Lonny baselessly accused Layzej of "cherry-picking" when Layzej loaded all the UAH data. Jane/Lonny then suggested cherry-picking at 1998, and keeps insisting that this somehow isn't "cherry-picking".

Ironically, I even gave Jane/Lonny R code which calculates trends and accelerations of global mean sea level (GMSL) data. That graph accounts for autocorrelation- the red lines are 2 sigma uncertainties. The trends and accelerations are calculated over periods which all end at 2009.5. The new significance.zip (backup copies) contains my R statistics folder, including many data sets.

Again, note that this approach avoids cherry-picking by using the entire dataset. Also note that all the best-fit accelerations are positive.

Once again, that's consistent with this NOAA article:

"Sea level is rising at an increasing rate ... There is strong evidence that global sea level is now rising at an increased rate and will continue to rise during this century. While studies show that sea levels changed little from AD 0 until 1900, sea levels began to climb in the 20th century. The two major causes of global sea-level rise are thermal expansion caused by the warming of the oceans (since water expands as it warms) and the loss of land-based ice (such as glaciers and polar ice caps) due to increased melting. Records and research show that sea level has been steadily rising at a rate of 1 to 2.5 millimeters (0.04 to 0.1 inches) per year since 1900. This rate may be increasing. Since 1992, new methods of satellite altimetry (the measurement of elevation or altitude) indicate a rate of rise of 3 millimeters (0.12 inches) per year. This is a significantly larger rate than the sea-level rise averaged over the last several thousand years."

And once again, that's consistent with the 2013 IPCC AR5 SPM:

"Proxy and instrumental sea level data indicate a transition in the late 19th to the early 20th century from relatively low mean rates of rise over the previous two millennia to higher rates of rise (high confidence). It is likely that the rate of global mean sea level rise has continued to increase since the early 20th century."

That's also consistent with the US NAS's statement that "Sea level is rising faster in recent decades".

When they analyze all the data that exists, that's the opposite of cherry picking. [Geoffrey Landis]

Indeed. I made this same point after Jane/Lonny baselessly accused Layzej of "cherry-picking" when Layzej loaded all the UAH data. Jane/Lonny then suggested cherry-picking at 1998, and keeps insisting that this somehow isn't "cherry-picking".

Ironically, I even gave Jane/Lonny R code which calculates trends and accelerations of global mean sea level (GMSL) data. That graph accounts for autocorrelation- the red lines are 2 sigma uncertainties. The trends and accelerations are calculated over periods which all end at 2009.5. The new significance.zip (backup copies) contains my R statistics folder, including many data sets.

Again, note that this approach avoids cherry-picking by using the entire dataset. Also note that all the best-fit accelerations are positive.

Once again, that's consistent with this NOAA article:

"Sea level is rising at an increasing rate ... There is strong evidence that global sea level is now rising at an increased rate and will continue to rise during this century. While studies show that sea levels changed little from AD 0 until 1900, sea levels began to climb in the 20th century. The two major causes of global sea-level rise are thermal expansion caused by the warming of the oceans (since water expands as it warms) and the loss of land-based ice (such as glaciers and polar ice caps) due to increased melting. Records and research show that sea level has been steadily rising at a rate of 1 to 2.5 millimeters (0.04 to 0.1 inches) per year since 1900. This rate may be increasing. Since 1992, new methods of satellite altimetry (the measurement of elevation or altitude) indicate a rate of rise of 3 millimeters (0.12 inches) per year. This is a significantly larger rate than the sea-level rise averaged over the last several thousand years."

And once again, that's consistent with the 2013 IPCC AR5 SPM:

"Proxy and instrumental sea level data indicate a transition in the late 19th to the early 20th century from relatively low mean rates of rise over the previous two millennia to higher rates of rise (high confidence). It is likely that the rate of global mean sea level rise has continued to increase since the early 20th century."

That's also consistent with the US NAS's statement that "Sea level is rising faster in recent decades".

http://www.janes.com/article/7...

The Obama administration planned to upgrade all legs of the âtriadâ(TM). This includes a new nuclear-capable Long Range Standoff (LRSO) cruise missile, 12 Columbia-class ballistic missile submarines (SSBNs) to replace the Ohio class, Ground Based Strategic Deterrent (GBSD) to largely replace silo-based Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), and new Northrop Grumman B-21 Raider long-range nuclear bombers.

The Trump administration will continue those efforts, plus add low-yield submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs) and a new nuclear sea-launched cruise missile (SLCM). Undersecretary of Defense for Policy John Rood told reporters the funding numbers for this new plan would not be revealed until the fiscal year 2019 budget is submitted later in February.

You can argue that the Columbia subs are necessary - the UK is doing the same thing. I suppose the same argument applies replacing the Minutemen. The LRSO is basically an updated version of the ACM - a missile the US deployed and then withdrew

And one of the justifications for the LRSO was that it has selectable yields, unlike other US nukes. However the new SLBMs and SLCM duplicate this. Actually the US did have nuclear SLCMs before but phased them out - there were nuclear armed Tomahawks.

I.e. there's a fair bit of fat that could be trimmed off either proposal.

If it were up to me I'd build new subs, keep the current Trident II SLBMs, replace Minutemen and keep the cruise missiles and spend any spare cash on missile defence.

Or you could go really radical and go to a pure SLBM/SLCM system because subs are very hard for an adversary to zap in a first strike and then use all the spare money on missile defence. Those silo based missiles are vulnerable to a first strike.

Maybe do a deal with Russia and China to phase out silo and bomber based missiles? I'm not sure they go for that though - they presumably fear that US missile defence would at some point give the US nuclear primacy. Still the US had that in 2006 and it didn't seem to worry them then. Since then they've both introduced SLBM subs which are not vulnerable to a first strike on patrol.

The EFF has been taken over by the exact same people doing the surveilling. The EFF helps ID the people fighting against the surveillance (because they ask the EFF for help) and calls their employers claiming that they are alt-right nazis. EFF's Jillian C. York has gloated about this. Send your donations to anybody else, preferably someone who has gotten awful press from the likes of Gawker or the Daily Beast.

Here is one of the many stories that the EFF is probably not going to tell you about. Patreon just banned a journalist because he outed a pedophile ring inside Hasbro's Wizards of the Coast after WotC banned him for ridiculing their awful marketing stunts. That's the company that makes Magic: The Gathering. Only the #Gamergate people are talking about it. Try looking on EFF's website for any discussion of Unsleeved Media, Gamergate, Brett Kimberlin, PeterSweden, Charles C. Johnson, or any of the other big online censorship scandals of the past few years. You won't find the EFF talking about the stuff that matters. You are better off finding the people who are talking about this stuff and funding them.

Great. Call all Janes "it" if you want. This is the stupidest thing I've read this month.

Once again, you're pretending(?) to be unbelievably stupid. You're the only one here transphobic enough to use dehumanizing pronouns like "it" to refer to human beings. Projecting your transphobia onto others just makes you look even more like an "SJW".

And of course this isn't about "all Janes". Again, don't pretend to be stupid. It just refers to you, the toxic "Jane Q. Public" who is actually a male king baby named "Lonny Eachus". Obviously any "Jane" who is either cis or trans female should be referred to as "her". But it's very unlikely that you're trans, so people shouldn't refer to you as "her" because your toxic and irrational comments just make all women look bad (especially on a mostly male website).

It's not clear whether you're really delusional enough to think that you're not posing as a woman, or whether you're just so pathologically dishonest that you'll never stop lying. You've already deceived two commenters in this thread into helping you make all women look bad. And that happened long after you were told that "your UID implies you are female" and a commenter said they were "hopeful you really are female". And you certainly are posing as a woman every time you refer to yourself as "she" and "gal". When you say you're "not a lesbian", remember that if you weren't posing as a woman this wouldn't be necessary because you're a man, and men can't be lesbians.

You're also posing as a woman when you laugh after people note that you're actually a man and then speculate that they said this because they "don't have the spine to admit" that they can be "bested by a woman".

You're also posing as a woman when you respond to a suggestion that you don't know about women by saying "read my name again", and when you say things like "I am not a dude. Please check the name." and "who should be more offended than me?" and "try being a woman who speaks up".

"... You are really pissing me off here because you are acting out the worst sexist stereotypes of women: completely irrational, expecting special treatment and unable to keep a single thought straight in your head for more than a couple of minutes and then getting hyper-emotional when called on it. You are the kind of woman who makes it that much harder for the rest of us women to be judged on our abilities instead of the same old, ugly stereotypes you've spent the day reinforcing right here. Shame on you." [Someone to Jane, 2012-09-09]

Great. Call all Janes "it" if you want. This is the stupidest thing I've read this month.

Once again, you're pretending(?) to be unbelievably stupid. You're the only one here transphobic enough to use dehumanizing pronouns like "it" to refer to human beings. Projecting your transphobia onto others just makes you look even more like an "SJW".

And of course this isn't about "all Janes". Again, don't pretend to be stupid. It just refers to you, the toxic "Jane Q. Public" who is actually a male king baby named "Lonny Eachus". Obviously any "Jane" who is either cis or trans female should be referred to as "her". But it's very unlikely that you're trans, so people shouldn't refer to you as "her" because your toxic and irrational comments just make all women look bad (especially on a mostly male website).

It's not clear whether you're really delusional enough to think that you're not posing as a woman, or whether you're just so pathologically dishonest that you'll never stop lying. You've already deceived two commenters in this thread into helping you make all women look bad. And that happened long after you were told that "your UID implies you are female" and a commenter said they were "hopeful you really are female". And you certainly are posing as a woman every time you refer to yourself as "she" and "gal". When you say you're "not a lesbian", remember that if you weren't posing as a woman this wouldn't be necessary because you're a man, and men can't be lesbians.

You're also posing as a woman when you laugh after people note that you're actually a man and then speculate that they said this because they "don't have the spine to admit" that they can be "bested by a woman".

You're also posing as a woman when you respond to a suggestion that you don't know about women by saying "read my name again", and when you say things like "I am not a dude. Please check the name." and "who should be more offended than me?" and "try being a woman who speaks up".

"... You are really pissing me off here because you are acting out the worst sexist stereotypes of women: completely irrational, expecting special treatment and unable to keep a single thought straight in your head for more than a couple of minutes and then getting hyper-emotional when called on it. You are the kind of woman who makes it that much harder for the rest of us women to be judged on our abilities instead of the same old, ugly stereotypes you've spent the day reinforcing right here. Shame on you." [Someone to Jane, 2012-09-09]

Great. Call all Janes "it" if you want. This is the stupidest thing I've read this month.

Once again, you're pretending(?) to be unbelievably stupid. You're the only one here transphobic enough to use dehumanizing pronouns like "it" to refer to human beings. Projecting your transphobia onto others just makes you look even more like an "SJW".

And of course this isn't about "all Janes". Again, don't pretend to be stupid. It just refers to you, the toxic "Jane Q. Public" who is actually a male king baby named "Lonny Eachus". Obviously any "Jane" who is either cis or trans female should be referred to as "her". But it's very unlikely that you're trans, so people shouldn't refer to you as "her" because your toxic and irrational comments just make all women look bad (especially on a mostly male website).

It's not clear whether you're really delusional enough to think that you're not posing as a woman, or whether you're just so pathologically dishonest that you'll never stop lying. You've already deceived two commenters in this thread into helping you make all women look bad. And that happened long after you were told that "your UID implies you are female" and a commenter said they were "hopeful you really are female". And you certainly are posing as a woman every time you refer to yourself as "she" and "gal". When you say you're "not a lesbian", remember that if you weren't posing as a woman this wouldn't be necessary because you're a man, and men can't be lesbians.

You're also posing as a woman when you laugh after people note that you're actually a man and then speculate that they said this because they "don't have the spine to admit" that they can be "bested by a woman".

You're also posing as a woman when you respond to a suggestion that you don't know about women by saying "read my name again", and when you say things like "I am not a dude. Please check the name." and "who should be more offended than me?" and "try being a woman who speaks up".

"... You are really pissing me off here because you are acting out the worst sexist stereotypes of women: completely irrational, expecting special treatment and unable to keep a single thought straight in your head for more than a couple of minutes and then getting hyper-emotional when called on it. You are the kind of woman who makes it that much harder for the rest of us women to be judged on our abilities instead of the same old, ugly stereotypes you've spent the day reinforcing right here. Shame on you." [Someone to Jane, 2012-09-09]

Great. Call all Janes "it" if you want. This is the stupidest thing I've read this month.

Once again, you're pretending(?) to be unbelievably stupid. You're the only one here transphobic enough to use dehumanizing pronouns like "it" to refer to human beings. Projecting your transphobia onto others just makes you look even more like an "SJW".

And of course this isn't about "all Janes". Again, don't pretend to be stupid. It just refers to you, the toxic "Jane Q. Public" who is actually a male king baby named "Lonny Eachus". Obviously any "Jane" who is either cis or trans female should be referred to as "her". But it's very unlikely that you're trans, so people shouldn't refer to you as "her" because your toxic and irrational comments just make all women look bad (especially on a mostly male website).

It's not clear whether you're really delusional enough to think that you're not posing as a woman, or whether you're just so pathologically dishonest that you'll never stop lying. You've already deceived two commenters in this thread into helping you make all women look bad. And that happened long after you were told that "your UID implies you are female" and a commenter said they were "hopeful you really are female". And you certainly are posing as a woman every time you refer to yourself as "she" and "gal". When you say you're "not a lesbian", remember that if you weren't posing as a woman this wouldn't be necessary because you're a man, and men can't be lesbians.

You're also posing as a woman when you laugh after people note that you're actually a man and then speculate that they said this because they "don't have the spine to admit" that they can be "bested by a woman".

You're also posing as a woman when you respond to a suggestion that you don't know about women by saying "read my name again", and when you say things like "I am not a dude. Please check the name." and "who should be more offended than me?" and "try being a woman who speaks up".

"... You are really pissing me off here because you are acting out the worst sexist stereotypes of women: completely irrational, expecting special treatment and unable to keep a single thought straight in your head for more than a couple of minutes and then getting hyper-emotional when called on it. You are the kind of woman who makes it that much harder for the rest of us women to be judged on our abilities instead of the same old, ugly stereotypes you've spent the day reinforcing right here. Shame on you." [Someone to Jane, 2012-09-09]

is this what lead poisoning looks like?

Ask progressives. They're the ones screeching that Jordan Peterson is a alt-right white nationalist neo-nazi who supports a white ethnostate and is a racist. That's generally in the order of the screeching in many cases too.

You assume people are lying, assuming that the actions of a few attention-seekers apply to every woman who speaks about harassment. In other words, you believe in a conspiracy. That's what I object to.

Nice assumption. Too bad that's not how reality works, reality expects evidence and/or proof, something that she hasn't offered(much like the post I made above). And in the current state of "omg I'm being harassed because I'm *insert thing*" and it over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over again being a case where mean comments don't equal harassment. Anyone who actually cares about that, gets tired of it well...quickly.

The only thing you seem to object to is someone expecting evidence to be shown. You know, kind of like this. Makes me wonder how you function in the real world with skin as thick as tissue paper. Oh wait, that's harassment right?

But she lost because the military out rigged her, now the entire Rothschild gang is going down, and you want to ban all the news about it like CNN.

Who is #QAnon?

Massive intel drops by individuals with highest level Q clearance:

Part I: https://truthearth.org/2017/11...
Part II: https://truthearth.org/2017/11...
Part III: https://truthearth.org/2017/11...
Part IV: https://truthearth.org/2017/11...
Part V: https://truthearth.org/2017/11...
Part VI: https://truthearth.org/2017/11...

Qanon updates for January 14 2018
http://www.stillnessinthestorm...

#QANON Updates: Q Map, Q Posts, Q BreadCrumbs, Liz Crokin & More
http://www.theeventchronicle.c...

QAnon: The link between Space X and North Korea
http://www.astoundingelements....

Eric Schmidt's North Korea Visit:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/tec...

QAnon: Trump's Executive Order Linked to Resignation of Google's Eric Schmidt
https://freedomoutpost.com/qan...

Q Threatens Lynn de Rothschild â" Followed by Deadly Plane Crash at Rothschild Estate
http://brutalproof.net/2017/12...

It's interesting that QAnon posted about LdR (Lynn de Rothschild or possible Lord Rothschild) on Monday and today a "freak" accident occurs between a helicopter and a light plane. How many heli/plane accidents have you ever seen and suddenly there are two high profile helicopter crashes in two weeks, taking out some of the richest people in the world
https://voat.co/v/pizzagate/22...

Is this Q message directed at Lynn de Rothschild? Notice the L d R in brackets. Who died in the crash near the Rothschild estate today?
http://archive.is/uLy5G

Is QAnon real?
http://theduran.com/understand...

QAnon has posted some remarkable predictions proving his âoeauthenticityâ as someone working inside the Trump Administrationâ¦

QAnon predicted Trump's Twitter shutdown

QAnon predicted an incident with a helicopter at a Rothschild estate in the UK two days before it happened

QAnon posted original photographs taken from Air Force One. Timestamps and flight paths match the POTUS Trump's recent trip to Asia. One photo appears to have been taken while flying over North Korea.

QAnon: The link between Space X and North Korea
http://www.astoundingelements....

Eric Schmidt's North Korea Visit:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/tec...

QAnon: Trump's Executive Order Linked to Resignation of Google's Eric Schmidt
https://freedomoutpost.com/qan...

Q Threatens Lynn de Rothschild â" Followed by Deadly Plane Crash at Rothschild Estate
http://brutalproof.net/2017/12...

It's interesting that QAnon posted about LdR (Lynn de Rothschild or possible Lord Rothschild) on Monday and today a "freak" accident occurs between a helicopter and a light plane. How many heli/plane accidents have you ever seen and suddenly there are two high profile helicopter crashes in two weeks, taking out some of the richest people in the world
https://voat.co/v/pizzagate/22...

Is this Q message directed at Lynn de Rothschild? Notice the L d R in brackets. Who died in the crash near the Rothschild estate today?
http://archive.is/uLy5G

Is QAnon real?
http://theduran.com/understand...

QAnon has posted some remarkable predictions proving his âoeauthenticityâ as someone working inside the Trump Administrationâ¦

QAnon predicted Trump's Twitter shutdown

QAnon predicted an incident with a helicopter at a Rothschild estate in the UK two days before it happened

QAnon posted original photographs taken from Air Force One. Timestamps and flight paths match the POTUS Trump's recent trip to Asia. One photo appears to have been taken while flying over North Korea.

QAnon has posted key phrases that the President used in future tweets, with many of his phrases and terminology independently confirmed as belonging to military intelligence.

Massive intel drops by individuals with highest level Q clearance:

Part I: https://truthearth.org/2017/11...
Part II: https://truthearth.org/2017/11...
Part III: https://truthearth.org/2017/11...
Part IV: https://truthearth.org/2017/11...
Part V: https://truthearth.org/2017/11...
Part VI: https://truthearth.org/2017/11...

Qanon updates for January 14 2018
http://www.stillnessinthestorm...

#QANON Updates: Q Map, Q Posts, Q BreadCrumbs, Liz Crokin & More
http://www.theeventchronicle.c...

(5th Post)

QAnon: The link between Space X and North Korea
http://www.astoundingelements....

Eric Schmidt's North Korea Visit:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/tec...

QAnon: Trump's Executive Order Linked to Resignation of Google's Eric Schmidt
https://freedomoutpost.com/qan...

Q Threatens Lynn de Rothschild â" Followed by Deadly Plane Crash at Rothschild Estate
http://brutalproof.net/2017/12...

It's interesting that QAnon posted about LdR (Lynn de Rothschild or possible Lord Rothschild) on Monday and today a "freak" accident occurs between a helicopter and a light plane. How many heli/plane accidents have you ever seen and suddenly there are two high profile helicopter crashes in two weeks, taking out some of the richest people in the world
https://voat.co/v/pizzagate/22...

Is this Q message directed at Lynn de Rothschild? Notice the L d R in brackets. Who died in the crash near the Rothschild estate today?
http://archive.is/uLy5G

Is QAnon real?
http://theduran.com/understand...

QAnon has posted some remarkable predictions proving his âoeauthenticityâ as someone working inside the Trump Administrationâ¦

QAnon predicted Trump's Twitter shutdown

QAnon predicted an incident with a helicopter at a Rothschild estate in the UK two days before it happened

QAnon posted original photographs taken from Air Force One. Timestamps and flight paths match the POTUS Trump's recent trip to Asia. One photo appears to have been taken while flying over North Korea.

QAnon has posted key phrases that the President used in future tweets, with many of his phrases and terminology independently confirmed as belonging to military intelligence.

QAnon claims Debbie Wasserman Schultz put out a contract to MS-13 gang members to murder Seth Rich

(5th Post) BIG DROP:
How did NK obtain Uranium?
How did Iran obtain Uranium?
Why did BO send billions (in cash and wire) to Iran?
Why the cash component?
Was the hostage component a cover?
For what?
Could any of the cash component be handed off to other people?
How many planes carried the cash into Iran?
Did all land in Iran?
Did all land in the same location?
Why is this relevant?
Who controls NK?
Who really controls NK?
Don't think of a single person.
Think of a powerful entity.
Why is this important?
Why are wars so important?
Who benefits?
What does hostage refer to?
Who can be held hostage and controlled by NK having miniaturized nuclear weapons?
Where is BO TODAY?
Where is VJ?
Alice & Wonderland.

I've been listening to NPR quite a bit over the years and while there are plenty of things they run that are interesting and correct, there is also a major and obvious problem that they have with bias when it comes to shows that discuss anything that can have a feminist/social justice agenda overlaid on it. Diane Rehm and the replacement show 1A in particular are notorious for letting feminist dogma on the show unchallenged and the only opposing views or even facts that might be presented are token, easily dismissed items selected by the call screeners that only give the sound of "both sides" but the actual expressions and concerns of opposing sides are not allowed. NPR shows claim to thoroughly vet the people coming onto those shows and what they want to present but they clearly do not, especially with feminists.

Prime case I distinctly remember from last year: Lauren Duca was on 1A complaining about Martin Shkreli "harassing" her and "his fans" then coming after her and abusing and harassing her and threatening her with things up to and including death. Of course, Lauren Duca was covertly photographing Shkreli in a bar without permission and posting the photo to Twitter and bitching about his existence a year before that show, and she is basically an aggressive troll herself (she is basically a professional white man hater that can't keep her mouth shut about her hatred for white men):

PRO TIP:Most men who insult your "journalistic integrity" are bored as hell at their shitty desk jobs. Or just mad in their mom's basements.

Lol wow, so many mangy white men are going to go to jail for the riots after Hillary wins. #debatenight

Happy #WomensEqualityDay!! Straight, white men, unless I have spoken to you separately about this issue, please refrain from all engagement.

Friendly reminder that there's an uneven playing field, and straight, white men are generally trash!

GOP Uses Craig's List To Find Suitable Candidate, White Men Seeking White Man, Must Hate Women/The Poor

Gosh, you look super overprivileged and milky white carrying that starving African baby in your prof pic! Thanks for saving the world!

I AM GOING TO FUCKING KILL THE NEXT RANDOM MAN THAT TALKS TO ME

She's basically a vile racist sexist cunt and no one on 1A challenged her. NPR couldn't do the two minutes of research I did to find her deleted hate tweets? Give me a break.

Don't even get me started on that Diane Rehm show about "the sexual assault epidemic and what it says about our culture." That was a truckload of bullshit from the start. A bunch of high-profile sexual misconduct claims doesn't make the entirety of America full of sexual harassers and rapists. Between 1995 and 2010, the rate of completed rape or sexual assault declined from 3.6 per 1,000 females to 1.1 per 1,000. What THAT says about our culture is that we were well on the way to not sexually assaulting people before the SJW movement blew up in 2012, but no one on Diane Rehm's show challenged anything the feminists there said. Oh, and note that on issues with feminist ties, they ONLY invite feminists to be part of the show.

The questions I've heard tossed out on the BBC world service on NPR are also often feminist and heavily left-leaning. There is very strong and obvious bias in the questions asked by BBC interviewers. They often ask the exact same questions rephrased and repackaged to insist that their left-leaning view is corre

I've been listening to NPR quite a bit over the years and while there are plenty of things they run that are interesting and correct, there is also a major and obvious problem that they have with bias when it comes to shows that discuss anything that can have a feminist/social justice agenda overlaid on it. Diane Rehm and the replacement show 1A in particular are notorious for letting feminist dogma on the show unchallenged and the only opposing views or even facts that might be presented are token, easily dismissed items selected by the call screeners that only give the sound of "both sides" but the actual expressions and concerns of opposing sides are not allowed. NPR shows claim to thoroughly vet the people coming onto those shows and what they want to present but they clearly do not, especially with feminists.

Prime case I distinctly remember from last year: Lauren Duca was on 1A complaining about Martin Shkreli "harassing" her and "his fans" then coming after her and abusing and harassing her and threatening her with things up to and including death. Of course, Lauren Duca was covertly photographing Shkreli in a bar without permission and posting the photo to Twitter and bitching about his existence a year before that show, and she is basically an aggressive troll herself (she is basically a professional white man hater that can't keep her mouth shut about her hatred for white men):

PRO TIP:Most men who insult your "journalistic integrity" are bored as hell at their shitty desk jobs. Or just mad in their mom's basements.

Lol wow, so many mangy white men are going to go to jail for the riots after Hillary wins. #debatenight

Happy #WomensEqualityDay!! Straight, white men, unless I have spoken to you separately about this issue, please refrain from all engagement.

Friendly reminder that there's an uneven playing field, and straight, white men are generally trash!

GOP Uses Craig's List To Find Suitable Candidate, White Men Seeking White Man, Must Hate Women/The Poor

Gosh, you look super overprivileged and milky white carrying that starving African baby in your prof pic! Thanks for saving the world!

I AM GOING TO FUCKING KILL THE NEXT RANDOM MAN THAT TALKS TO ME

She's basically a vile racist sexist cunt and no one on 1A challenged her. NPR couldn't do the two minutes of research I did to find her deleted hate tweets? Give me a break.

Don't even get me started on that Diane Rehm show about "the sexual assault epidemic and what it says about our culture." That was a truckload of bullshit from the start. A bunch of high-profile sexual misconduct claims doesn't make the entirety of America full of sexual harassers and rapists. Between 1995 and 2010, the rate of completed rape or sexual assault declined from 3.6 per 1,000 females to 1.1 per 1,000. What THAT says about our culture is that we were well on the way to not sexually assaulting people before the SJW movement blew up in 2012, but no one on Diane Rehm's show challenged anything the feminists there said. Oh, and note that on issues with feminist ties, they ONLY invite feminists to be part of the show.

The questions I've heard tossed out on the BBC world service on NPR are also often feminist and heavily left-leaning. There is very strong and obvious bias in the questions asked by BBC interviewers. They often ask the exact same questions rephrased and repackaged to insist that their left-leaning view is corre

I've been listening to NPR quite a bit over the years and while there are plenty of things they run that are interesting and correct, there is also a major and obvious problem that they have with bias when it comes to shows that discuss anything that can have a feminist/social justice agenda overlaid on it. Diane Rehm and the replacement show 1A in particular are notorious for letting feminist dogma on the show unchallenged and the only opposing views or even facts that might be presented are token, easily dismissed items selected by the call screeners that only give the sound of "both sides" but the actual expressions and concerns of opposing sides are not allowed. NPR shows claim to thoroughly vet the people coming onto those shows and what they want to present but they clearly do not, especially with feminists.

Prime case I distinctly remember from last year: Lauren Duca was on 1A complaining about Martin Shkreli "harassing" her and "his fans" then coming after her and abusing and harassing her and threatening her with things up to and including death. Of course, Lauren Duca was covertly photographing Shkreli in a bar without permission and posting the photo to Twitter and bitching about his existence a year before that show, and she is basically an aggressive troll herself (she is basically a professional white man hater that can't keep her mouth shut about her hatred for white men):

PRO TIP:Most men who insult your "journalistic integrity" are bored as hell at their shitty desk jobs. Or just mad in their mom's basements.

Lol wow, so many mangy white men are going to go to jail for the riots after Hillary wins. #debatenight

Happy #WomensEqualityDay!! Straight, white men, unless I have spoken to you separately about this issue, please refrain from all engagement.

Friendly reminder that there's an uneven playing field, and straight, white men are generally trash!

GOP Uses Craig's List To Find Suitable Candidate, White Men Seeking White Man, Must Hate Women/The Poor

Gosh, you look super overprivileged and milky white carrying that starving African baby in your prof pic! Thanks for saving the world!

I AM GOING TO FUCKING KILL THE NEXT RANDOM MAN THAT TALKS TO ME

She's basically a vile racist sexist cunt and no one on 1A challenged her. NPR couldn't do the two minutes of research I did to find her deleted hate tweets? Give me a break.

Don't even get me started on that Diane Rehm show about "the sexual assault epidemic and what it says about our culture." That was a truckload of bullshit from the start. A bunch of high-profile sexual misconduct claims doesn't make the entirety of America full of sexual harassers and rapists. Between 1995 and 2010, the rate of completed rape or sexual assault declined from 3.6 per 1,000 females to 1.1 per 1,000. What THAT says about our culture is that we were well on the way to not sexually assaulting people before the SJW movement blew up in 2012, but no one on Diane Rehm's show challenged anything the feminists there said. Oh, and note that on issues with feminist ties, they ONLY invite feminists to be part of the show.

The questions I've heard tossed out on the BBC world service on NPR are also often feminist and heavily left-leaning. There is very strong and obvious bias in the questions asked by BBC interviewers. They often ask the exact same questions rephrased and repackaged to insist that their left-leaning view is corre

I've been listening to NPR quite a bit over the years and while there are plenty of things they run that are interesting and correct, there is also a major and obvious problem that they have with bias when it comes to shows that discuss anything that can have a feminist/social justice agenda overlaid on it. Diane Rehm and the replacement show 1A in particular are notorious for letting feminist dogma on the show unchallenged and the only opposing views or even facts that might be presented are token, easily dismissed items selected by the call screeners that only give the sound of "both sides" but the actual expressions and concerns of opposing sides are not allowed. NPR shows claim to thoroughly vet the people coming onto those shows and what they want to present but they clearly do not, especially with feminists.

Prime case I distinctly remember from last year: Lauren Duca was on 1A complaining about Martin Shkreli "harassing" her and "his fans" then coming after her and abusing and harassing her and threatening her with things up to and including death. Of course, Lauren Duca was covertly photographing Shkreli in a bar without permission and posting the photo to Twitter and bitching about his existence a year before that show, and she is basically an aggressive troll herself (she is basically a professional white man hater that can't keep her mouth shut about her hatred for white men):

PRO TIP:Most men who insult your "journalistic integrity" are bored as hell at their shitty desk jobs. Or just mad in their mom's basements.

Lol wow, so many mangy white men are going to go to jail for the riots after Hillary wins. #debatenight

Happy #WomensEqualityDay!! Straight, white men, unless I have spoken to you separately about this issue, please refrain from all engagement.

Friendly reminder that there's an uneven playing field, and straight, white men are generally trash!

GOP Uses Craig's List To Find Suitable Candidate, White Men Seeking White Man, Must Hate Women/The Poor

Gosh, you look super overprivileged and milky white carrying that starving African baby in your prof pic! Thanks for saving the world!

I AM GOING TO FUCKING KILL THE NEXT RANDOM MAN THAT TALKS TO ME

She's basically a vile racist sexist cunt and no one on 1A challenged her. NPR couldn't do the two minutes of research I did to find her deleted hate tweets? Give me a break.

Don't even get me started on that Diane Rehm show about "the sexual assault epidemic and what it says about our culture." That was a truckload of bullshit from the start. A bunch of high-profile sexual misconduct claims doesn't make the entirety of America full of sexual harassers and rapists. Between 1995 and 2010, the rate of completed rape or sexual assault declined from 3.6 per 1,000 females to 1.1 per 1,000. What THAT says about our culture is that we were well on the way to not sexually assaulting people before the SJW movement blew up in 2012, but no one on Diane Rehm's show challenged anything the feminists there said. Oh, and note that on issues with feminist ties, they ONLY invite feminists to be part of the show.

The questions I've heard tossed out on the BBC world service on NPR are also often feminist and heavily left-leaning. There is very strong and obvious bias in the questions asked by BBC interviewers. They often ask the exact same questions rephrased and repackaged to insist that their left-leaning view is corre

I've been listening to NPR quite a bit over the years and while there are plenty of things they run that are interesting and correct, there is also a major and obvious problem that they have with bias when it comes to shows that discuss anything that can have a feminist/social justice agenda overlaid on it. Diane Rehm and the replacement show 1A in particular are notorious for letting feminist dogma on the show unchallenged and the only opposing views or even facts that might be presented are token, easily dismissed items selected by the call screeners that only give the sound of "both sides" but the actual expressions and concerns of opposing sides are not allowed. NPR shows claim to thoroughly vet the people coming onto those shows and what they want to present but they clearly do not, especially with feminists.

Prime case I distinctly remember from last year: Lauren Duca was on 1A complaining about Martin Shkreli "harassing" her and "his fans" then coming after her and abusing and harassing her and threatening her with things up to and including death. Of course, Lauren Duca was covertly photographing Shkreli in a bar without permission and posting the photo to Twitter and bitching about his existence a year before that show, and she is basically an aggressive troll herself (she is basically a professional white man hater that can't keep her mouth shut about her hatred for white men):

PRO TIP:Most men who insult your "journalistic integrity" are bored as hell at their shitty desk jobs. Or just mad in their mom's basements.

Lol wow, so many mangy white men are going to go to jail for the riots after Hillary wins. #debatenight

Happy #WomensEqualityDay!! Straight, white men, unless I have spoken to you separately about this issue, please refrain from all engagement.

Friendly reminder that there's an uneven playing field, and straight, white men are generally trash!

GOP Uses Craig's List To Find Suitable Candidate, White Men Seeking White Man, Must Hate Women/The Poor

Gosh, you look super overprivileged and milky white carrying that starving African baby in your prof pic! Thanks for saving the world!

I AM GOING TO FUCKING KILL THE NEXT RANDOM MAN THAT TALKS TO ME

She's basically a vile racist sexist cunt and no one on 1A challenged her. NPR couldn't do the two minutes of research I did to find her deleted hate tweets? Give me a break.

Don't even get me started on that Diane Rehm show about "the sexual assault epidemic and what it says about our culture." That was a truckload of bullshit from the start. A bunch of high-profile sexual misconduct claims doesn't make the entirety of America full of sexual harassers and rapists. Between 1995 and 2010, the rate of completed rape or sexual assault declined from 3.6 per 1,000 females to 1.1 per 1,000. What THAT says about our culture is that we were well on the way to not sexually assaulting people before the SJW movement blew up in 2012, but no one on Diane Rehm's show challenged anything the feminists there said. Oh, and note that on issues with feminist ties, they ONLY invite feminists to be part of the show.

The questions I've heard tossed out on the BBC world service on NPR are also often feminist and heavily left-leaning. There is very strong and obvious bias in the questions asked by BBC interviewers. They often ask the exact same questions rephrased and repackaged to insist that their left-leaning view is corre

I've been listening to NPR quite a bit over the years and while there are plenty of things they run that are interesting and correct, there is also a major and obvious problem that they have with bias when it comes to shows that discuss anything that can have a feminist/social justice agenda overlaid on it. Diane Rehm and the replacement show 1A in particular are notorious for letting feminist dogma on the show unchallenged and the only opposing views or even facts that might be presented are token, easily dismissed items selected by the call screeners that only give the sound of "both sides" but the actual expressions and concerns of opposing sides are not allowed. NPR shows claim to thoroughly vet the people coming onto those shows and what they want to present but they clearly do not, especially with feminists.

Prime case I distinctly remember from last year: Lauren Duca was on 1A complaining about Martin Shkreli "harassing" her and "his fans" then coming after her and abusing and harassing her and threatening her with things up to and including death. Of course, Lauren Duca was covertly photographing Shkreli in a bar without permission and posting the photo to Twitter and bitching about his existence a year before that show, and she is basically an aggressive troll herself (she is basically a professional white man hater that can't keep her mouth shut about her hatred for white men):

PRO TIP:Most men who insult your "journalistic integrity" are bored as hell at their shitty desk jobs. Or just mad in their mom's basements.

Lol wow, so many mangy white men are going to go to jail for the riots after Hillary wins. #debatenight

Happy #WomensEqualityDay!! Straight, white men, unless I have spoken to you separately about this issue, please refrain from all engagement.

Friendly reminder that there's an uneven playing field, and straight, white men are generally trash!

GOP Uses Craig's List To Find Suitable Candidate, White Men Seeking White Man, Must Hate Women/The Poor

Gosh, you look super overprivileged and milky white carrying that starving African baby in your prof pic! Thanks for saving the world!

I AM GOING TO FUCKING KILL THE NEXT RANDOM MAN THAT TALKS TO ME

She's basically a vile racist sexist cunt and no one on 1A challenged her. NPR couldn't do the two minutes of research I did to find her deleted hate tweets? Give me a break.

Don't even get me started on that Diane Rehm show about "the sexual assault epidemic and what it says about our culture." That was a truckload of bullshit from the start. A bunch of high-profile sexual misconduct claims doesn't make the entirety of America full of sexual harassers and rapists. Between 1995 and 2010, the rate of completed rape or sexual assault declined from 3.6 per 1,000 females to 1.1 per 1,000. What THAT says about our culture is that we were well on the way to not sexually assaulting people before the SJW movement blew up in 2012, but no one on Diane Rehm's show challenged anything the feminists there said. Oh, and note that on issues with feminist ties, they ONLY invite feminists to be part of the show.

The questions I've heard tossed out on the BBC world service on NPR are also often feminist and heavily left-leaning. There is very strong and obvious bias in the questions asked by BBC interviewers. They often ask the exact same questions rephrased and repackaged to insist that their left-leaning view is corre

I've been listening to NPR quite a bit over the years and while there are plenty of things they run that are interesting and correct, there is also a major and obvious problem that they have with bias when it comes to shows that discuss anything that can have a feminist/social justice agenda overlaid on it. Diane Rehm and the replacement show 1A in particular are notorious for letting feminist dogma on the show unchallenged and the only opposing views or even facts that might be presented are token, easily dismissed items selected by the call screeners that only give the sound of "both sides" but the actual expressions and concerns of opposing sides are not allowed. NPR shows claim to thoroughly vet the people coming onto those shows and what they want to present but they clearly do not, especially with feminists.

Prime case I distinctly remember from last year: Lauren Duca was on 1A complaining about Martin Shkreli "harassing" her and "his fans" then coming after her and abusing and harassing her and threatening her with things up to and including death. Of course, Lauren Duca was covertly photographing Shkreli in a bar without permission and posting the photo to Twitter and bitching about his existence a year before that show, and she is basically an aggressive troll herself (she is basically a professional white man hater that can't keep her mouth shut about her hatred for white men):

PRO TIP:Most men who insult your "journalistic integrity" are bored as hell at their shitty desk jobs. Or just mad in their mom's basements.

Lol wow, so many mangy white men are going to go to jail for the riots after Hillary wins. #debatenight

Happy #WomensEqualityDay!! Straight, white men, unless I have spoken to you separately about this issue, please refrain from all engagement.

Friendly reminder that there's an uneven playing field, and straight, white men are generally trash!

GOP Uses Craig's List To Find Suitable Candidate, White Men Seeking White Man, Must Hate Women/The Poor

Gosh, you look super overprivileged and milky white carrying that starving African baby in your prof pic! Thanks for saving the world!

I AM GOING TO FUCKING KILL THE NEXT RANDOM MAN THAT TALKS TO ME

She's basically a vile racist sexist cunt and no one on 1A challenged her. NPR couldn't do the two minutes of research I did to find her deleted hate tweets? Give me a break.

Don't even get me started on that Diane Rehm show about "the sexual assault epidemic and what it says about our culture." That was a truckload of bullshit from the start. A bunch of high-profile sexual misconduct claims doesn't make the entirety of America full of sexual harassers and rapists. Between 1995 and 2010, the rate of completed rape or sexual assault declined from 3.6 per 1,000 females to 1.1 per 1,000. What THAT says about our culture is that we were well on the way to not sexually assaulting people before the SJW movement blew up in 2012, but no one on Diane Rehm's show challenged anything the feminists there said. Oh, and note that on issues with feminist ties, they ONLY invite feminists to be part of the show.

The questions I've heard tossed out on the BBC world service on NPR are also often feminist and heavily left-leaning. There is very strong and obvious bias in the questions asked by BBC interviewers. They often ask the exact same questions rephrased and repackaged to insist that their left-leaning view is corre

I've been listening to NPR quite a bit over the years and while there are plenty of things they run that are interesting and correct, there is also a major and obvious problem that they have with bias when it comes to shows that discuss anything that can have a feminist/social justice agenda overlaid on it. Diane Rehm and the replacement show 1A in particular are notorious for letting feminist dogma on the show unchallenged and the only opposing views or even facts that might be presented are token, easily dismissed items selected by the call screeners that only give the sound of "both sides" but the actual expressions and concerns of opposing sides are not allowed. NPR shows claim to thoroughly vet the people coming onto those shows and what they want to present but they clearly do not, especially with feminists.

Prime case I distinctly remember from last year: Lauren Duca was on 1A complaining about Martin Shkreli "harassing" her and "his fans" then coming after her and abusing and harassing her and threatening her with things up to and including death. Of course, Lauren Duca was covertly photographing Shkreli in a bar without permission and posting the photo to Twitter and bitching about his existence a year before that show, and she is basically an aggressive troll herself (she is basically a professional white man hater that can't keep her mouth shut about her hatred for white men):

PRO TIP:Most men who insult your "journalistic integrity" are bored as hell at their shitty desk jobs. Or just mad in their mom's basements.

Lol wow, so many mangy white men are going to go to jail for the riots after Hillary wins. #debatenight

Happy #WomensEqualityDay!! Straight, white men, unless I have spoken to you separately about this issue, please refrain from all engagement.

Friendly reminder that there's an uneven playing field, and straight, white men are generally trash!

GOP Uses Craig's List To Find Suitable Candidate, White Men Seeking White Man, Must Hate Women/The Poor

Gosh, you look super overprivileged and milky white carrying that starving African baby in your prof pic! Thanks for saving the world!

I AM GOING TO FUCKING KILL THE NEXT RANDOM MAN THAT TALKS TO ME

She's basically a vile racist sexist cunt and no one on 1A challenged her. NPR couldn't do the two minutes of research I did to find her deleted hate tweets? Give me a break.

Don't even get me started on that Diane Rehm show about "the sexual assault epidemic and what it says about our culture." That was a truckload of bullshit from the start. A bunch of high-profile sexual misconduct claims doesn't make the entirety of America full of sexual harassers and rapists. Between 1995 and 2010, the rate of completed rape or sexual assault declined from 3.6 per 1,000 females to 1.1 per 1,000. What THAT says about our culture is that we were well on the way to not sexually assaulting people before the SJW movement blew up in 2012, but no one on Diane Rehm's show challenged anything the feminists there said. Oh, and note that on issues with feminist ties, they ONLY invite feminists to be part of the show.

The questions I've heard tossed out on the BBC world service on NPR are also often feminist and heavily left-leaning. There is very strong and obvious bias in the questions asked by BBC interviewers. They often ask the exact same questions rephrased and repackaged to insist that their left-leaning view is corre

I've been listening to NPR quite a bit over the years and while there are plenty of things they run that are interesting and correct, there is also a major and obvious problem that they have with bias when it comes to shows that discuss anything that can have a feminist/social justice agenda overlaid on it. Diane Rehm and the replacement show 1A in particular are notorious for letting feminist dogma on the show unchallenged and the only opposing views or even facts that might be presented are token, easily dismissed items selected by the call screeners that only give the sound of "both sides" but the actual expressions and concerns of opposing sides are not allowed. NPR shows claim to thoroughly vet the people coming onto those shows and what they want to present but they clearly do not, especially with feminists.

Prime case I distinctly remember from last year: Lauren Duca was on 1A complaining about Martin Shkreli "harassing" her and "his fans" then coming after her and abusing and harassing her and threatening her with things up to and including death. Of course, Lauren Duca was covertly photographing Shkreli in a bar without permission and posting the photo to Twitter and bitching about his existence a year before that show, and she is basically an aggressive troll herself (she is basically a professional white man hater that can't keep her mouth shut about her hatred for white men):

PRO TIP:Most men who insult your "journalistic integrity" are bored as hell at their shitty desk jobs. Or just mad in their mom's basements.

Lol wow, so many mangy white men are going to go to jail for the riots after Hillary wins. #debatenight

Happy #WomensEqualityDay!! Straight, white men, unless I have spoken to you separately about this issue, please refrain from all engagement.

Friendly reminder that there's an uneven playing field, and straight, white men are generally trash!

GOP Uses Craig's List To Find Suitable Candidate, White Men Seeking White Man, Must Hate Women/The Poor

Gosh, you look super overprivileged and milky white carrying that starving African baby in your prof pic! Thanks for saving the world!

I AM GOING TO FUCKING KILL THE NEXT RANDOM MAN THAT TALKS TO ME

She's basically a vile racist sexist cunt and no one on 1A challenged her. NPR couldn't do the two minutes of research I did to find her deleted hate tweets? Give me a break.

Don't even get me started on that Diane Rehm show about "the sexual assault epidemic and what it says about our culture." That was a truckload of bullshit from the start. A bunch of high-profile sexual misconduct claims doesn't make the entirety of America full of sexual harassers and rapists. Between 1995 and 2010, the rate of completed rape or sexual assault declined from 3.6 per 1,000 females to 1.1 per 1,000. What THAT says about our culture is that we were well on the way to not sexually assaulting people before the SJW movement blew up in 2012, but no one on Diane Rehm's show challenged anything the feminists there said. Oh, and note that on issues with feminist ties, they ONLY invite feminists to be part of the show.

The questions I've heard tossed out on the BBC world service on NPR are also often feminist and heavily left-leaning. There is very strong and obvious bias in the questions asked by BBC interviewers. They often ask the exact same questions rephrased and repackaged to insist that their left-leaning view is corre

before it expires (or NVIDIA asks Google to clear it): here

The transgender movement is centrally organized by a group which openly seeks to overthrow the government of the USA (No.554) and is on a grant from Soros's Open Society Foundations to suppress public opposition to al-Qaeda (No.327795).

There's a lot of bullshit on 8chan/4chan but sometimes really important information comes through. It's an eye-opener when you look into it yourself and the information checks out. It's another eye-opener when nobody in the media is willing to report on it, not the R or the D or the independent media on either wing. It makes one wonder how many of these right-wing conspiracy theories that no one takes seriously might have some truth to them.

The transgender movement is centrally organized by a group which openly seeks to overthrow the government of the USA (No.554) and is on a grant from Soros's Open Society Foundations to suppress public opposition to al-Qaeda (No.327795).

There's a lot of bullshit on 8chan/4chan but sometimes really important information comes through. It's an eye-opener when you look into it yourself and the information checks out. It's another eye-opener when nobody in the media is willing to report on it, not the R or the D or the independent media on either wing. It makes one wonder how many of these right-wing conspiracy theories that no one takes seriously might have some truth to them.

Nobody really endorsed this since 10 Feb 2015 https://archive.is/Vtk1C

Because today it's terrorism, tomorrow it's someone who criticizes Islam or says that Brexit is a good thing.

By "tomorrow" you mean three or four years ago. AQ offered to stop major attacks if NATO would censor their political opposition within NATO countries, and our leaders agreed to the deal. Our leaders also have to censor their own political opposition to keep the system in place because any new and independent government that comes in and sees what they did is going to hang the old leaders for treason. Anders Breivik's attack on the Islamist terrorist recruitment event at Utoya island cemented the deal by convincing NATO leaders that they need to eliminate any sense of nationality and patriotism in their own societies to prevent right-wing terrorism. Meanwhile they dump taxpayer funds into PR telling them they're doing a good job so they don't change course. The PR agencies take jobs from Russia, China, Qatar, Iran, and AQ's private financiers, and our leaders let them do it because they need the same PR agencies to run their election campaigns. They honestly think that they are bringing about world peace.

They use Richard Spencer and /pol/ as a scary enemy to justify everything that they are doing and as distraction from their own mergers with equally right-wing Islamist forces. Their next enemy, who they've already started going after, will be Robert Spencer, the researcher who studies Islamic extremism and runs the news aggregator Jihad Watch. He is not a Nazi or an extremist, just a guy who has spent decades studying Islam and international affairs. Their names are similar enough that the public will project their hatred of one onto the other, and then onto other researchers who have studied Islam without converting to it and who have come to the same conclusions as Spencer.

The Gamergate people have figured out bits and pieces of what's going on after they were declared to be terrorists and censored by multiple NATO governments acting on behalf of known AQ operatives who were "vetted" by the politicians who run our national security agencies. Do you know how much "Gamergate harassment" there was? There was ONE TWEET from one game developer to a guy called "Communist Naruto". That's it. That is all of the scary "Gamergate harassment." Everything else was false reports, self-inflicted, or was kids reacting to fake news stories about "Gamergate harassment" by deciding it would be fun to join in. You can use Gamergate as an easy weathervane to tell which news sources are knowingly, deliberately lying to you and which are, if nothing else, not on their side.

• Concordia thread - Motivations and some of the people involved
• Literally WHO - listing more people involved
• HASTAC - more people involved, linked to State Department. The State Department guy works for Pierre Omidyar.
• HSBC - of course they're involved.
• The Messianic Power of Bill Gates - billionaires dump their entire fortunes into the project

Everyone who cares about their future should be looking into this.

Because today it's terrorism, tomorrow it's someone who criticizes Islam or says that Brexit is a good thing.

By "tomorrow" you mean three or four years ago. AQ offered to stop major attacks if NATO would censor their political opposition within NATO countries, and our leaders agreed to the deal. Our leaders also have to censor their own political opposition to keep the system in place because any new and independent government that comes in and sees what they did is going to hang the old leaders for treason. Anders Breivik's attack on the Islamist terrorist recruitment event at Utoya island cemented the deal by convincing NATO leaders that they need to eliminate any sense of nationality and patriotism in their own societies to prevent right-wing terrorism. Meanwhile they dump taxpayer funds into PR telling them they're doing a good job so they don't change course. The PR agencies take jobs from Russia, China, Qatar, Iran, and AQ's private financiers, and our leaders let them do it because they need the same PR agencies to run their election campaigns. They honestly think that they are bringing about world peace.

They use Richard Spencer and /pol/ as a scary enemy to justify everything that they are doing and as distraction from their own mergers with equally right-wing Islamist forces. Their next enemy, who they've already started going after, will be Robert Spencer, the researcher who studies Islamic extremism and runs the news aggregator Jihad Watch. He is not a Nazi or an extremist, just a guy who has spent decades studying Islam and international affairs. Their names are similar enough that the public will project their hatred of one onto the other, and then onto other researchers who have studied Islam without converting to it and who have come to the same conclusions as Spencer.

The Gamergate people have figured out bits and pieces of what's going on after they were declared to be terrorists and censored by multiple NATO governments acting on behalf of known AQ operatives who were "vetted" by the politicians who run our national security agencies. Do you know how much "Gamergate harassment" there was? There was ONE TWEET from one game developer to a guy called "Communist Naruto". That's it. That is all of the scary "Gamergate harassment." Everything else was false reports, self-inflicted, or was kids reacting to fake news stories about "Gamergate harassment" by deciding it would be fun to join in. You can use Gamergate as an easy weathervane to tell which news sources are knowingly, deliberately lying to you and which are, if nothing else, not on their side.

• Concordia thread - Motivations and some of the people involved
• Literally WHO - listing more people involved
• HASTAC - more people involved, linked to State Department. The State Department guy works for Pierre Omidyar.
• HSBC - of course they're involved.
• The Messianic Power of Bill Gates - billionaires dump their entire fortunes into the project

Everyone who cares about their future should be looking into this.

Because today it's terrorism, tomorrow it's someone who criticizes Islam or says that Brexit is a good thing.

By "tomorrow" you mean three or four years ago. AQ offered to stop major attacks if NATO would censor their political opposition within NATO countries, and our leaders agreed to the deal. Our leaders also have to censor their own political opposition to keep the system in place because any new and independent government that comes in and sees what they did is going to hang the old leaders for treason. Anders Breivik's attack on the Islamist terrorist recruitment event at Utoya island cemented the deal by convincing NATO leaders that they need to eliminate any sense of nationality and patriotism in their own societies to prevent right-wing terrorism. Meanwhile they dump taxpayer funds into PR telling them they're doing a good job so they don't change course. The PR agencies take jobs from Russia, China, Qatar, Iran, and AQ's private financiers, and our leaders let them do it because they need the same PR agencies to run their election campaigns. They honestly think that they are bringing about world peace.

They use Richard Spencer and /pol/ as a scary enemy to justify everything that they are doing and as distraction from their own mergers with equally right-wing Islamist forces. Their next enemy, who they've already started going after, will be Robert Spencer, the researcher who studies Islamic extremism and runs the news aggregator Jihad Watch. He is not a Nazi or an extremist, just a guy who has spent decades studying Islam and international affairs. Their names are similar enough that the public will project their hatred of one onto the other, and then onto other researchers who have studied Islam without converting to it and who have come to the same conclusions as Spencer.

The Gamergate people have figured out bits and pieces of what's going on after they were declared to be terrorists and censored by multiple NATO governments acting on behalf of known AQ operatives who were "vetted" by the politicians who run our national security agencies. Do you know how much "Gamergate harassment" there was? There was ONE TWEET from one game developer to a guy called "Communist Naruto". That's it. That is all of the scary "Gamergate harassment." Everything else was false reports, self-inflicted, or was kids reacting to fake news stories about "Gamergate harassment" by deciding it would be fun to join in. You can use Gamergate as an easy weathervane to tell which news sources are knowingly, deliberately lying to you and which are, if nothing else, not on their side.

• Concordia thread - Motivations and some of the people involved
• Literally WHO - listing more people involved
• HASTAC - more people involved, linked to State Department. The State Department guy works for Pierre Omidyar.
• HSBC - of course they're involved.
• The Messianic Power of Bill Gates - billionaires dump their entire fortunes into the project

Everyone who cares about their future should be looking into this.

Because today it's terrorism, tomorrow it's someone who criticizes Islam or says that Brexit is a good thing.

By "tomorrow" you mean three or four years ago. AQ offered to stop major attacks if NATO would censor their political opposition within NATO countries, and our leaders agreed to the deal. Our leaders also have to censor their own political opposition to keep the system in place because any new and independent government that comes in and sees what they did is going to hang the old leaders for treason. Anders Breivik's attack on the Islamist terrorist recruitment event at Utoya island cemented the deal by convincing NATO leaders that they need to eliminate any sense of nationality and patriotism in their own societies to prevent right-wing terrorism. Meanwhile they dump taxpayer funds into PR telling them they're doing a good job so they don't change course. The PR agencies take jobs from Russia, China, Qatar, Iran, and AQ's private financiers, and our leaders let them do it because they need the same PR agencies to run their election campaigns. They honestly think that they are bringing about world peace.

They use Richard Spencer and /pol/ as a scary enemy to justify everything that they are doing and as distraction from their own mergers with equally right-wing Islamist forces. Their next enemy, who they've already started going after, will be Robert Spencer, the researcher who studies Islamic extremism and runs the news aggregator Jihad Watch. He is not a Nazi or an extremist, just a guy who has spent decades studying Islam and international affairs. Their names are similar enough that the public will project their hatred of one onto the other, and then onto other researchers who have studied Islam without converting to it and who have come to the same conclusions as Spencer.

The Gamergate people have figured out bits and pieces of what's going on after they were declared to be terrorists and censored by multiple NATO governments acting on behalf of known AQ operatives who were "vetted" by the politicians who run our national security agencies. Do you know how much "Gamergate harassment" there was? There was ONE TWEET from one game developer to a guy called "Communist Naruto". That's it. That is all of the scary "Gamergate harassment." Everything else was false reports, self-inflicted, or was kids reacting to fake news stories about "Gamergate harassment" by deciding it would be fun to join in. You can use Gamergate as an easy weathervane to tell which news sources are knowingly, deliberately lying to you and which are, if nothing else, not on their side.

• Concordia thread - Motivations and some of the people involved
• Literally WHO - listing more people involved
• HASTAC - more people involved, linked to State Department. The State Department guy works for Pierre Omidyar.
• HSBC - of course they're involved.
• The Messianic Power of Bill Gates - billionaires dump their entire fortunes into the project

Everyone who cares about their future should be looking into this.

Because today it's terrorism, tomorrow it's someone who criticizes Islam or says that Brexit is a good thing.

By "tomorrow" you mean three or four years ago. AQ offered to stop major attacks if NATO would censor their political opposition within NATO countries, and our leaders agreed to the deal. Our leaders also have to censor their own political opposition to keep the system in place because any new and independent government that comes in and sees what they did is going to hang the old leaders for treason. Anders Breivik's attack on the Islamist terrorist recruitment event at Utoya island cemented the deal by convincing NATO leaders that they need to eliminate any sense of nationality and patriotism in their own societies to prevent right-wing terrorism. Meanwhile they dump taxpayer funds into PR telling them they're doing a good job so they don't change course. The PR agencies take jobs from Russia, China, Qatar, Iran, and AQ's private financiers, and our leaders let them do it because they need the same PR agencies to run their election campaigns. They honestly think that they are bringing about world peace.

They use Richard Spencer and /pol/ as a scary enemy to justify everything that they are doing and as distraction from their own mergers with equally right-wing Islamist forces. Their next enemy, who they've already started going after, will be Robert Spencer, the researcher who studies Islamic extremism and runs the news aggregator Jihad Watch. He is not a Nazi or an extremist, just a guy who has spent decades studying Islam and international affairs. Their names are similar enough that the public will project their hatred of one onto the other, and then onto other researchers who have studied Islam without converting to it and who have come to the same conclusions as Spencer.

The Gamergate people have figured out bits and pieces of what's going on after they were declared to be terrorists and censored by multiple NATO governments acting on behalf of known AQ operatives who were "vetted" by the politicians who run our national security agencies. Do you know how much "Gamergate harassment" there was? There was ONE TWEET from one game developer to a guy called "Communist Naruto". That's it. That is all of the scary "Gamergate harassment." Everything else was false reports, self-inflicted, or was kids reacting to fake news stories about "Gamergate harassment" by deciding it would be fun to join in. You can use Gamergate as an easy weathervane to tell which news sources are knowingly, deliberately lying to you and which are, if nothing else, not on their side.

• Concordia thread - Motivations and some of the people involved
• Literally WHO - listing more people involved
• HASTAC - more people involved, linked to State Department. The State Department guy works for Pierre Omidyar.
• HSBC - of course they're involved.
• The Messianic Power of Bill Gates - billionaires dump their entire fortunes into the project

Everyone who cares about their future should be looking into this.

Businessinsider can hardly be called "socialist America haters".

* fired Pax Dickinson for social justice
* diagnosed Linus Torvalds with a mental disorder
* promotes communist nutjob Zoe Quinn's fraudulent Crash Override Network
* deleted comments that did not fit their party line
* promotes/cites communist nutjob Brianna Wu
* promoted the #ThankYouEllenPao campaign as soon as it began
* promotes Github's communist nutjob Corey Ehmke (Coraline Ada)
* was part of a smear campaign against Palmer Luckey
* is run by a friend of the Lerer brothers, the same group that runs Huffington Post and Buzzfeed

Business Insider is almost a canonical example of a fake news site run by socialist America-haters.

Businessinsider can hardly be called "socialist America haters".

* fired Pax Dickinson for social justice
* diagnosed Linus Torvalds with a mental disorder
* promotes communist nutjob Zoe Quinn's fraudulent Crash Override Network
* deleted comments that did not fit their party line
* promotes/cites communist nutjob Brianna Wu
* promoted the #ThankYouEllenPao campaign as soon as it began
* promotes Github's communist nutjob Corey Ehmke (Coraline Ada)
* was part of a smear campaign against Palmer Luckey
* is run by a friend of the Lerer brothers, the same group that runs Huffington Post and Buzzfeed

Business Insider is almost a canonical example of a fake news site run by socialist America-haters.

Businessinsider can hardly be called "socialist America haters".

* fired Pax Dickinson for social justice
* diagnosed Linus Torvalds with a mental disorder
* promotes communist nutjob Zoe Quinn's fraudulent Crash Override Network
* deleted comments that did not fit their party line
* promotes/cites communist nutjob Brianna Wu
* promoted the #ThankYouEllenPao campaign as soon as it began
* promotes Github's communist nutjob Corey Ehmke (Coraline Ada)
* was part of a smear campaign against Palmer Luckey
* is run by a friend of the Lerer brothers, the same group that runs Huffington Post and Buzzfeed

Business Insider is almost a canonical example of a fake news site run by socialist America-haters.

It could have something to do with this as well.

Google Ideas is now known as Jigsaw.
Jigsaw organized a team to "fight online abuse":
* Holly Jacobs, Cyber Civil Rights Initiative
* Rose Eveleth, the person responsible for getting Tim Hunt fired in the "Shirtgate" incident
* "Feminista Jones"
* Randi Harper, professional online abuser
* Anita Sarkeesian, con artist
* Zoe Quinn, professional online abuser
* Jamia Wilson of Women, Action, and Media (WAM)

About Jigsaw director Jared Cohen:
On 11 February, Burton wrote to the secure email list that Cohen was still planning to head to Gaza. He added, "The dude is a loose can[n]on. GOOGLE is trying to stop his entry into Gaza now because the dude is like scorched earth. It's unclear to GOOGLE if he's driving without a license, but GOOGLE believes he's on a specific mission of "regime change" on the part of leftist fools inside the WH who are using him for their agendas.

More Startups Are Emerging To Take On Internet Trolls
Christina Farr March 14, 2016 Device Daily
> Two weeks ago, a group of developers, journalists, and policy experts showed up at the headquarters of Google and Facebook to brainstorm ideas about how to solve one of the Internetâ(TM)s pervasive problem: Trolls.
> The hackathon, called No2H8, was organized by a company called Affinis Labs, which specializes in throwing events to brainstorm solutions to major challenges.
Affinis Labs members include Quintan Wiktorowicz, Shahed Amanullah, and Wajahat Ali.

The Center for American Progress produced the report "Fear Inc.: The Roots Of the Islamophobia Network In America" written by Faiz Shakir, Wajahat Ali, Eli Clifton, Matt Duss, Scott Keyes and Lee Fang. As described by Daniel Greenfield:
The message is subtle, but not very. The majority of the experts blamed in the report for the spread of Islamophobia are Jewish⦠But the report isn't really about Israel or Jews â" it's about silencing critics of Islamic extremism. Shakir, Ali and company tip their hand when they don't limit their attacks to non-Muslims, but go after moderate Muslim critics of Islamic extremism as well.

DHS Memo Supports Muslim Brotherhood Influence Over U.S. Counter-Terrorism Language
> A June 2007 article in a San Francisco newspaper appears to identify the four Muslims Americans as:
> * Akbar Ahmed, former ambassador from Pakistan
> * Reza Aslan, author
> * M.J. Kahn, Houston City Councilman
> * Shahed Amanullah, Austin Texas blogger
> The key influence here is likely Akbar Ahmed, a board member of the Center for the Study of Islam and Democracy (CSID), an organization with many links to the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood.

TL/DR: Google is hiring some of the Internet's worst harassers to "fight online abuse" and is hiring Islamist extremists to identify "online trolls" for the "anti-harassment" team to fight.

Twitter (Soliya, formerly Solis) is run as a joint operation of Qatari intelligence, the PLO, associates of Alwaleed bin Talal, and the Obama campaign but I repeat myself. The goal is to find excuses to ban people who oppose Democrats or Islamists, to smear them while doing so, and to suppress the spread of information that might cause anyone to oppose Democrats or Islamists. Anything opposing Democrats or Islamists may be considered "hateful" and "offensive" whether it is or not. Anything from Democrats or Islamists is allowed to slide unless it hits the news and threatens to expose the double standard. They plan to selectively censor opinions over a long period of time to change what the public views as acceptable or offensive until there is no opposition to Islamist extremism and no information available that might lead someone to question Islam.

Hillary Clinton personally authorized this federally-funded State Department program and Lisa Monaco personally appointed Islamist extremists to run it. Clinton and Huma Abedin were allowed to take away documents about the "Muslim Engagement Project" so they could not be published under FOIA. Two of the big names behind the program are Peter Warren Singer and Martin Indyk. Private partners include the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, the Omidyar network, the Soros network, the Gates Foundation, and other billionaires who have their own private spy networks. Big foundations like Arcus, Annie E. Casey, and MacArthur are chipping in support.

The same Islamist alliance runs Google, Apple, Microsoft, Buzzfeed, Huffington Post, the Daily Beast, Vice, Vox, Boingboing, Cracked, Ars Technica, Mozilla, Github, the EFF, Reddit, Wikipedia, Metafilter, UBM, Pearson, the Guardian, the New York Times, National Geographic, and the Daily Show. They coordinate their messaging to give the appearance of widespread approval, have their operatives in business fire whoever stands up to disagree with them, and spread news of the firings and denunciations of their opponents to then manufacture approval by making everyone else too scared to speak up. Gamergate happened when they got into the gaming industry and exposed how much of the media they control by censoring a sex scandal and smearing opponents of the corruption and the coverup.

They are running the same scam that they use in Israel. They attack someone without provocation until the other party fights back, then they claim that they are being oppressed. The media believes them, people believe the media, and gullible people give them donations and access to political power. By now they own the media, access to the media, access to employment in many big companies, have gotten into the government and the education system, and they're going after control of the army. Trump may need to roll out the army to get rid of them while the army will still follow his orders and will still consider ISIS their enemy and not their "Ally".

> tvc has it

What's tvc? What is the link to this 4 season stream?

I tried googling and still couldn't figure it out.

https://archive.is/jK08j

https://archive.is/hFG6V

> tvc has it

What's tvc? What is the link to this 4 season stream?

I tried googling and still couldn't figure it out.

https://archive.is/jK08j

https://archive.is/hFG6V

Google: " +kickingthebitbucket +site:archive.is" to keep up on all creimer content while denying him the satisfaction of reader metrics!!

Here's another example of stupid. Each of those pages has embedded affiliate links. No wonder creimer is laughing all the way to the bank.

http://archive.is/www.kickingthebitbucket.com

You seem to be confused about the definition of "diversity".

https://imgur.com/a/XHrr4
http://archive.is/8751T

You should probably read this and get a head of the curve for a change. Plenty of ties to both the CDI and Podesta group in this, and it's likely not going to be pretty. But it does need to come out.

Groundwater Sustainability Agencies ?

That's the first result for

https://www.google.com/search?...

https://archive.is/eU90k

https://www.google.com/search?...

https://archive.is/TstDK

I don't see anything about useless people being sent there though.

Got a link?

Groundwater Sustainability Agencies ?

That's the first result for

https://www.google.com/search?...

https://archive.is/eU90k

https://www.google.com/search?...

https://archive.is/TstDK

I don't see anything about useless people being sent there though.

Got a link?

MPAC dossier, page 9

Its July 1999 issue featured Ayatollah Khomeini and Osama bin Laden on its cover, with a headline "The Spirit of Jihad." Inside, bin Laden was identified as a "freedom fighter and philanthropist."

After 9/11 made Osama too much of an embarrassment, they did portray him as a villain.. as a puppet controlled by Dick Cheney or working with The Jews.

What's the relevence? This is the group that runs Twitter, Reddit, Wikipedia, Mozilla, Metafilter, BoingBoing, etc, as part of a federally funded Internet censorship program called "Viral Peace" that is run out of the Berkman Center at Harvard University. Gamergate happened when they rolled out the censorship machine two years early to cover up a racketeering scandal. (It was supposed to be a secret weapon against Hillary's opponents in the 2016 election.) The autistic gamers have spent three years finding out what happened, and the signs pointed back to the feds protecting a censorship bureau run by Islamists.

MPAC was placed there by Lisa Monaco. Yes, the Department of Homeland Security put Islamists in charge of censoring the Internet. No one in the MSM considers this a scandal but everyone wants to talk about Russia buying ads on Facebook.

Now take a look at who is often accused of being "alt-right" and "white supremacist." Steve Bannon, Sebastian Gorka, Ben Shapiro, Pamela Geller, Robert Spencer, Cathy Young, Phyllis Chesler, Melanie Phillips, Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Milo Yiannopoulos, Bill Maher, Julian Assange, Jordan Peterson, Dave Rubin, David Auerbach, and then there are a few open Nazi LARPers like Richard Spencer that they point at to justify censoring the rest. Many of the people who are accused of being "alt-right" are not White Supremacists. They are anti-terrorist, or they are aligned with Hillary Clinton's political opponents, or they just got in the way of the censors. Take a hint, if the Zionist Organization of America or the Jerusalem Post honors somebody then they are probably not a Nazi.

archive.is is, IME, a better way to break through paywalls. I use it all the time for WSJ links, and it looks like it'll also work for the Economist: https://archive.fo/4xW6A. (They have multiple TLDs, any one of which might be the one used for any given article.)

Well none of those states claim to be socialist. They're multiparty democracies with a social democratic party.

And they don't have 'perfect human rights records'. All of them ban hate speech for example and defined hate speech widely enough that disagreeing with the groupthink is potentially illegal. E.g. disagreeing with state policies on mass immigration, or welfare.

They do all have high taxes though. Which is ironic as a society which taxes people heavily but grants them lots of benefits when they're unemployed is probably only possible with a small and culturally homogenous population. E.g. in a great article from Rosengard, an immigrant ghetto in Sweden

https://archive.is/SQLl2

Yet there is an increasing sense, even on the left, that the combination of Sweden's welfare and migration policies was foredoomed. The "Swedish model", often seen as a middle way between communism and capitalism, dates back to the 1930s. The intellectual roots of the policy lie in the concept of folkhem ("people's home"); scholars have noticed its similarity to the interwar German idea of Volksgemeinschaft ("people's community"). One turned malignant, one did not, but they were grown in similar cultures.

Nick Johnson of Britain's Institute of Community Cohesion has studied race relations in various multicultural cities. "In both Sweden and Denmark," he says, "it was very striking that people on the left were saying they hadn't realised the extent to which their social model was predicated on a strong sense of nationalism. And diversity was starting to open the debate about the kind of society they want.

"Some were thinking that they can only maintain strong support for individuals if they control their borders. They are now facing the problem the UK has wrestled with for years: that of having a permanent ethnic minority underclass.

Of course dissenting on immigration is basically impossible in Sweden. Same in Germany. Unfortunately as Engels' article points out high welfare combined with a generous asylum policy means you end up with a lot of people who will probably never work. And they'll have children who will also never work. This is not good for social stability.

I'm not any of the previous ACs in this thread, but I will provide a citation: WSJ: Top 20% of Earners Pay 84% of Income Tax. One flaw of the article is that it only considers income taxes, but not capital gains taxes, which are considerably lower.

found online, not vouching for its accuracy

Independent verification of FBI Anon claims

1995: Martin Indyk, Dennis Ross, Izaac Herzog, and an unidentified Israeli representative meet to discuss the possibility of Bill Clinton pardoning Marc Rich in exchange for Rich funding the PLO, a Muslim terrorist organization committed to Israel's destruction.
http://www.judicialwatch.org/p...

Qatar would buy a stake in Marc Rich's company Glencore after his death, and Qatar and Glencore would operate in concert afterwards.

2000: Marc Rich associate Michael Steinhardt controls the DLC and Progressive Policy Institute.
http://www.deepcapture.com/200...

2003: George Soros and Morton Halperin placed John Podesta as founding head of the Center for American Progress.
http://www.discoverthenetworks... https://archive.is/Gb2FV

Under Podesta's watch, unknown persons placed accused Hamas fundraiser Faiz Shakir as Vice President of the Center for American Progress and chief editor of Think Progress. In 2011 Faiz Shakir and Wajahat Ali produced the report "Fear Inc." smearing national security analysts and political activists who oppose the Muslim Brotherhood, including liberal Muslims.
http://www.frontpagemag.com/fp... https://archive.is/tOxwC

Online rumors have attempted to connect the art trading of John Podesta's brother Tony Podesta with Qatari art purchases of works by Damien Hirst and Jeff Koons who have been hosted by Qatar Museums.
http://qz.com/764975/qatars-oi...

The Podesta Group lobbyied for Qatar Petroleum in 2013.
https://www.desmogblog.com/201...

2004: The Awan brothers begin employment in the US Congress and will work under Robert Wexler, Xavier Becerra, Gregory Meeks, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, and others before they are exposed as a spy ring in 2017.
http://www.politico.com/story/...

2005: Unknown persons placed Emad Shahin and Juliette Kayyem in the Dubai Initiative which produced propaganda to promote the Muslim Brotherhood using the name and reputation of Harvard University.
http://belfercenter.ksg.harvar...
Emad Shahin was convincted in absentia of aiding Hamas and Iran to overthrow the Egyptian government.
http://emadshahin.com/?p=1839
https://news.vice.com/article/...
Juliette Kayyem advocated for Qatari state television network Al-Jazeera and wrote "The War On Terror Is Over" to discourage continued resistance to al-Qaeda.
https://www.boston.com/bostong...
https://www.boston.com/bostong...

2005: Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal paid Georgetown University $20 million to continue hosting John Esposito's Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding, which was originally founded in 1993 with a grant from PLO board member Hasib Sabagh