Slashdot Mirror

You don't win an argument by discrediting the speaker. You have to, you know, make arguments. In this case the Left was all for free speech - as long as it was THEIR speech that was being protected. Now that they're in power, they don't see why anyone should be able to speak but them. An internal company briefing produced by Google and leaked argues that due to a variety of factors, including the election of President Trump, the "American tradition" of free speech on the internet is no longer viable. Pulling up the ladder so nobody else can get up.

No, moviegoers don't hate women. Comic books especially have always led entertainment when it comes to diversity, and comic book fans have never had a problem with that.

To amplify the point, no one had a problem with Ripley gunning down Aliens - it was an awesome movie and perhaps one of the best SF movies of all time.

No one has a problem with Black Widow tricking Loki into revealing his plans, or largely holding her own against the Winter Soldier. I saw both of those and was impressed at how female characters in Marvel movies are *not* useless. Including Maria Hill gunning down the attacker on the helicarrier bridge. (Also of note: no one cares that Nick Fury is played by a black man, it's extremely well done.)

There's an interesting article(*) on Breitbart that sums up the current situation: a) Hollywood engages in hatred towards half the country, and b) this wouldn't be a problem if the movies were any good. As it turns out they're not any good, and this is just us hating you back.

From the article:

Yes, we’ve been insulted, and we’re sick of it. But I can overlook a lot of insults if you give me something worthy of praise. Maria Callas insulted a lot of people, but we still wanted to hear her sing. Can we say the same about the films nominated for Best Picture?

A specific instance cited in the article is Spike Lee's "BlackkKlansman" (nominated best picture this round) compared to "Giant" (1957). Spike Lee's movie casts whites as evil while doling out liberal doses of shame and humiliation, while at the end of "Giant" the audience is visibly rooting for Rock Hudson fighting with a racist diner owner.

Same message, good (versus bad) delivery.

Maybe this is why movie attendance is low, and oscars attendance is really low: the movies are crap, we're sick of the insults, and we don't like being brow-beaten with your social justice message.

(*) Yes, it's from Breitbart, get over it. It's an insightful article that largely describes the problem, and attacking the source is not the same as discussing the content.

Former ACLU legal director and Berkeley law professor John A. Powell recently told a reporter from the New Yorker that free speech rules in the United States fail to weigh the value of speech against the harms that speech can cause, and argued that we ought to regulate speech that can cause P.T.S.D. and "stereotype threat."

An internal company briefing produced by Google and leaked argues that due to a variety of factors, including the election of President Trump, the âoeAmerican traditionâ of free speech on the internet is no longer viable.

It's a real problem and it's only getting worse.

There is also the human cost to consider.

Rep. Brooks outlines the cost of not having a wall:

“With the southern border, we have the loss of at least 15,000 Americans a year. You have 2,000 that are homicides by illegal aliens, according to federal government data. You’ve got another 15,000, 16,000 that die each year from heroin overdoses, 90 percent of which comes across our porous southern border. That’s not counting the 55,000 additional deaths that are caused by overdoses, a significant amount of which comes across the southern border,” Brooks stated."

I've looked into this, and the numbers are accurate. The GAO estimates for 2009 show that Arizona had 240 illegal immigrant inmates incarcerated in federal prison for homicide related charges. California had 2430, Florida had 480, New York had 1350, and Texas had 900.

"Taking the data only from these five states, and assuming that each person incarcerated for a homicide-related offense is responsible for only one death, yields 5,400 people killed by illegal aliens."

For comparison, automobile deaths in the US is around 35,000 annually.

Total non-medical deaths in the US is about 161,000 annually. Deaths due to illegals is more than 2% of that, possibly as much as 10%, depending on where you put the blame for overdosing.

All of this is fact, and should be the basis for any political arguments about the wall.

The human cost of not having a wall is very high.

The wall will NOT stop any of that. Zero. Nada.
NONE of it. Do you understand that we have THOUSANDS of miles of coastline that is barely guarded?
Do you understand that most of those drugs come in from regular checkpoints?
And let's deal with the REASONS why there are so many drugs coming into the country - THERE IS A DEMAND FOR THEM! Let's deal with that!

The wall is NOTHING but a distraction issue that will solve NOTHING.
And WHY are there so many migrants? Let's look at America's policies shall we?! We CAUSED the immigrant problem!

So let's take some responsibility for OUR actions on the World stage!

Jesus Fucking Christ! How the fuck did Americans get so stupid!! Oh wait! Newt Gingrich and Fox News......

GO ahead, get your fucking wall and "win". Go right ahead!

I am so disgusted now ... Trump is a total moron and yet, my fellow Americans STILL support him?! They'd sooner drop their football team for being less of a loser.
This is unbelievable. The Founding Fathers were morons for not giving us a Parliamentary system. This two-party system is broken and from what I see, it's the Republicans who have jumped the rails into retard land first.
It's a good thing that most of them are old and about to die. The sooner the better and let's fix this country when the Fox News audience is dead.

There is also the human cost to consider.

Rep. Brooks outlines the cost of not having a wall:

“With the southern border, we have the loss of at least 15,000 Americans a year. You have 2,000 that are homicides by illegal aliens, according to federal government data. You’ve got another 15,000, 16,000 that die each year from heroin overdoses, 90 percent of which comes across our porous southern border. That’s not counting the 55,000 additional deaths that are caused by overdoses, a significant amount of which comes across the southern border,” Brooks stated."

I've looked into this, and the numbers are accurate.

And completely irrelevant to a wall. Do you really think people are carrying bags of heroin on their backs through the desert? The heroin comes through ports of entry, hidden in trucks or ships.

Rep Mo Brooks is lying to you.

The GAO estimates for 2009 show that Arizona had 240 illegal immigrant inmates incarcerated in federal prison for homicide related charges. California had 2430, Florida had 480, New York had 1350, and Texas had 900.

"Taking the data only from these five states, and assuming that each person incarcerated for a homicide-related offense is responsible for only one death, yields 5,400 people killed by illegal aliens."

For comparison, automobile deaths in the US is around 35,000 annually.

Total non-medical deaths in the US is about 161,000 annually. Deaths due to illegals is more than 2% of that

Wow that article is hilarious.

"DACA is bad because a much larger group of which DACA is a very unique subset committed bad crimes!! And I'm skeptical of studies that completely contradict my thesis but won't actually say why!!!!"

depending on where you put the blame for overdosing.

All of this is fact, and should be the basis for any political arguments about the wall.

The human cost of not having a wall is very high.

Even assuming illegal immigration was as terrible as you say did you notice last year when Democrats and Trump agreed to a deal for $25 billion in wall funding, but then immigration hardliners came in and blew it up?

There's a reason they did that, a wall is a giant waste of cash and not that useful for stopping illegal immigration.

But if President Crybaby really wants a wall he can do the thing Presidents are supposed to do when they want a policy and needs the other party's support. Negotiate and find something of value they'll take in exchange.

The US system does not give Trump the right to build a wall without congressional support.

There is also the human cost to consider.

Rep. Brooks outlines the cost of not having a wall:

“With the southern border, we have the loss of at least 15,000 Americans a year. You have 2,000 that are homicides by illegal aliens, according to federal government data. You’ve got another 15,000, 16,000 that die each year from heroin overdoses, 90 percent of which comes across our porous southern border. That’s not counting the 55,000 additional deaths that are caused by overdoses, a significant amount of which comes across the southern border,” Brooks stated."

I've looked into this, and the numbers are accurate. The GAO estimates for 2009 show that Arizona had 240 illegal immigrant inmates incarcerated in federal prison for homicide related charges. California had 2430, Florida had 480, New York had 1350, and Texas had 900.

"Taking the data only from these five states, and assuming that each person incarcerated for a homicide-related offense is responsible for only one death, yields 5,400 people killed by illegal aliens."

For comparison, automobile deaths in the US is around 35,000 annually.

Total non-medical deaths in the US is about 161,000 annually. Deaths due to illegals is more than 2% of that, possibly as much as 10%, depending on where you put the blame for overdosing.

All of this is fact, and should be the basis for any political arguments about the wall.

The human cost of not having a wall is very high.

Seems to have worked well for Israel deterring illegal African "immigration"... but not the US? picture of israel's southern wall

The number is modest, considering that Twitter has previously deleted millions of accounts it determined were responsible for spreading misinformation in the 2016 U.S. presidential election.

You mean how Twitter admitted under oath to suppressing #DNCLeak during the election campaign?

That was simply suppression of news that made Democrats look horrible, not misinformation.

Liberals have spent two years rioting in the streets and on campuses because they didn't get their way in 2016, are regularly driven to assault by the mere sight of red hats, and are triggered into apoplectic rage by the mere existence of alternative viewpoints. Social media (and /.) is flooded with batshit demands for everything from assassinations of republicans and Trump or demands for Trump's trial and execution for "treason", to the overthrow of the government itself.

In an honest world this is known as "terrorism"; the only reason no one pushes the point is because it would only inflame the situation more and we're trying to contain you psychos as best we can. Actively monitoring and infiltrating the Antifa-types (as well as right-wing nutjobs) looking for any excuse to shut them down is exactly what the government *should* be doing. To not do so is all but asking for another OKC.

Reminder that Twitter admitted under oath to suppressing #DNCLeak during the election campaign.

https://www.breitbart.com/poli...

What a biased load of crap... Slashdot is easily duped.

Who is advocating wide open borders?

Puhleaze. Democratic Socialist darling Ocasio-Cortez put forth the rallying cry two months ago to abolish ICE - which essentially would be the same as if not directly opening the borders. And a bunch of other Democrats could not stumble over each other fast enough to parrot her. It was cringe inducing to say the least it was so ridiculous.

Many Democrats have and now are advocating we welcome what has now become an army of thousands of men (really no women) marching here (in any other reality it would be called an invasion force) into the country because we can absorb them.

I know many people do not bother with mainstream media sources anymore. But you really do need to pull your head out of the sand on this one.

See subject & https://www.infowars.com/trump... who (though I dislike quoting this person) come as friends but are the WORST most INSIDIOUS DEMON https://www.breitbart.com/nati...

* Now, if you "follow the money" (being taken out of your hands by NUMEROUS FORMS of "wealth transfer")?

WE ALL KNOW WHAT GROUP RUNS THEM - get rid of THEM too (but we've tried to no avail as VAMPIRES DO NOT FEED ON OTHER VAMPIRES).

APK

P.S.=> This'll ALL change & HOPEFULLY Trump makes good on getting RID of the ANYTHING BUT FEDERAL ILLEGAL RESERVE CENTRAL BANKS (we've done our BEST economically MINUS them, & they were put in place by a MINORITY of GOV'T. (illegal & done while rest of gov't. was on vacation during Wilson's tenure) + ILLEGAL by Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution the U.S. Congress is the one that is supposed to have the authority to âoecoin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measuresâ. So why is the Federal Reserve doing it? KICK THEIR ASSES OUT! Lincoln avoided them via the "greenback" & iirc? Things were righted almost instantly - Jackson did nearly the same, same result - history & its RESULTS speaks FOR ITSELF... apk

Google is not what it seems by Julian Assange. Hey, remember when Wikileaks was popular? Before they started talking about Gamergate and Hillary Clinton? Then suddenly no one followed them anymore and you never heard about them again.

As Google Spins, So Does Silicon Valley. Google trained the public relations departments of many major Silicon Valley companies. The public relations departments control what information the executives hear from the public, controlling their decision making process by proxy.

Google leaked plans to censor the Internet for the benefit of foreign powers

Google and Facebook are working "to solve one of the Internet's pervasive problem: Trolls" with Islamists who believe that any opposition to al-Qaeda is "Islamophobia"

Google Ideas Invites Online Harassers to Talk About Online Harassment with such notables as Randi Harper, Zoe Quinn, and Rose Eveleth from Shirtgate.

Anita Sarkeesian's Feminist Frequency was part of a campaign to empower "Muslim, Arab, and South Asian communities"

Google is not what it seems by Julian Assange. Hey, remember when Wikileaks was popular? Before they started talking about Gamergate and Hillary Clinton? Then suddenly no one followed them anymore and you never heard about them again.

As Google Spins, So Does Silicon Valley. Google trained the public relations departments of many major Silicon Valley companies. The public relations departments control what information the executives hear from the public, controlling their decision making process by proxy.

Google leaked plans to censor the Internet for the benefit of foreign powers

Google and Facebook are working "to solve one of the Internet's pervasive problem: Trolls" with Islamists who believe that any opposition to al-Qaeda is "Islamophobia"

Google Ideas Invites Online Harassers to Talk About Online Harassment with such notables as Randi Harper, Zoe Quinn, and Rose Eveleth from Shirtgate.

Anita Sarkeesian's Feminist Frequency was part of a campaign to empower "Muslim, Arab, and South Asian communities"

I came to the comments for this. So many people don't know the real story behind what happened. Unfortunately most of the press didn't even cover it, so here's one of the few articles that did: https://www.breitbart.com/tech...

Brave is "ok". I've been alternating between brave and FF but haven't found Brave mature in development enough to make the switch completely.

Keith Ellison's being pushed out of the DNC already.

Is that why the Dems defended him with their "independent" investigation? What Democrat has publicly disavowed Ellison and called for him to step down and withdraw from his current election contest?

And how do the Republicans respond to the triple allegations of sexual assault against Kavanaugh?

The evidence was examined and given a public hearing. How do Dems respond to the inconsistencies, refutations by supposed witnesses (including a lifelong friend), and proven lies? How do they respond to withheld evidence, such at the therapists notes? They scream and stamp their feet, and double down on their lunacy.

Do you seriously believe there were "gang rape parties" that the 3rd accuser attended, that there were over ten such events, and that she kept attending them before she became one of the victims? Even on the surface it's absurd, let alone the complete lack of any substantiation.

Even people on the left are turning their backs on the rat-faced, publicity-seeking lawyer Avenatti.

No one is forcing anyone to use Google, YouTube, or any of the other services.

Other than Stripe and Patreon and Apple and Visa and Mastercard and the US State Department and UK Home Office.

If you start up an alternative service, you can expect to get kicked off of every cloud service provider and then DDOSed to death by NATO. Expect the backbones and satellite service providers to start enforcing the same rules that payment processors are already enforcing, and then please tell me how you can begin to build an alternative to Google when you have no network access, no government funding, and no banks will process your payments.

No one is forcing anyone to use Google, YouTube, or any of the other services.

Other than Stripe and Patreon and Apple and Visa and Mastercard and the US State Department and UK Home Office.

If you start up an alternative service, you can expect to get kicked off of every cloud service provider and then DDOSed to death by NATO. Expect the backbones and satellite service providers to start enforcing the same rules that payment processors are already enforcing, and then please tell me how you can begin to build an alternative to Google when you have no network access, no government funding, and no banks will process your payments.

I see racist liberals are upset people don't agree with their opinions.
Guess what? Blacks getting out of poverty is seen as a GOOD THING by most people. Sorry they don't "know their place" anymore and block vote the way you want them to. Perhaps you can threaten to cut off their penis if they don't vote the way you like, similar to how your hero Kimmel thinks conservatives should be treated. Or perhaps you might want to try lynching them like they tried to do to Cruz the other day.

Your racism, hatred, and calling for violence against people who don't vote the way you want is unacceptable. It must be a difficult day for you to begin to realize this. Go back to your KKK meetings and your opinions won't be challenged.

Your link links to your submission which links to Breitbart. The very first line that you wrote was

Here's a story you'll never see on the front page of Slashdot

You already knew that it would not be accepted because Breitbart is not news. Breitbart is propoganda - the word that we used before alternative facts.

Google built a prototype of a censored search engine for China that links users' searches to their personal phone numbers, thus making it easier for the Chinese government to monitor people's queries

Evidently, some Fascist regimes are easier to #RESIST than others...

They didn't address illegal immigration in that video

Well, they did. They just never come out and say, "We're pro illegal immigration!" Instead, they sneer and simper about walls and "xenophobia".

nor balkanization

That's the point. They ignore the downsides of mass migration, foreign cultures, and lax enforcement of illegal immigration.

You are full of stuff. Fox and Rush take a few loonies and paint them as representatives.

Oh really? Then why did so many come out in support of James Gunn? Is it "just jokes"? Why does this excuse never fly if the joke has a hint of racism by somebody on the right? Also, James Gunn was not a comedian. And his "jokes" amounted to, "Hey guys, I like to fuck kids!" over and over again. Strange that Disney would give him a premium job after that. It's almost like pedo signaling is considered a virtue in Hollywood.

Why do we get articles by Vice singing the virtues of a convicted pedophile as a fighter of neo-Nazis in prison?

Why is creepy Joe Biden still in good standing within the Democrat party?

And we haven't forgotten the series of articles put out by Salon.

A video recorded by Google shortly after the 2016 presidential election reveals an atmosphere of panic and dismay amongst the tech giant’s leadership, coupled with a determination to thwart both the Trump agenda and the broader populist movement emerging around the globe.

https://www.breitbart.com/tech...

Wages have been slow to adjust, but a recent report shows wage growth(*) at 2.9% last month (monthly increase, annualized for a year), which is higher than inflation. Unemployment is at about 2.9% and steady.

(*)Yes, Breitbart.com, which always lies and never tells the truth and are a bunch of poo-poo heads that should be banned. Now dispute the actual numbers and the government report like an adult, or GTFO.

You know, like a stopped clock, Breitbart just might be right now and then. And in this case, it appears they are.

But I mean, c'mon. Breitbart? Their reputation is well-known. If you want to be taken seriously, provide some links to other sources, assuming you read any.

Don't forget that the economy, from the point of view of the *people*, only started to get better about October of last year. Looking at the DJIA (or other leading indicators) shows we were out of the woods and back to health in 2013.

Repeat after me:

The stock market is not the economy. The economy is not the stock market.
The stock market is not the economy. The economy is not the stock market.
The stock market is not the economy. The economy is not the stock market.
[...]

I don't know about the rest of /. but my wages have not kept pace with inflation. Cheap foreign goods has been the only thing that's kept my head above water. Now, you can argue that my wages will start climbing as a result of this, but a) that's not going to happen right away and in the meantime it means big inflation I can ill afford and b) it's not likely to happen since even if the factories come back they're likely to be modern factories heavy on automation, meaning few jobs.

Tariffs are good at protecting an existing business, but you have to have a business to protect for a tariff to work. The US has manufacturing and we were already doing a good job of protecting it. We've doubled out manufacturing output in the last 40 years (while cutting the workforce by 1/3 due to automation, I might add). Broad tariffs at this point are just closing the barn door after the cows got out.

Wages have been slow to adjust, but a recent report shows wage growth(*) at 2.9% last month (monthly increase, annualized for a year), which is higher than inflation. Unemployment is at about 2.9% and steady.

Don't forget that the economy, from the point of view of the *people*, only started to get better about October of last year. Looking at the DJIA (or other leading indicators) shows we were out of the woods and back to health in 2013.

We've had real economic recovery for the people only for about 11-ish months. Wages are starting to come up again, and it'll take some time to scrub off the barnacles that have been slowing us down.

(*)Yes, Breitbart.com, which always lies and never tells the truth and are a bunch of poo-poo heads that should be banned. Now dispute the actual numbers and the government report like an adult, or GTFO.

Sometimes racism is just that... racism. Removing hate speech doesn't have to be about Conservatives vs Liberals.

But it's conservatives that are tarred with the "racist" label, for example, arguing against phony narratives like Black Lies Matter. But when it comes to liberals, they get away with saying the most hateful and racist things against white people.

The fact that a small percentage of Republicans (and it is a small percentage-not all Republicans are racist douche-bags; the party existed before Trump and used to be fairly intolerant of racism like the rest of us) feel it is necessary for racism to be allowed to express their political views is quite telling about what really drives those individuals.

Do you believe your own bullshit? Here's the real story: Twitter cast a wide net based on associations, block lists, and the double standards of their Orwellian "Trust and Safety" (Target and Silence) team. Here it is from the horses mouth, CEO Jack Dorsey:

" 'In the spirit of accountability and transparency: recently we failed our intended impartiality. Our algorithms were unfairly filtering 600,000 accounts [bold mine], including some members of Congress, from our search auto-complete and latest results,' claimed Dorsey. 'We fixed it. But how did it happen? Our technology was using a decision making criteria that considers the behavior of people following these accounts. We decided that wasn't fair, and corrected. We'll always improve our technology and algorithms to drive healthier usage, and measure the impartiality of outcomes.' "

I fully support freedom of speech, but media companies are not required to post and keep every single thing you write on their platforms- nor should the be.

You're a liar. If you fully supported free speech, you wouldn't be so transparently biased in your support. If you truly supported free speech, you would acknowledge that there is no "hate speech" under the 1st Amendment.

If you truly supported free speech, you'd realize that the online public square is ruled over by an openly biased oligarchy, and that we don't really have free speech in this country when a handful of big tech companies running out of California decide in a partisan fashion that they're going to shut down the free speech of others right before the crucial midterm elections.

Alex Jones is a distraction from the far more pervasive censorship by Twitter. The real story is that Twitter was caught mass shadowbanning those on the right, to the point that Republican senators got caught up in it.

And now right before CEO Dorsey is supposed to testify before congress, magically the mass shadowbanning disappears.

And before you knee-jerk reflexively dismiss Breitbart, try attacking the argument, not the site.

Antifa has a long history of using violence to achieve their goals.

Facebook censors.

Google does as well. They just aren't stupid enough to admit it.

How many liberal voices can you find on Breitbart?

Facebook censors.
 
Google does as well. They just aren't stupid enough to admit it.

Lovable strawman there. Yes, ladies and gentlemen, Google, Facebook, and even Amazon actively demote conservative voices.

Just a FEW links. These are just the average pages. Leaks help to break through the "black box" of what is going on behind the scenes in a search engine. Mainly through leaks, one will find what the internal motives are within a company.

Podcasts from the guy with the number 4 news app removed
https://www.usnews.com/news/top-news/articles/2018-08-06/apple-removes-most-of-us-conspiracy-theorists-podcasts-from-itunes

Hard to keep an explanation up when you have been de-platformed, and they won't tell you why.
https://www.infowars.com/alexa-caught-fixing-infowars-ratings/

Twitter demoting results
https://gizmodo.com/twitter-may-be-demoting-controversial-accounts-in-searc-1827788070

Vimeo deleting accounts
https://www.usnews.com/news/top-news/articles/2018-08-06/apple-removes-most-of-us-conspiracy-theorists-podcasts-from-itunes

One of many articles on SE demotions
https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2017/08/08/former-google-employee-there-are-efforts-to-demote-anything-non-pc-from-search-results/

Mueller is not on a "witch hunt" for Trump.

Yes he is. He stacked his team with Democrats. He's gone further and further afield from what he was initially supposed to investigate. He's gone hard after Trump associates, while soft on Clinton associates like Tony Podesta. He referred Trump's personal lawyer for a criminal investigation, which resulted in his office being raided. He's on a witch hunt.

There's lots of people who wanted Obama out of office for various reasons and he didn't always have a same-party Congress like Trump has.....and yet it was never a debacle to this level.

Indeed, because there was no independent counsel. You have to go back to the Bill Clinton era for a similar level of ridiculousness. Monica Lewinsky = Stormy Daniels.

The simple fact of the matter is Trump is causing this.

Yes, Trump Derangement Syndrome. The establishment hates Trump. A lot of people collectively flipped their shit when Trump got elected.

He's shady, hung around shady people

Just like all other politicians? Do you realize who he ran against? Even Saint Obama has skeletons in his closet (sidenote: that's akin to Trump taking a smiling photo with David Duke).

You can't blame the media

Sure I can. Why the incessant focus on Trump, when the facts show it was the DNC and Clinton campaign engaged in a Watergate scandal combined with McCarthyism? You just can't make this stuff up. We live in bizarro world.

By the way, how is Alex Jones doing now? Seems like the attempts to "de-platform" him is only making him more popular.

Uh, no, they are now denying payment services to third-party sites like bitchute for carrying his content.

He was a nobody until these new media platforms tried to shut him down, and now everyone knows his name.

Are you kidding? Everybody knew who Alex Jones was. He was a laughingstock, a punchline. They targeted him because people consider him an acceptable target. Now that they have established that they can destroy one independent journalist, they will go after another.

Traits of 'white dominant culture' :

https://media.breitbart.com/me...

Why tech giants aren't the same as Christian Bakeries

CNN tanked in the cable ratings between August 6 and August 12, losing out to Fox News, MSNBC, and even the History Channel show Ancient Aliens, according to the latest data from Nielsen Media Research.

https://www.breitbart.com/big-...

Curious, none of them would dare be seen taking a position like "I don't want to work with a company that relies on H1B visas."

If you want to talk ethics and activism, I have news for you. All that bullshit about diversity your corporate HR departments spew about hiring and visas is just a smokescreen around the fact that our immigration system is subtly more pernicious than indentured servitude.

Indentured servants had full recourse to the King's Justice in the colonies. H1bs don't have the equivalent of that in the United States.

This is why your corporation and its leadership support all of that immigration. It's to pit you and the immigrants against each other in a race to the bottom that lets them suck up that tasty arbitrage to achieve dizzying new levels of profit without having to pay you any more.

But sure, piss and moan about drones while supporting a company that makes great use of a system that is closer to the Peculiar Institution than a free market labor economy.

Remember, Bernie Sanders told Vice in an interview that massive immigration is a Koch brothers plan.

https://www.breitbart.com/big-...

Sure there is. You can add up all the confirmed cases of in-person voting fraud, and use it as an estimate of how likely it is that there are millions of people committing in-person voter fraud in California.

Given that California is a "sanctuary" state, what makes you think officials there would do what it takes to look for election fraud? There's widespread fraud when it comes to illegal identification, and the state has an open-arms policies to illegal immigrants, but we're supposed to believe the elections are squeaky clean.

The way Raenex has framed these statements, closes the door to any reasonable discord.

I stated my case plainly and with supporting references, in response to a one-sided diatribe against the right.

Your defense of the intolerant muslim ban is to say that, yes, you are intolerant?

Your defense of mass importation of an intolerant and violent culture is... to say to not do so would be intolerant?? All this concern for LGBT and women's rights flies out the window when it comes to this issue. Strange, isn't it?

You're just making shit up.

All my statements were supported by references. Who's the one attempting reasonable discord? Certainly not you.

I don't see anything on the "left" that is attempting selective immigration by religion or origin

Oh, really?

You provide no argument to oppose the claim or defend LGBT people, but just point out that you are absolutely and certainly ostracizing at least the trans portion of those. Isn't this simply confirming your intolerance?

I made a case that the defense of LGBT issues has gone well past the point of reasonableness. You think it's "intolerance" that biological women don't want to have biological men who "identify" as women hanging around them with their genitals hanging out. Does this seem reasonable to you?

Where was BLM mentioned?

That's what has pushed the whole "police brutality" narrative for the past several years.

Are you rounding them all up under the generic "the left" again?

"The left" has indeed adopted and heavily pushed the phony Black Lies Matter narrative, which itself was founded by leftists who idolized the black nationalist, communist, and fugitive cop-killer Assata Shakur.

The article you use as evidence states that there was bias found in police use of force.

A whopping 18%. Now let's talk about how blacks commit many times more violent crime than whites, which is their real problem. Less crime, less interaction with the police, less black on black crime.

If they're illegals, they can't vote.

You completely ignored the part about the US Census. Why should illegals help determine the outcome of the Congress and the Electoral College?

Furthermore, illegals technically "can't work" either, yet they do so via fraudulent means.

How does that relate to voter disenfranchisement, which you have not commented on?

I commented that minorities, who are supposedly being disenfranchised, actually have majority support for voter id laws. Disenfranchisement happens when people who are not eligible to vote do so, by usurping rights exclusively limited to citizens.

Yes, abortion is a divisive issue, but you're using it to wedge us apart here.

I'm not the one who brought it up. I was responding to somebody using it to tar the right as "intolerant" of "womens rights", while ignoring the human life being terminated. Of course it's a complicated issue, and you can make a reasoned case for either side.

I don't know how we'll ever heal this country

I don't know either. We certainly won't by harassing

Breitbart had a good summary of the situation(*).

In short, it's manufactured outrage intended to gin up exactly this sort of reaction in people.

1) Trump is only enforcing the law
2) Many children arrive unaccompanied
3) Children can only be separated for 20 days
4) Their conditions are actually pretty good, better than most poor American children get, and better than where they came from.
5) We separate citizen children from their parents, when we put parents in jail
6) Obama did it

And finally:

7) Asylum seekers not breaking the law are not separated from their children.

(*) To say Breitbart is not a valid source, you would have to point out that these facts are in error. Are any of these facts in error? No? Then Breitbart is a perfectly acceptable source for these facts.

I guess 4th grade was too hard for your tiny, tiny brain. Every time you post your mindless dribble it lowers the I.Q. of the entire Internet.

You got modded down, but your comment is spot on.

The left has been just relentlessly awful the past couple of weeks, and the bad part is that it'll only get worse as the midterms get closer.

Trump's son posts a picture enjoying father's day with his kid, and gets a torrent of insults. Trump's daughter shares a picture cuddling her infant son and triggers a tidal wave of hatred.

To believe some celebrities, the US is torturing children at the border right now! It's exactly the same as nazi concentration camps, young children are ripped (note: actual word used) from their mothers and held in cages by the hundreds!

If we could find a way to harness hatred we could run the entire country off of leftist ideals.

The fundamental trade issue between the US and China on is _not_ tariffs.

It's part of it, and only in your Land of Denial do you think getting tariffs on cars reduced from 25% to 15% isn't a positive result.

Instead it's China's routine use of state interference

Then you should be glad to know that Trump is concerned with the overall balance of trade, and not just tariffs, and has complained about those other things too.

But who are we kidding? You have Trump Derangement Syndrome, and aren't interested in giving Trump credit for anything.

How do you manage to keep safe from these imaginary brown people??

He's probably not a woman, and doesn't attend concerts, swimming pools, jogging, or New Year's Eve celebrations.

You poor snowflake!

How brave of you to brush under the rug the real "rape culture" being imported into Europe and other Western countries.

Your numbers are similar to numbers from other analysts. Looks like it'll be a quarter billion dollar loss on this movie.

http://www.breitbart.com/ ?

During the Obama administration, global warming alarmists have infiltrated the NOAA and began altering the records to lend a false legitimacy to global warming. I was hardly the only who noticed that the NOAA had been exaggerating climate trends especially after recent changes of seasons.

So when you see any alarmist story from NOAA, you should be skeptical because NOAA has lied to us before.

This commentary published by The Wall Street Journal, written by Fred Singer, claims that warming (and therefore greenhouse gas emissions) has no effect on global sea level rise. Although Singer concedes the physical fact that water expands as its temperature increases, he claims that this process must be offset by growth of Antarctic ice weasels.

Scientists who reviewed this opinion piece explained that it is contradicted by a wealth of data and research. Singer bases his conclusion entirely on a cherry-picked comparison of sea level rise 1915-1945 and a single study published in 1990, claiming a lack of accelerating sea level rise despite continued warming. But in fact, modern research utilizing all available data clearly indicates that sea level rise has accelerated, and is unambiguously the result of human-caused global warming.

I think what we are seeing is the start of a new strategy for the religion climate change.

It *used* to be dire predictions getting ever closer and more dire, but that didn't seem to work, so now they're transitioning to monetary measures.

Expect the "costs" of global warming to get ever more expensive, dire, and immediate... until that's seen as not working and they transition to something else.

It's getting so bad that climate scientists are giving science a bad name. (Here's an easier-to-read digest of that essay.)

From the linked articles:

There are many examples where the transition from paid employment in climate research to retirement has been accompanied by a significant change of heart away from acknowledging the seriousness of global warming. It seems that scientists too are conscious of the need to eat, and like everyone else must consider the consequences of public dissent from the views of the powers-that-be. One example was Dr Brian Tucker. He was the Director of the Australian Numerical Meteorology Research Centre, and subsequently became Chief of the CSIRO Division of Atmospheric Research. He was heavily involved in the development of the IPCC. During his time with CSIRO he was the ‘go to’ man for journalists and radio programmers seeking stories on matters to do with climate change. On retirement he became a writer and speaker for the Institute of Public Affairs, and greatly surprised his former colleagues with his very public change to an openly sceptical view on the subject.

Don't discount the source.... read the article... 5 min read.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-g...