No, but if you offset your carbon usage at the same time, you are not a net creator of atmospheric CO2. If everyone did that, we'd be in a much better position. Or, you can just ignore all of that and just focus on his house and jet. I could make a comment about "typical right-wing ideology" ignoring Gore's carbon offsets for a quick "win", but I realise that not all right-wing people are as dense as you appear to be.
Whether the US is a republic or not has absolutely nothing to do with whether it is democratic. There are democratic republics, non-democratic republics, democratic monarchies and non-democratic monarchies. Maybe you are thinking of "representative democracy"?
There is no dilemma. The two are not mutually exclusive, and the fact you seem to think they are speaks more about your tenuous grasp of logic than it does about "Illiberals".
Stop seeing everything in such black and white terms - it's evidently hurting your ability to think clearly.
They are teaching how to program (using VB as the language in which to teach), not how to program VB. A difficult distinction to make, I'm sure. It's not comparable to teaching how to use MS Office, for example.
Try something else - how about a film which glorified the 9/11 attacks, and painted the victims as justified targets? One can't simply compare the topics without also comparing the importance and reverence people/governments place on the subject matter.
I'm not saying I agree with NK's alleged actions, but your comparison is not particularly accurate...
And many of its users. I don't know how useful Facebook Messenger would be if you have to open a browser every time to check it. Apps cut down on the data usage massively, as pages and assets don't need to be sent to the phone - just the compressed data.
Which is not what they are saying... Current research shows there is nothing inherent in females which make them unsuitable for working in tech, which means the tech sector is missing ~50% of the possible workers for apparently no good reason. If there is a reason why women are inherently unsuitable for this sector, it makes sense to actually establish what it is, so looking in to this discrepancy makes a lot of sense.
If one is being entirely pragmatic, investigating this makes a shit-tonne of sense. If one has some sort of insecurity of their gender, or simply doesn't understand how essential a workforce is in an industry, it probably sounds like nonsense.
The people saying "we need to hire all the women we can, simply for the numbers" are not helping, and neither are people who make the last point you did, which paints a grossly-perverted picture of the issue at hand.
But every single person who files a false insurance claim or pretends to be a better driver than they are is costing everyone else money. Every single one of them. You not being able to tell with a cursory glance doesn't change that...
I love how you delved deep, deep into your bowels in order to conjure up some argument as to how you are correct. 25%? Brilliant work. "At any point in history" - genius stuff.
I appreciate the point you're trying to make, but remember that Europe includes the UK, which has had a long, long history of immigration, and your description doesn't really apply.
So you make a bunch of guesses, and come to the conclusion that creating a bunch of stateless Muslims who are trained and experienced in weaponry is the best idea? You're not too good at this whole thinkin' thing are you? The fact you keep using unhelpful terms like "Muzzies" shows you really don't give a rat's ass about the people you are talking about, and care only about the labels you have clumsily applied to them, like colourful sprites in some RPG you play in your spare time.
A country can't deport someone who is a citizen of their country and no other, something which will be quite common in the group you are talking about. You can hand-wave that away, but that simply belies your fear and naivety. You are so desperate to do something you can't even considering thinking about this problem with the requisite diligence, either through lacking ability, or simply not realising that when discussing the lives of millions (the majority of whom are entirely innocent) it behooves you to use rational thought, lest you fall into some Nietzsche-esque abyss, and become as bad as the worst of the people you are condemning.
Perhaps look at the shameful French practice of marginalising poor Muslim families, and the repercussions of said attitude, just for a start - you glossed over that point with suspicious ease...
Those brothers were the asterisk, and that you think otherwise speaks more of your brazen desire to condemn than it does of French Muslims, or any Muslim for that matter.
Terrorism isn't defined as "Something Ol Olsoc doesn't like" - it's the use, or threat, of force against a people in order to coerce their politics. Stoning women is clearly not terrorism, just a barbaric practice long since gone from Christianity.
Just because some terrorists are Muslim doesn't mean they all are, or even most of them are, as you stated above. You are ignoring all the terrorism from other religions, either on purpose or by accident, and then getting confused when people point that out to you. That doesn't make you look very rational, but almost as if you are looking for any excuse to blame Muslims and Islam...
It started out as a secular conflict, with interesting things like the (to some) father of Irish Republicanism being a protestant, but it quickly degraded into sectarian violence, especially after the British seemed to go out of their way to bolster the protestant population at the expense of the Catholics. The troubles were more to do with social grievances (anti-Catholic gerrymandering, lack of access to jobs & housing, detention without trial used overwhelmingly on Catholics, etc.) than Irish republicanism - the republicanism was a means to an end to stop the British from meddling with the Catholic population, and eventually became the banner under which the anti-British fought. The unionists then bolstered their position in order to maintain their standard of living and the discriminatory institutions which enabled and protected it, and every ounce of success on one side lead to an increase of activity on the other. The split was massively down religious lines, and the scars which still exist attest to that.
Many are - they just see "themselves" as being more than them, but encompassing their community, or their particular brand of religion or culture. I'm not supporting their actions, merely trying to point something out.
Google Play Services can be removed, or at least entirely disabled... You don't even have to install GApps, and use F-Droid or Amazon or even nothing as your APK source...
Overweight children are quite possibly being neglected in some way - you didn't mention the outcome of the "investigation", so I'm not sure what anyone can take from your post...
Why are you being so defensive? It's not a competition. Plus there are many areas in which case Europe is way ahead of the US. Without you being more specific you're not really making a point...
The apps come from the store, and the update mechanisms check certificates like crazy. Apps don't update themselves - the store pushes updates. The browsers also (from my experience, anyway) also alert to the presence of untrusted certificates, so MITM with HTTPS is going to be obvious. If one is security conscious, they can very easily get a VPN service and connect their phone to it (sending all traffic over it), ensuring that even open wifi is as practically secure as their own.
1. The oceans are warming 2. It has been warming in the last 20 years 3. The sea ice is wide, but thin, so I don't know what you mean 4. Global warming is happening, and the changes it makes ot the climate are called "climate change"
You being confused doesn't make you right and those you disagree with wrong, it just makes you confused. I wouldn't be so proud of that!
Slashdot Mirror
No, but if you offset your carbon usage at the same time, you are not a net creator of atmospheric CO2. If everyone did that, we'd be in a much better position. Or, you can just ignore all of that and just focus on his house and jet. I could make a comment about "typical right-wing ideology" ignoring Gore's carbon offsets for a quick "win", but I realise that not all right-wing people are as dense as you appear to be.
Whether the US is a republic or not has absolutely nothing to do with whether it is democratic. There are democratic republics, non-democratic republics, democratic monarchies and non-democratic monarchies. Maybe you are thinking of "representative democracy"?
You have a strange definition of "never"...
There is no dilemma. The two are not mutually exclusive, and the fact you seem to think they are speaks more about your tenuous grasp of logic than it does about "Illiberals".
Stop seeing everything in such black and white terms - it's evidently hurting your ability to think clearly.
Fascists like Rosa Parks, you mean? Pointing out injustice is not a bad thing, unless you are the one being unjust.
Seeing as the second amendment was created in 1791, I don't know what you are talking about. I suspect you don't, either ;)
They are teaching how to program (using VB as the language in which to teach), not how to program VB. A difficult distinction to make, I'm sure. It's not comparable to teaching how to use MS Office, for example.
Try something else - how about a film which glorified the 9/11 attacks, and painted the victims as justified targets? One can't simply compare the topics without also comparing the importance and reverence people/governments place on the subject matter.
I'm not saying I agree with NK's alleged actions, but your comparison is not particularly accurate...
And many of its users. I don't know how useful Facebook Messenger would be if you have to open a browser every time to check it. Apps cut down on the data usage massively, as pages and assets don't need to be sent to the phone - just the compressed data.
Which is not what they are saying... Current research shows there is nothing inherent in females which make them unsuitable for working in tech, which means the tech sector is missing ~50% of the possible workers for apparently no good reason. If there is a reason why women are inherently unsuitable for this sector, it makes sense to actually establish what it is, so looking in to this discrepancy makes a lot of sense.
If one is being entirely pragmatic, investigating this makes a shit-tonne of sense. If one has some sort of insecurity of their gender, or simply doesn't understand how essential a workforce is in an industry, it probably sounds like nonsense.
The people saying "we need to hire all the women we can, simply for the numbers" are not helping, and neither are people who make the last point you did, which paints a grossly-perverted picture of the issue at hand.
But every single person who files a false insurance claim or pretends to be a better driver than they are is costing everyone else money. Every single one of them. You not being able to tell with a cursory glance doesn't change that...
I love how you delved deep, deep into your bowels in order to conjure up some argument as to how you are correct. 25%? Brilliant work. "At any point in history" - genius stuff.
I appreciate the point you're trying to make, but remember that Europe includes the UK, which has had a long, long history of immigration, and your description doesn't really apply.
So you make a bunch of guesses, and come to the conclusion that creating a bunch of stateless Muslims who are trained and experienced in weaponry is the best idea? You're not too good at this whole thinkin' thing are you? The fact you keep using unhelpful terms like "Muzzies" shows you really don't give a rat's ass about the people you are talking about, and care only about the labels you have clumsily applied to them, like colourful sprites in some RPG you play in your spare time.
A country can't deport someone who is a citizen of their country and no other, something which will be quite common in the group you are talking about. You can hand-wave that away, but that simply belies your fear and naivety. You are so desperate to do something you can't even considering thinking about this problem with the requisite diligence, either through lacking ability, or simply not realising that when discussing the lives of millions (the majority of whom are entirely innocent) it behooves you to use rational thought, lest you fall into some Nietzsche-esque abyss, and become as bad as the worst of the people you are condemning.
Perhaps look at the shameful French practice of marginalising poor Muslim families, and the repercussions of said attitude, just for a start - you glossed over that point with suspicious ease...
Those brothers were the asterisk, and that you think otherwise speaks more of your brazen desire to condemn than it does of French Muslims, or any Muslim for that matter.
Terrorism isn't defined as "Something Ol Olsoc doesn't like" - it's the use, or threat, of force against a people in order to coerce their politics. Stoning women is clearly not terrorism, just a barbaric practice long since gone from Christianity.
Just because some terrorists are Muslim doesn't mean they all are, or even most of them are, as you stated above. You are ignoring all the terrorism from other religions, either on purpose or by accident, and then getting confused when people point that out to you. That doesn't make you look very rational, but almost as if you are looking for any excuse to blame Muslims and Islam...
It started out as a secular conflict, with interesting things like the (to some) father of Irish Republicanism being a protestant, but it quickly degraded into sectarian violence, especially after the British seemed to go out of their way to bolster the protestant population at the expense of the Catholics. The troubles were more to do with social grievances (anti-Catholic gerrymandering, lack of access to jobs & housing, detention without trial used overwhelmingly on Catholics, etc.) than Irish republicanism - the republicanism was a means to an end to stop the British from meddling with the Catholic population, and eventually became the banner under which the anti-British fought. The unionists then bolstered their position in order to maintain their standard of living and the discriminatory institutions which enabled and protected it, and every ounce of success on one side lead to an increase of activity on the other. The split was massively down religious lines, and the scars which still exist attest to that.
Many are - they just see "themselves" as being more than them, but encompassing their community, or their particular brand of religion or culture. I'm not supporting their actions, merely trying to point something out.
Google Play Services can be removed, or at least entirely disabled... You don't even have to install GApps, and use F-Droid or Amazon or even nothing as your APK source...
Overweight children are quite possibly being neglected in some way - you didn't mention the outcome of the "investigation", so I'm not sure what anyone can take from your post...
Compared to great swathes of the developed world, the US is unsafe. Murder, traffic deaths, getting arrested, etc. the list is not exactly short.
Why are you being so defensive? It's not a competition. Plus there are many areas in which case Europe is way ahead of the US. Without you being more specific you're not really making a point...
The apps come from the store, and the update mechanisms check certificates like crazy. Apps don't update themselves - the store pushes updates. The browsers also (from my experience, anyway) also alert to the presence of untrusted certificates, so MITM with HTTPS is going to be obvious. If one is security conscious, they can very easily get a VPN service and connect their phone to it (sending all traffic over it), ensuring that even open wifi is as practically secure as their own.
He likes Canada, friend.
1. The oceans are warming
2. It has been warming in the last 20 years
3. The sea ice is wide, but thin, so I don't know what you mean
4. Global warming is happening, and the changes it makes ot the climate are called "climate change"
You being confused doesn't make you right and those you disagree with wrong, it just makes you confused. I wouldn't be so proud of that!
It's not weird if you accept the scientific method. Calling scientific research a "cult" isn't making you look particularly sane...