If the government can disappear one person without due process, then they can disappear any person without due process.
EpeeGnome
joined 2 years ago
Yeah, I assume the now-former employee acted with full expectation of losing her job over this. She succeeded at bringing attention to something many people (myself included) hadn't heard about before, so she at least accomplished that much.
You're right, that does sound particularly like something an autistic person would say. It's also something I'd be perfectly happy to hear and engage with.
"New toilet paper, same shit" is how an old boss of mine used to say it. Good for if you want to go clever yet crude.
Well, I'm doing my part against them by refusing to click on any bait headlines, but I fear it's a lost cause anyway.
I went to the one in my small city in SC. Had a few hundred people along a decently busy road. I was pleasantly surprised as hundreds of passing cars showed support over the 2 hours we were there, and only a dozen or so expressed opposition. I was not surprised that a majority of passers-by didn't engage at all though. The real majority in this country is not left or right, it's apathy.
A big part of the problem is that plenty of Republicans would answer some or all of your pointed questions with an unironic "yes."
No, they're referring to how when a job finishes up, they typically move to a new job site. Change of scenery instead of the same four walls every day for years.
"will be referred to the appropriate criminal entity for criminal prosecution"
I had to check that your quote was correct, because that doesn't seem like the words they probably meant to use. Though, now that I think of it, the current administration referring someone to a "criminal entity" is all too plausible.
Easy. He'll just keep having more kids.
It may not rise to the level of proof, but it is a memorable and easily understood demonstration of something already proven by car safety researchers, as mentioned in the article.
Why shouldn't they precut the wall into cartoony shapes? It adds entertainment and doesn't compromise the demonstration.
I agree, it's insane that customs ever accepted a fictional port on uninhabited islands as a point of origin in the first place. That's the loophole they should close. It does appear that that's a thing that did actually happen though, so it's not a complete fabrication. I'd say customs should have been authorized to confiscate any such good until a non-fictional provinence was proven.