Or, perhaps, threats.
Take careful note of this tweet from Matthew Brennan. Not only does this system know who Brennan is without any input from him (this time). It knows where he is and where he’s going.
Imagine that identification and tracking ability in the hands of Government. The government in the tweet is the PRC’s, but that’s not the only government spreading surveillance systems around the nation like butter on warm toast.
H/t to ralf.
No more bad faith pseudo-negotiations by Brussels. No more dithering and bad-skilled pseudo-negotiations by Theresa May.
The UK asked the European Union to delay its departure from the bloc until June 30, an extension that if approved would give Prime Minister Theresa May just weeks to break an impasse in Parliament over her withdrawal deal.
It’s not just an internal impasse between the PM and Parliament. It’s also and more importantly an impasse between Great Britain and Brussels.
Cut the cord. The other 27 nations of the EU, or at least that one of them with sense and integrity, should reject the request for more time. It’s time that only will be wasted by both sides, each for its own reasons.
Update: The EU, lacking even that single nation of the 27, has voted to grant Great Britain’s request for more time before leaving. In fact, the EU offered a couple of options for more time.
The withdrawal agreement the Parliament is expected to vote on is the same one it’s rejected twice before. The EU isn’t serious about that thing being accepted on the third try.
This is a sham offer, designed only to drag things out; Brussels is continuing to deal in bad faith. The continent has, perhaps, one or both of two motives for this disingenuousity. It’s still looking to make an example of Great Britain as a warning to other member nations that might be thinking of leaving. It’s looking to dismember Great Britain by taking Northern Ireland out of the nation with its demand of an open, unguarded border between Great Britain and the Republic of Ireland.
If the Brits have any sense at all left (an increasing question), they’ll reject the deal and go out from the EU on schedule, on 29 March, and with no deal at all. No amount of time is going to get them a better deal, incessant delay will only give the Remainers on both side of the Channel time to find a way to keep Great Britain trapped in the EU cage.
That’s the Progressive-Democrats’ Orwellian claim about their HR1 bill, just passed on party lines. It’s for the children, too. If it saves just one life…. Here is some of what’s in the bill:
Mandates a nationalized system to publicly finance federal elections. It would allocate federal money to match certain small-dollar donations 6-to-1 and deposit those funds in campaign accounts.
We already can designate, on our tax returns, a donation to a Federal fund for Presidential campaigns; the monies to be divided equally between the political parties. That’s been a complete failure over the years, with the amounts designated falling, and private money going directly to the parties, candidates, PACs, etc, expanding. The Progressive-Democrats’ answer is to “correct” that by forcing us to donate to political campaigns in even larger amounts, whether we want to or not.
Requires several classes of politically active organizations, including tax-exempt 501(c)(4) groups, to disclose donors who have given $10,000 or more during an election cycle.
Because anonymity is as anathema to Progressive-Democrats as it is critical to free speech and to liberty generally.
Changes the membership of the Federal Election Commission to five members, with the president’s party in the majority, from its current six members, evenly split between Democratic and Republican appointees.
Because balancing the membership also is anathema to Progressive-Democrats: they desperately need a purely partisan facility for overseeing our elections.
Fortunately, Republicans still have a majority in the Senate.
Recall Alphabet’s decision to use its Google arm to help the government and defense establishment of our enemy, the People’s Republic of China, while simultaneously refusing to help our own develop the tools needed to defend our nation.
Now Alphabet has chosen to use its Google facility to actively aid the government of Saudi Arabia in keeping Saudi women down on the Arab farm. The Saudi government has put an app into Alphabet’s Google Play store that allows Saudi male citizens to track “their” Saudi women and control where they travel.
Alphabet says that’s jake and refuses to block the app.
Whatever happened to Don’t be evil? Whose side are these Precious Ones on, anyway?
Progressive-Democratic Party Presidential candidate wannabe and Senator Kamala Harris (D, CA) wants us to take our dark history seriously.
We must confront the dark history of slavery and government-sanctioned discrimination in this country that has had many consequences, including undermining the ability of black families to build wealth in America for generations. We need systemic, structural changes to address that.
Absolutely. The Progressive-Democratic Party must confront its dark history of slavery and government-sanctioned discrimination.
The Progressive-Democratic Party must confront its dark history of its Democrat, Chief Justice Roger Brooke Taney, who ruled that Dred Scott, a free (because escaped) black man in the north, must be returned to the southern ownership of his owner—and who further ruled that blacks could not be citizens of the United States because blacks were not fully men.
It must confront its demand for the States Right of holding slaves, slavery over which the nation had to fight a bloody civil war to end because of Party intransigence.
The Progressive-Democratic Party must confront its dark history of its creation, the Ku Klux Klan, which it used to terrorize newly freed blacks—and any who supported them—in the aftermath of the Party’s lost overt slavery policy.
The Progressive-Democratic Party must confront its dark history of its Jim Crow Laws, designed explicitly to keep blacks from voting.
The Progressive-Democratic Party must confront its dark history of segregation, resumed in full under President Woodrow Wilson (D), who actively resegregated the Federal government after it had been steadily integrated following the Civil War, a policy for which Wilson insisted blacks should be grateful for the “protection,” and which continued apace in schools under the fiction of “separate but equal,” which included all public spaces, and which extended even to sections of buses, drinking fountains, and rest rooms.
The Progressive-Democratic Party must confront its dark history of destroying black families by enacting “welfare” laws that paid single mothers but not intact families, making it fiscally useful, if not wholly immoral, for fathers to absent themselves.
The Progressive-Democratic Party must confront its dark history of deliberate, overt racial (and gender) discrimination in its “affirmative action” policies that give special treatment based, ultimately, on skin color and/or gender.
The Progressive-Democratic Party must confront its dark history of undermining the ability of black families (such as they’re allowed to exist) to build wealth by keeping them trapped in Party’s welfare cage with the designed-in welfare cliff that prevents welfare recipients—most of whom are minority recipients, with most of those black—from getting a new job or a pay raise that would put them above an income threshold because that would cut welfare payments by more than the pay raise.
The Progressive-Democratic Party must confront its dark present of identity politics that seeks to give special treatment to particular groups of Americans—which is nothing more than segregation modernized.
The Progressive-Democratic Party does, most definitely, need systemic, structural changes to address that.