Hey, @washingtonpost? This is disgusting. Give the man's family space to mourn privately. He didn't ask to be in the news; he didn't ask to be murdered; and they just lost their father, husband, son. How would *you* feel? washingtonpost.com/local/william-…
He's not the news. He's the *victim of a crime.* And you're stalking his family? Reporting every detail you can find about his family and their--until yesterday--perfectly normal, happy life? Why? To tantalize readers? For clicks?
It's in the public interest to know more about the murderer. It is not in the public interest to know so much about the victim that the press, minutes after the family, ---including his kids--have received by far the worst and most traumatic news they've received in their lives,
needs to circle like vultures outside their home, listing all the normal attributes of a loving family's home and waiting to shove a microphone in one of their faces and ask, "So, how does it feel that your father was senselessly murdered today?"
Maybe that gets lots of clicks, but at some point, you've got to ask yourself, "Is this decent?" And the answer is: "No."
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Among the things you should listen to it to learn: What's the best canal palindrome? (Hint: It's not what you think.) What's the fastest way to get goods to Europe if the Suez Canal is blocked? (Hint: It's not what you think.)
What should you do if you're attacked by Somali pirates? (Truth: We don't know, actually.) In what way have EU relations with China in the past week resembled progressive FM rock in the late 1960s? What's the future of the China-EU trade deal? (Hint: No f-- way it gets ratified.)
Are we moving into a world beyond geography, or one in which geography returns with a vengeance? For that, no hints: you have to listen.
Yes, my God, yes. I wander through the world now in a cloud of puzzlement: What did I get up to do? Why is my wallet in the fridge? What on earth did I order on Amazon this time? These nice people calling me to tell me I'm about to host a conference--who *are* they?
Why must I preface every communication with, "Siri, find my phone?" How many loads of laundry have I run twice because I forgot to take it out before it started to rot? How many times have I stood up firmly to find item X only to find myself somehow losing the next four hours--
either searching for item X, in a blind fury, or forgetting to search for item X because suddenly I remember with horror there's something even more important I've forgotten to do? Something for which item *Y* is required--
I, of course, said, "Why can't we just blow it up?"
But it turned out really interesting, when @IlvesToomas got us to look at a map and showed us that for pretty much every country but India--for which this is a disaster--it's a non-problem.
Yes, it's a traffic jam and a hassle for vessels that are stuck; but look at the map. Bienvenue, climate change! It's April. We don't really need the Suez Canal until next winter. So we can all stop worrying about it.
It conflates "created in a lab" with "escaped from a lab." Those are very different things.
This comment is idiotic:
The problem is with Anderson's reading comprehension skills, not Redfield's grasp of evolutionary virology. Lipkin's defensiveness, and Anderson's, are dismaying.
The lab-leak hypothesis is supported by roughly the same evidence as the no-lab-leak hypothesis, which is to say, almost none, and certainly not enough to be this confident. And this quote? Just kill me now.
"Je peux vous affirmer que je n'ai aucun mea culpa à faire, aucun remords, aucun constat d'échec," cette manière de se vanter, mon Dieu, ça le fait paraître aussi éhonté que Trump.
C'est juste * bizarre * de dire ça. On est censé dire: "En tant que président de la République j'assume pleinement la responsabilité de cet échec," ou si on ne peut pas se résoudre à dire le mot "échec", au moins "j'assume pleinement la responsabilité."
Si même ces mots restent coincés dans la gorge, la toujours-serviable voix passive reste toujours à la disposition des politiciens. "Des erreurs ont été commises."
If you're telling me you want to put me in a reeducation camp and you tell me you want me to disarm, I'm not apt to do so. To get rid of the weapons, we have to rebuild social trust. People are armed because they don't trust us not to put them in reeducation camps.
No, I don't know how to rebuild social trust, either. But fundamentally, the reason people have guns is because they don't trust the people around them. Rational or irrational, that's why.
I actually suspect even the most ardent 2A enthusiasts are sick to death of this and realize there's a connection between "number of guns" and "number of mass shootings." Deep down, they probably share the desire for "a lot fewer guns."