Bergdahl Pleads Guilty to Desertion, Ophelia Strikes Ireland, Verdict in Chelsea Bombing Trial: P.M. Links

|

  • Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl
    Andrew Craft/ZUMA Press/Newscom

    Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl has pleaded guilty to desertion and faces a maximum penalty of life in prison. He disappeared from his post in 2009 and was held in captivity by the Taliban until 2014.

  • Former Hurricane Ophelia has struck Ireland, with wind gusts up in the 80s. Three have been killed.
  • Ahmad Rahimi has been found guilty of eight federal charges for the pressure cooker bomb that exploded in a Chelsea, New York, neighborhood in 2016, injuring 30.
  • A Florida politician who says she has been abducted by aliens is running for Congress.
  • A federal judge declined today to dismiss any of the 18 corruption-related charges against New Jersey Democratic Sen. Robert Menendez.
  • Some folks seem to think that Attorney General Jeff Sessions offering up a lawyer to assist in the prosecution of a man accused of murdering a transgender teen is some sort of proof of layers and complexity in a man with a long anti-LGBT background. The more likely, logical explanation is that he really, really likes putting people in prison for really long sentences.
  • The Clinton Foundation is keeping the $250,000 donation it has received from Harvey Weinstein. A spokesperson says they've spent the money on charitable causes.
  • A judge has ordered the imprisonment of two leaders of the Catalan independence movement while they're being investigated for sedition in Spain.

Follow us on Facebook and Twitter, and don't forget to sign up for Reason's daily updates for more content.

Advertisement

NEXT: Jerry Brown Vetoes Campus Sexual Assault Bill Because It Threatens Due Process

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. The Clinton Foundation is keeping the $250,000 donation it has received from Harvey Weinstein.

    I mean, what access is that buying at this point?

    1. 2020 is around the corner.

    2. Hello.

      So Obama – at the cost of servicemen lives – went and got one of our own…full stop’ for a deserter.

      Why again?

    3. So Harvey’s $250,000 likely went to a settlement for one of Bill’s accusers.

      1. That, at least, would be a good cause…

  2. A Florida politician who says she has been abducted by aliens is running for Congress.

    The state couldn’t ask for a better representative.

    1. I thought we were done with Sol Invictus.

      1. Sol Invictus will tell us when we’re done with Sol Invictus.

        1. Probably through some kind of goat blood expressive art piece.

    2. I thought we were supposed to call them Dreamers now.

  3. Former Hurricane Ophelia has struck Ireland, with wind gusts up in the 80s.

    The tropical cyclone formerly known as Ophelia.

    1. You know who else was rough on the Irish?

      1. People who had “No Irish Need Apply” signs?

          1. Aren’t you supposed to be banging your wife right about now?

            1. Squirrels. You mean my wife?

      2. Viking raiders?

      3. Oliver Cromwell?

      4. Not Hitler. Ireland was neutral.

      5. Ward Cleaver?

      6. The town of Rock Ridge?

      7. Nate Diaz?

      8. The Roman Empire?

      9. USC?

  4. If you’re going to lie to use, Scott, lie to our faces instead of sullying the new-text with your bullshit. We know you chose that glamor shot.

  5. A federal judge declined today to dismiss any of the 18 corruption-related charges against New Jersey Democratic Sen. Robert Menendez.

    Man, everyone wants this guy to pay for dissing the Iran deal.

  6. A Florida politician who says she has been abducted by aliens is running for Congress.

    That’s just called “a Florida politician.”

    1. It’s also just called “living in Florida.”

  7. Some folks seem to think that Attorney General Jeff Sessions offering up a lawyer to assist in the prosecution of a man accused of murdering a transgender teen is some sort of proof of layers and complexity in a man with a long anti-LGBT background. The more likely, logical explanation is that he really, really likes putting people in prison for really long sentences.

    I don’t read these links for Snark Shackleford.

    1. More like Scott Cynicalford. Am I right, people?

      1. That is Scott “Four more links that Christian B., plus Alt-Text” Shackford to you, Sir.

    2. I do.

    3. Snark is all the sane have left, Snackmen. Don’t rob us of it.

      1. All snark must be balanced by butthurt. Such is the law of the H&R.

    4. Or that he thinks the murder of anyone is a serious crime. What the hell is wrong with anyone who thinks that it takes “complexity” to want a murderer put away? That is not complexity. That is basic human decency. The fact that the poor kid suffered from a mental disorder doesn’t make his murder any less heinous or worthy of punishment.

    5. You read the lynx? Who even does that?

  8. Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl has pleaded guilty to desertion and faces a maximum penalty of life in prison.

    Didn’t we get fake news at some point that no such charge was going to be brought?

    1. As a trip down memory lane, here’s President Mofo doing his photo op in the Rose Garden with this creep’s nutty family.

      He never was a very good judge of character.

      1. Speaking of which, what’s the deal with this Canadian guy and his family that was just rescued? His back story is super shady.

        1. The guy takes his pregnant wife to do relief work in Afghanistan. Then he is taken captive by some tribe there and he and his wife have another kid. Who had kids while they are being held captive? WTF?

          1. My understanding is that sex is prevalent in detainment scenarios — sort of the last pleasure that can’t be stripped from you (unless they want to solitary your confinement).

            I base this entirely off of old WW2 concentration camp stories. They might have been wasting away from sickness and famine, but they banged to pass the time while still able — is my understanding. Obviously not everyone would be partaking but it wouldn’t be a chaste sit-in either.

            1. Judging from the pictures just after their capture, they looked really well fed.

              1. Judging from the pictures of their additional kids just after their capture, they looked really well fed fucked.

                FTFY

          2. I’m guessing tribal Afghanis don’t exactly have easy access to birth control

            1. I am guessing that getting pregnant would be the last thing on your mind if you were captured by the Afghans.

              1. “We’ll permit carnal knowledge if you promise to raise the children as Taliban-linked extremists.”

              2. You say that now, John, but if you were in their situation, you would be banging away too. Even if your lady friend started to get skinny from the starvation.

          3. He also used to be married to Omar Khadr’s 9/11-praising sister.

        2. That’s super crazy. The guy is truly an idiot.

          I would love to know how his American wife was suckered into it.

          1. She’s an idiot, probably.

      2. President Mofo.

        Lol.

        1. Also. The woman.

          She has just the right about of ‘would’.

  9. The Clinton Foundation is keeping the $250,000 donation it has received from Harvey Weinstein. A spokesperson says they’ve spent the money on charitable causes.

    “We spent all the money. On disguises.”

    1. More specifically, on various animal masks.

  10. Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl has pleaded guilty to desertion and faces a maximum penalty of life in prison. He disappeared from his post in 2009 and was held in captivity by the Taliban until 2014.

    Obama- Worst POTUS EVAH!: The shit continues.

  11. A judge has ordered the imprisonment of two leaders of the Catalan independence movement while they’re being investigated for sedition in Spain.

    I guess the leaders of the Catalan independence movement did not expect a Spanish inquisition?

      1. Spanish heretics?

    1. I see what you did there. “No one expects the Spanish Inquisition!”

      1. Bring out the comfy chair!

  12. Not sure what the Clinton Foundation could have done differently. All it does is spend other people’s money on various charities. They literally donated it to charity. Should they have given it back to Harvey?

    1. And people don’t just donate their money directly to those charities because…?

      1. Actually the CF doesn’t focus mainly on redistributing its donations to charities but does its own charitable work. I got that wrong.

        1. “I got that wrong.”

          Who are you and what have you done with Tony.

          1. Tony’s version of that is “I didn’t praise the Clintons enough. I got that wrong.”

    2. The real question is how much do they pay to WJC Consulting or ZFS Holdings.

      That is where Bill and Hillary launder their money. No one ever pays them directly.

      http://www.taxhistory.org/thp/…..n_2015.pdf

      1. Trump won, can we put to bed the insane conspiracy shit now?

        1. *cough* panama papers *cough*

          Bro rich people hid their money, especially rich politicians, sorry to shatter your world view.

          1. Funny how fast that story got swept under the rug, wasn’t it?

            1. If you’re of a certain age and above a certain wealth level, you had or still have money hidden away in Panama. I know this for a fact.

        2. Yeah, let’s talk about how the Russians control Twitter.

          1. Well he is the president now. A Clinton hasn’t been president for like a generation.

            1. God, that sounds so much better when you say it.

              1. I’m fond of telling people, as someone born during the Clinton years, that I’ve never been alive for a good President, so why should I expect one, ever?

  13. The Clinton Foundation is keeping the $250,000 donation it has received from Harvey Weinstein. A spokesperson says they’ve spent the money on charitable causes.

    If by ‘charitable causes’ you mean another Armani jacket for Hillary, then ok.

    1. You’re so cynical. It wasn’t an Armani jacket for Hillary. It was four months’ salary for Chelsea.

      1. Exactly. Charity begins at home.

    2. So the Weinstein lockbox can’t be replenished from the lockboxes of all the other fine folks that gave them money?

      1. Warning: it’s John and Tony turtles all the way down from here.

  14. I would prefer that mitigating factors be considered in the Bergdahl case: he did undergo years of captivity by psychopathic terrorists, and the war he was fighting was pointless.

    But apparently he is in the middle of some Trump vs. Obama culture war I can’t quite wrap my head around?

    1. If he thought the war was pointless, then he should have told his superiors so and gone to jail. He should not have gotten his fellow soldiers killed looking for him.

      1. No one has explained to me why the Taliban were interested in five strangers in Guantanamo.

        1. Obama released five really dangerous, hardened terrorists to get a deserter back from the Taliban. But it is Trump who is too reckless to be President.

          1. A black Democrat as president and all of a sudden Reagan-loving Muricans start hating the troops like it was an old habit.

            1. Mullah Norullah Nori was a senior Taliban commander in the northern city of Mazar-e-Sharif when the Taliban fought U.S. forces in late 2001. He previously served as a Taliban governor in two northern provinces, where he has been accused by the U.N. of ordering the massacre of thousands of Shiites. “Detainee continues to be a significant figure encouraging acts of aggression and his brother is currently a Taliban commander conducting operations against U.S. and coalition forces,” a 2008 U.S. military assessment of Nori said.

              Tell us how you think that guy should be released, Tony? Tell us about the wisdom of Obama letting that guy and four others lose to get a private who wandered into the desert and joined the Taliban back. Go ahead.

              1. Maybe it really sucks that he gets released, but he wasn’t afforded due process or even POW rights. Guess what happens when that happens in America?

                Well, under Bush and Cheney it means you can be locked up forever with no trial. Is that the kind of system you prefer?

                1. And Obama released him to go out and kill some more. Tony, people wouldn’t laugh at you so much if you would ever find a hill not worth dying on. They could find Obama raping a small child and you would be on here telling us how it was all Bush’s fault and how wonderful Obama is. At some point, doesn’t being in a cult of personality and being utterly and comically stupid get old? Never mind, we already know your answer to that question.

                  1. Due process rights is a hill worth dying on.

                    Don’t let me ever catch you pretending to be a Real Murican ever again.

                    1. Unless you’re a college guy that stuck it in crazy, right Tony?

                      Mattress girl has to be believed.

          2. For the record, I think Guantanamo is an abomination, but I do believe that the lionshare of prisoners there were enemy combatants and various terrorist-ey types. I found it funny that the Taliban specifically named five prisoners and demanded their return.

            “Return to what?” was my first instinctive response… “everyone there is innocent… they were just tending their fields when WHAMMO off to Guantanamo they went.”

            1. They’re all innocent until proven guilty. No sane person can buy into this crap about how they’re enemy combatants when the war is apparently neverending, and is being fought against a concept rather than a country.

              We fucked up by not just sending them through the normal criminal process, and the only legitimate action is to release them and hope that Bush-Cheney’s horrific incompetence doesn’t result in even more dead Americans than it already has.

              1. Yes, I agree that they’re all innocent until proven guilty. But you don’t at least find it amusing (funny ha-ha) that the taliban captors that you described as psychopathic terrorists were on a first-name basis with five people sitting at Gitmo?

                1. I find it very believable, as Gitmo and its inhabitants are well-known in such circles. You might even say Gitmo is one of the best terrorist recruiting efforts in the world.

              2. The awkward reality is that every ununiformed Iranian caught with a gun in Iraq is guilty of a capital offense and should be executed rather than released.

      2. “A review of the database of casualties in the Afghan war suggests that Sergeant Bergdahl’s critics appear to be blaming him for every American soldier killed in Paktika Province in the four-month period that followed his disappearance.” –NYT

        Nobody has proved a cause-effect relationship between his search and soldier deaths at the time, which happened during normal Taliban fighting season.

        Again, this is kind of an ugly culture war thing that has felt debasing and ugly from the moment people started bashing Obama for rescuing an American soldier from Taliban torturers.

        But I have sympathy for conscientious objectors, especially to pointless wars.

        1. http://www.militarytimes.com/n…..-bergdahl/

          And Obama let these people out of GUITMO, two of which are known to be guilty of mass murder, to get Berghdal back. If I didn’t understand how stupid Obama actually is, I would swear the guy was a traitor.

          1. Well, they were being held indefinitely without due process, which is, I’m sure you’ll agree, absolute unAmerican. Freedom isn’t free, asshole. When you violate people’s basic due process rights, you don’t get to lock them up for the crimes they were arrested for. I will fully admit that this was a means to an end of emptying GTMO. If those guys come back and kill Americans, you can blame George W. Bush for making a criminal case against them impossible.

            1. They deserved to be held there indefinitely. They are dangerous people guilty of very serious crimes. And Obama let them go because he thought doing so would be a good photo op. Obama is by far the dumbest and most shallow person ever to hold the Presidency. The guy never once rose to the occasion or in any way changed from being what he was.

              1. Okay then so you don’t believe in the constitution or even basic rules of war. You’re a horrible unAmerican fascist dick. I’m so glad we finally cleared that up.

                1. Tony, As we have explained to your dumbass before, the constitution does not apply in foreign countries. Afghanistan was also deemed a war zone by booosh and your buddy Obama, so military law applies. In fact Bergdahl is still active duty army, so the UCMJ applies to him and guess what the UCMJ does not have much of? Due Process.

                  Commanding officers can order summary execution after minimal due process. It happened with German spies in WWII who wore American uniforms during the Battle of the Bulge.

                  Bergdahl is a piece of shit and got his due process. He plead guilty. He could have gotten a trial by court martial if he wanted which is more than his would be buddies the Taliban gave him.

                  Fuck that dude and he will never get VA benefits even though he was declared a POW. Veterans will never let that guy get positive public recognition as POWs deserve.

              2. If they were dangerous and known to be so then charging them with a crime would have lead to a conviction.

          2. Well. To the extent they are indigenous fighters resisting an American invasion, they aren’t really guilty of any crimes per se. They should be held until we withdraw from Afghanistan and then turned over to the Afghani government.

            To the extent they committed war crimes against afghanis, they should be held until we withdraw from Afghanistan and then turned over to the afghani government.

            1. bin Laden launched an unconventional war against us, and you’re expecting them to receive the full Geneva Convention treatment? Ok. If you like your Constitution, you can keep it. If you like your due process, you can keep that. Period.
              All better now?

              1. We have a stellar conviction rate of terrorists who go through the normal criminal justice system. Way better than the record at Gitmo, even with all that very useful torture.

                1. But our intentions are good! If that can excuse 90 years of progressive fuckery, why not now?

    2. Those mitigating factors should, and likely will, influence the sentencing. They shouldn’t have any influence on the conviction. There’s a good chance he doesn’t actually go back to jail, and if he does, for not long.

      1. No, they shouldn’t. He was captured because he deserted. His captivity not only was entirely his own fault, but it also got other men needlessly killed.

        And political opinions about the war are completely irrelevant, and not a “mitigating factor” of any sort.

        1. He didn’t kill anyone, and there is no proved cause-effect relationship between soldiers killed after his desertion and the search for him. If he’s responsible for anyone’s deaths, then he needs to be charged with murder. Is he being charged with murder, or are you making stuff up to support your culture war position on this matter?

          1. He’s not guilty of murder. He’s guilty of deserting his post and that sentence could be death in time of war. Lucky for him, we are not at war.

            Fellow soldiers went to find, what they thought was a good soldier, with some died trying. Bergdahl is getting his due process.

    3. But apparently he is in the middle of some Trump vs. Obama culture war I can’t quite wrap my head around?

      Alright, Fucktard, what was it we gave up in exchange for the Traitor Bergdahl?

      1. See, how is he a traitor? Did he join the Taliban?

        This is about Obama vs. Trump and it kind of makes me want to puke all over the place.

        1. He aided the enemy. His desertion caused soldiers to die looking for him which helped the Taliban.

          They got 5 guys for his sorry ass.

          1. You people turn into disgusting unpatriotic pieces of shit when a (D) is in the White House.

  15. Bergdahl didn’t disappear, he deserted (which he just admitted to).

    If you develop a conscience as a soldier and don’t want to be one anymore, then admit and it go to jail. Don’t desert and get half a dozen others killed while searching for you.

    He should be facing a firing squad. But I’m sure he’ll be pardoned the next time a Democrat is elected and given a job at a University

    1. The fact that we have a 100% voluntary military and he enlisted after we were already at war in Afghanistan pretty much eliminates any sympathy I have for him.

  16. Trump’s Chief of Staff John Kelly had his phone compromised and breached by cyber hackers for over a year.

    ‘Cyber Security’ is like ‘Christian Scientist’ — the words do not work together.

    1. Honestly, I don’t think that is fair to the Christian Scientists because unlike a lot of cybersecurity programs praying over your computer at least does no harm.

      1. Anyone who’s had a computer crash while having not recently saved a document has prayed over a computer. And most have taken the Lord’s Name in vain when confronted with the BSOD.

    2. A Catholic priest created the field of genetics. A Catholic priest first proposed the Big Bang Theory. Galileo died a devout Christian. Werner Heisenberg, pioneer of quantum mechanics, was an open and avowed Christian.

      This is such stupid talking point that not only flies in the face of history, but does more harm to science than good.

      1. Fair points, I’ll recant the bad example, it definitely had nothing to do with the actual espionage portion of my comment.

      2. Being an atheist is a way for small minded people to feel deep.

        1. While believing in invisible sky grandpa makes you really deep.

          1. Tony – you never did respond when it was pointed out to you that atheists are overwhelmingly white males.

            Hadn’t you better re-examine your value system when you realize that people of color disproportionately disagree with your views? Someone somewhere told me once that not doing so would make you racist.

            1. This is easy. White males, with all their social privilege, are simply more at liberty to be open atheists, and they have more educational opportunities available to them, naturally leading to more atheists among them.

              1. But when we’re talking about openness to free markets and individual liberty, it’s just racism all the way down, is that it?

                This is easy

                Gainsaying is easy, yes.

      3. In the history of science prior to the twentieth century, almost no one that you would call a scientist was unaffiliated with a church in some way. William of Ockham was a Franciscan friar, for example.

        Universities were religious institutions pretty much by definition all the way through the 18th century.

        Modern American Protestant mythology holds up Galileo and Columbus as laypeople who stood up against the theological authoritarians, but – little-known fact – both Galileo and Columbus were wrong in substantial ways that their church-beholden critics were 100% right about.

        1. And there was such opportunity for people in the Middle Ages to go about society being vocally atheistic if they wanted to.

          1. They had 300 years of killing Christians.

          2. And there was such opportunity for people in the Middle Ages to go about society being vocally atheistic if they wanted to.

            This has nothing to do with what I said, and you are profoundly ignorant on this topic.

            1. What you’re saying is that not all great scientists were confirmed hardcore atheists, therefore Jesus walked on water? Or no?

              1. Is this you again demonstrating your ability to see beyond dualism?

                Point to me where I said either you are either atheist or you believe in the literal truth of every fable in the Bible?

                Did you know that the medieval Catholic Church actually stood against literalist interpretations of the Bible that were coming out of various reformist movements? Of course you didn’t.

                Did you know that Saint Augustine himself said that taking the account of creation in Genesis as literally true is absurd and misses the point? Of course you didn’t.

                Did you know that Bishop Bradwardine argued in the fourteenth century that time and space are relative and that this was why predictive physics was beyond the capabilities of trigonometry? Of course you didn’t.

        2. I understand how “American Protestant mythology” can hold up Galileo as a scientist who stood up against theological nincompoops, but … Columbus. The anti-Catholic arguments against the Church’s behavior regarding Galileo at least make superficial sense. But, Columbus? Thomas Aquinas uncontroversially wrote about the earth being round in the 13th Century. But he wasn’t the first: Augustine was aware of it as well.

          1. Thomas Aquinas uncontroversially wrote about the earth being round in the 13th Century. But he wasn’t the first: Augustine was aware of it as well.

            Exactly. IIRC, according to legend, Pythagoras figured it out in the sixth century BC, comparing noon-time shadows between Athens and Memphis.

            But I’ve seen even in recent years the usual representation of Columbus pointing to a round globe with a knowing look on his face while a cardinal scowls and shakes his head.

            The main reason the Italians didn’t want him going, of course, was because they didn’t want a western trade-route to China for the obvious reasons. Even Ferdinand of Aragon wasn’t too terribly excited about the whole prospect – Barcelona, too, was built on eastern trade.

            The reason Columbus was told he couldn’t do it was because the ‘natural philosophers’ of the time felt that it was more likely than not that there was no land in between Spain and China and, having a pretty accurate idea of just how big the world is, they knew he would never make it.

            Columbus himself thought they were simply wrong about how big the world was, and hence went to his grave believing he had been to Japan.

      4. I think he meant Christian Scientist rather than Christian scientist. As in “I refuse to treat a bacterial infection with antibiotics because angels.”

        When the NSA gets hacked because of a work-from-home employee gets phished… probably time to start foregoing the Cyber and focusing on the plain-old security.

      5. People who weren’t allowed to be anything but Christian don’t really count as examples, and Heisenberg’s religiosity is notable precisely because he was outside the norm.

        Now atheism is rampant among the most educated people, including at least 2/3rds of scientists.

        1. When’s the last time a fish walked out of the ocean? When will scientists create life from inanimate matter?

          1. Thanks for the chuckle and the throwback to 8th grade debates.

            1. These are the pillars of atheism. Get your science freak on and prove them. Should be easy for high IQ liberals.

              1. A fish never walked out of the ocean. A species, perhaps much like Tiktaalik roseae, was capable of using its fin-like protrusions as primitive legs and its lung-like organ to breathe in air.

                Which is to say it was a species evolved to fit an environmental niche of shallow waters and swamps, and it may have been able, due to its physiology, to climb up land. As environment selected for creatures best able to exploit land, species developed that did so quite well. Yada yada yada, mammals.

                And scientists have been able to create primitive components of life and even self-replicating bacteria-like forms in labs (see Craig Venter).

        2. Careful with those statistics. They’re fungible.

          The Pew Research Center poll of scientists also found that levels of religious faith vary according to scientific specialty and age. For instance, chemists are more likely to believe in God (41%) than those who work in the other major scientific fields. Meanwhile, younger scientists (ages 18-34) are more likely to believe in God or a higher power than those who are older.

          Although one wonders how many 18 yr old scientists there are.

          1. Chemists are barely scientists.

            1. But climate scientists – now there’s some hard fucking science!

              1. Yeah, they take measurements and do experiments and try to confirm or reject hypothesis. Chemists spend a lot of time putting stuff in flasks, I think. The bakers of the scientific world.

              1. Let myself get irritated. I apologize.

                Tony, you attempt to discredit everything that disagrees with you in such a flagrant way. You have no backing and require no evidence beyond that you agree with it. Claiming that Chemistry is not science is ignorant on its face.

                1. Claiming that Chemistry is not science is ignorant on its face.

                  Yeah – that one is a little jaw-dropping even for him.

                2. I was being tongue-in-cheek.

                  Engineers, though, definitely not scientists.

        3. People who weren’t allowed to be anything but Christian don’t really count as examples

          Not one single one of the people that either he or I mentioned were forced to be priests.

          Heisenberg was not at all out of the norm – there are very few atheists in quantum mechanics. Atheists are concentrated in biology, because small-minded people like yourself think that the theory of natural selection necessitates atheism. It doesn’t.

          Now atheism is rampant among the most educated people

          Especially white people. What’s wrong with people of color that they don’t understand?

          1. When the only place science is happening is in monasteries, it’s not a surprise that scientists tended to be in the priestly class. Science began as a sort of leisure activity of monks, as everyone else was busy fighting wars in mud, eating mud, and doing other stupid old-timey shit.

            I admit that my encounter with evolutionary biology (outside of school, mind you, where it was never taught till college in my state) coincided with my path to atheism, but it’s not that I believe evolution to confirm atheism; it simply proves the Biblical narrative wrong. Atheism itself is confirmed by basic rationality.

            1. When the only place science is happening is in monasteries, it’s not a surprise that scientists tended to be in the priestly class.

              You simply haven’t the foggiest idea what you’re talking about. All you’re really saying is “there was a time when pretty much everyone in Europe was Catholic.”

              That didn’t become a matter of law until the thirteenth century, when “medieval times” were almost over. The sort of ideological persecution you’re talking about was an outgrowth of the Wars of Religion and the Spanish Inquisition – i.e. the Renaissance.

              There were people outside the Church in medieval times going in all kinds of different ideological directions, but contra the smug proclamations of people like yourself, groups like the Lollards were anti-science. Prior to the fifteenth century, the best science was coming from people like Bishop Bradwardine defending church doctrine against fundamentalists.

              Please learn some history before coming here and lecturing us.

              1. I spent more undergraduate hours reading dead theologians than I ever wanted to, but apparently whoever was in charge of our philosophy curriculum thought it was time well spent to read people whose main priority was proving a preconception about the nature of the universe. I haven’t stayed as abreast of the intersection of theology and science in ancient Europe as you, perhaps, but I’m just wondering what your point is. The history of science is complicated and not dominated by hard atheists. Okay. Does that prove atheism wrong? Or what?

                1. HVHV: “‘Cyber Security’ is like ‘Christian Scientist’ — the words do not work together.”

                  Clbldkd: “This is such stupid talking point that not only flies in the face of history, but does more harm to science than good.”

                  Square: “In the history of science prior to the twentieth century, almost no one that you would call a scientist was unaffiliated with a church in some way.”

                  Tony: “What you’re saying is that not all great scientists were confirmed hardcore atheists, therefore Jesus walked on water? Or no?”

                  Tony: “Now atheism is rampant among the most educated people, including at least 2/3rds of scientists.”

                  Tony: “Chemists are barely scientists.”

                  Tony: “but I’m just wondering what your point is.”

                  The history of science is complicated and not dominated by hard atheists.

                  Does that prove atheism wrong?

                  No. It proves you wrong, not that that ever made any difference to your smug self-satisfaction.

                  “Atheism” can’t be proven or disproven. It is a matter of faith. Not that I expect you to understand that.

                  1. Atheism is no more a matter of faith than a disbelief in a teapot orbiting Jupiter, which is a cliche you should know.

  17. People Literally Do Not Understand What Laws Are Or How They Work

    There is a widespread lack of appreciation for just what “passing a law against something” actually means. We can see this if we think about the more trivial things we detest. For example: herring in cream is a terrible food. When Current Affairs accidentally used “fake small caps” in our first issue, we received hate mail from graphic designers, who maintain a zealous loathing of it. Much of the stuff that white people like should obviously be made to disappear. Personally, we’d like to see a world without Slavoj ?i?ek, The New York Times, the Harvard Kennedy School, and Kraft Singles cheese squares.

    And yet to say something is bad and you’d prefer it didn’t exist is different from saying it ought to be illegal. There’s a huge difference between hoping people develop better taste in cheese and criminally sanctioning anyone who doesn’t buy cloth-bound Vermont cheddar. That’s because law is a blunt and brutal instrument, one that doesn’t simply abolish things by magic, but through a real-world process of enforcement. No matter how serious (e.g. murder) or silly (e.g. squeegeeing) the offense is, the police are the police.

    1. While you can tailor the punishment to fit the crime, and there’s a difference between 30 days in jail and 30 years, to some degree the process is the punishment: everyone who commits a crime will be arrested and have their life disrupted, everyone will have their life disrupted through a costly and tedious court process, everyone will get the mark of a criminal record following them for the rest of their lives.

      Let’s remember what it means for something to be a crime. It means that there is a statute indicating the elements and penalties. It means that local, state and federal police will start seeking out people doing that crime for arrest. They will sweep broadly and ensnare many people doing nothing at all. It means that people will be jailed and fined for the crime, that some will be sitting in jail for quite a while because they cannot afford bail and that they might die awaiting trial. It means that their jobs, families, housing, and social service benefits will be put in jeopardy. If they are an immigrant it means they may be deported. It means that 95% of people will plead guilty to the crime regardless of whether they did it or not, and that whether or not they are able to defend themselves will depend heavily on whether they can access a lawyer.

    2. Much of the stuff that white people like should obviously be made to disappear

      I was born in a snuggie and I’ll die in a snuggie.

      1. I put on a pair of New Balance kicks (the Official Sneaker of White People) when i jog, and i do not apologize to you or any other!

        1. If you’re not the owner of a multi-billion dollar computer company, you have no right to wear New Balance sneakers ever.

    3. Personally, we’d like to see a world without Slavoj ?i?ek

      *** looks up “Slavoj ?i?ek” ***

      Why?

      1. He’s the quintessential “post-modernist.” A smug empty suit with a serious statist streak. The man refers to himself as a “good-old-fashioned Marxist-Leninist,” but his entire mode of argument is essentially a jargon-laden “hipper-than-thou” self-panegyric.

        In, short, he’s over-celebrated and annoying as fuck. He thinks he’s Jacques Derrida, but he’s got about 1/10th of Derrida’s shrewdness.

          1. Derrida was a tool, but he wasn’t a completely useless one.

      2. He’s just grating and has gotten really big in Marxist circles.

        1. And he’s classic for constantly challenging meta-narratives and then silently leaving “Marxist-Leninism” as the unexamined “therefore.” He’s little more than a con-artist.

          1. I’ll admit to only being glancingly familiar with him. I remember reading some summation of his beliefs, maybe the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, and not finding him particularly interesting. So I will admit to not knowing him well enough to argue.

    4. we’d like to see a world without Slavoj ?i?ek

      Seconded!

  18. http://pagesix.com/2017/10/16/…..-time-low/

    Megyn Kelly’s ratings hit rock bottom. Kelly was popular because she was on Fox News. It was the platform that gave her the ratings. As Tucker Carlson proved, you could put any competent host in her slot and gotten those ratings. Take Kelly away from the platform and she is just another blond newsbabe who is passed her sell-by date. It amazes me that the people who run NBC couldn’t figure that out and gave her $24 million.

    1. People who watch NBC are normal liberals and don’t want to see Ms. “Santa Claus and Jesus were white, folks” polluting their channel, however soft-focused her show may be.

      Her looks made her a right fit for FOX though, if not her willingness to be somewhat more than a vapid dingbat.

      1. Tony if a willingness to be a vapid dingbat got her anywhere, she would be successful on NBC. And there hasn’t been a normal liberal since at least 2002. There are normal people, abnormal people, and liberals, who are all batshit crazy but make up for it by being pig ignorant and hate filled.

        1. If I were to ask you where you got your political beliefs, as in which TV and radio stations and websites, would you tell me, or would you pussy out like everyone else who spews empty rightwing horseshit?

          1. I only listen to AM Coast to Coast, thank you very much.

      2. You know who else though the wrong race was polluting their network?

        1. F1 fans during the NASCAR Cup series?

          1. I read that the NASCAR audience is way down, even relative to other sports. Must be all the black drivers kneeling during the anthem.

    2. She’s also going completely against her long-standing schtick of ice-cold prosecutor babe. Nobody buys it because she never showed even the tiniest inkling of what she is trying to sell now.

      With this decision, all we’ve seen is NBC’s executives deserve a seat in Congress. Such spending waste, I thought, wouldn’t be possible in a profitable venture without heads rolling.

      1. That is another good point. They thought someone whose entire schtick was being a cold nasty bitch was going to be the next Katie Couric. Did they just not watch any of her shows before they hired her?

        1. All they needed to know was that she skewered Trump in the first debate. TDS cost them $24 million!

  19. people who run NBC

    are fucking idiots.

  20. Rahimi was convicted of charges including … using a destructive device in furtherance of a crime of violence — namely, the use and attempted use of weapons of mass destruction.

    Weird (explosive) charges.

  21. “Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl has pleaded guilty to desertion and faces a maximum penalty of life in prison. He disappeared from his post in 2009 and was held in captivity by the Taliban until 2014.”

    Regardless of what your thoughts are on Bergdahl, everyone should check out last seasons Serial podcast. The details of his story are crazy.

      1. “Our algorithm is showing hard-clustering.”

        Hard-clustering means something, be careful with just throwing words around.

      2. I’m also offended that the “advanced douchebag” in the video is just Jason Mantzoukas.

        1. I thought the most interesting (and unscientific) part was the dude who created the troll account with the male model pics. He could say the most god awful offensive shit to women, and they were still 100% on board with meeting.

          1. I think some of the weirdness comes from the fact that Tinder in this ad is seemingly denying that they are commonly for random sex rather than extended relationships.

            I’m actually not into random sex, but if I was I’m sure I could put up with the most annoying supermodel the requisite number of seconds it takes to finish.

          2. Though, the other part about the survey was also super unscientific. 23 people is small to the point of meaningless. I wish they had discussed the OkCupid study they mentioned instead.

            So, basically, Tinder is obnoxious here, but I’m not too trusting of Men Going Their Own Way either.

        2. I’m also offended that the “advanced douchebag” in the video is just Jason Mantzoukas.

          Especially after Whitney Cummings who, at Hasselhoff’s roast, suggested that Pam Anderson and Hulk Hogan’s daughter drink a gallon of Magic Johnson’s blood. It’s a roast, I get it. But one of the prototypical douchebags uses a bluetooth and *tips the minimum on his black card* (Screw you, bitch, buy your own meal!). Even if it’s only in jest, publicly saying some tangentially relevant third party should contract HIV is pretty douche-y.

          1. The women themselves were so shallow and douche-y I’m still not certain it’s not (self-)parody.

          2. Even if it’s only in jest, publicly saying some tangentially relevant third party should contract HIV is pretty douche-y.

            Eh, not a particular fan of her comedy, but Roast’s are anything goes.

            1. Roast’s are anything goes.

              Nah. I get that the gloves come off, but “I’m going to murder your children.” or “I hear your 95-yr.-old Grandma has cancer, I hope she dies.” doesn’t fly. Also, my point was a bit relative. Participating in a roast is (intentionally) being a bit of a douche, being the biggest douche at the roast is above and beyond the call of duty. Being the biggest douche at the roast and then slighting someone because they don’t tip the way *you* think *they* should? Your background douche-iness is fucking with your douche radar.

      3. Hey, babe. Wanna bang?

    1. Don’t men outnumber women on dating apps? So if the initiative increases engagement by women, it could increase engagement with men too even if they are getting more negative attention. Unless I’m wrong and men who use dating apps are known for their discriminating taste and high standards with the opposite sex.

      1. Mos def.

        Women just have to sit there and look pretty.


  22. ?The Clinton Foundation is keeping the $250,000 donation it has received from Harvey Weinstein. A spokesperson says they’ve spent the money on charitable causes.

    Damn, looks like even the Clinton’s couldn’t clean up this mess for him!

  23. “The Clinton Foundation is keeping the $250,000 donation it has received from Harvey Weinstein. A spokesperson says they’ve spent the money on charitable causes.”

    “Do you actually think we keep that money lying around, waiting until the donor is revealed to be corrupt or immoral, so that we have to give the money back? No, that money goes right up our noses…or, you know, wherever.”

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.