Leaflets, and the like. Citizen journalism. Not tabloids from a neighboring country.

Why do you think I put it in <#399204742846349312>?

Asking if it was real cause it looked too much like something from the onion. Poes law and all.

What? Asylum seekers and trucks? What could ***possibly*** go wrong?
>Nice, France

Oh

It‘s technically true, you know... Theo best Kind of true...

Merkel Said that they talked about giving loans to Asylum seekers from syria that have a syrian drivers license and want to convert that into a german one.

And are these asylum seekers approved of their asylum?

Or are they still in the process?

It's a good idea, but you can't just put everyone who wants to drive a truck on such a list.

Since it is only something they talked about as a possibility behind closed doors i can not tell you that.

That's understandable

But generally as an asylum seeker you need a work permit

The way Merkel said it, it would only apply to syrians that already have a license ro drive trucks in syria and manage to pass the test to get the german license.

Basically the same thing an american would have to do, only difference is that the syrian gets a loan to pay for the german test (loan as in: has to pay it back)

But again: nothing official, just something the government threw around as an idea in a meeting, and got put out by merkel.

Indeed

Merkel's not exactly a bucket filled with good ideas, but if done properly this could be a good initiative

this is the problem with governments, they rarely, if ever, do things properly

Hence why the people are to hold them accountable

https://twitter.com/ianbremmer/status/998932355527139328

This video Vox did is really funny in retrospect. They have been spending the last few days saying it is demeaning to call humans animals. Well at the same time they put out a video on monogamy that constantly refers to humans as animals. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DCGyLjBjuGI&list=WL&index=16

"Welcome to the Legacy media. Where we will defend criminals and terrorists but dox and threaten children who makes memes about us"

Proof?

http://nordic.businessinsider.com/cnn-criticized-threatening-dox-reddit-users-identity-2017-7?r=US&IR=T

" CNN criticized for seemingly threatening to dox Reddit user behind Trump's wrestling video "

Not an actual dox, but a threat

They already hired a PI just to look into him

It was some time ago, but he's a child

Doesn't matter if they're a child or a decrepit old man

There's literally no reason to posture like this

It's not

They threatened to dox because of a damn meme

They wonder why their credibility is down the toilet, and they go about doing shit like this

Negative self-awareness

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/05/jordan-peterson-does-not-support-equality-of-opportunity.html

"But that hypothetical isn’t terribly relevant to questions of social policy in a nation where women are still routinely subjected to domestic violence in their homes"

>Fails to mention that the states linked to that, provided by themselves, show the difference between the number of men and women who suffer from domestic abuse is about 8 percent. 25% men and 33% women. (1/4 vs 1/3)

"gender bias in school"
>Neglects the fact women make up most college grads these days, also links to a study that says there is just less women in stem, but not why. Despite saying just before that it's possible this is just because of choice

gender bias in school? yeah, it's tailored to girls

I don’t get it. Where in that article is Peterson arguing against equality of opportunity?

he isn't

So why is that the title

Because fake news.

The title has literally nothing to do with the article

"Nor would such disparate preferences necessarily justify pay disparities,"
>Fails to cite that once you take away things like time off taken, and difference in jobs, the pay disparity is almost close enough to be statical error and the ability to negotiate

because they make stuff up around what he says to fit what he says into the box they want him in

@Deller basically it is saying "he claims to be for equality of opportunity, yet fights the left who want to end what is clearly not equally of opportunity right now. Then sites bs or our right lies. Or contradicts itself.

they cite inequality of outcome to "prove" that there is inequality of opportunity

"Our entire economic system relies on women performing incalculable hours of reproductive work without receiving any formal compensation at all"

>I.E. society should pay for my baby, not me or the father

who exactly forces women to have kids?

"A single mother raising four children — whose labor will one day help subsidize Peterson’s Old Age Security pension — receives no compensation for her efforts"

....WHERE THE FUCK IS DAD HUH? FUCKING SEND THE BILL TO HIS LAZY ASS

Dead. He killed himself rather than be saddled with unplayably high child support payments

Also she'll recieve her own subsidized old age security pension later, which is the compensation she seeks.

So...

Why does society need to pay for your work, that is what a husband or wife is for. This is why husbands were the bread winners, to pay you in shit. Then you didn't want them being the bread winners, so you went to work yourself. Yet still kept your first job (stay at home wife) but apparently let the person who is supposed to be paying you (the father) off the hook. Or even kicked him out!

single mother of 4 children.... yeah pay her for her poor choices

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/05/second-amendment-slavery-nyt-piece-misleading-claims/amp/#amp_tf=From%20%251%24s

I... Remember getting someone annoyed when I said that one of the things I look in a woman is "not a single mother"

I mean, seeing as how 99% of single mothers have made an extremely bad life choice, that doesn't seem like a bad stance to take

@Deller I think thats a little extreme

If you're a single mother one of 3 things likely happened. You had a child with a shitty person, your partner left you, or your partner died. Unless you became a single mother because your partner died, you made an extremely bad life choice

Both the choice to have a baby with a fucking jackass who'd abandon his family or having unprotected sexual encounters with someone who probably didn't want children sound like bad life choices

single mothers are the worst

Damn, that's some fucking bullshit right there

single parents and widower's are different things but people like to blur that line because someone who had their partner die often had no choice in that (unless they did the killing of course) where as single parents which are mostly women because of the biased legal system clearly made a bad decison of who to have kids with, or had unplanned kids

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/may/26/us-liberal-islamophobia-rising-more-insidious

Kek

"Maajid Nawaz leverages his as a “former Islamist”, brown skin and an affiliation with Harris, to peddle Islamophobia within largely cosmopolitan circles and liberal audiences. His Quilliam Foundation the Islamophobic tenet that radicalization is a uniquely Muslim phenomenon, and Nawaz has stated that “Islamism is the biggest form of extremism”, endorsing destructive policing programs that have eroded the civil liberties of Muslims in the United Kingdom. With the help of Harris, Nawaz has extended his native informant reach into the United States. "

There realy should be some sort of quality control of what opinion pieces they show

Yeah, that quality control should be a far greater ability for the general public to sue news organizations.

Especially for such 'opinion' pieces

why won't they realise that labling everything as Islamophobia is helping the real extremists

They look at it from the point of power dynamics

They see the move to try to smear legitimate critics as islamophobes more advantageous then risks of legitimazing actual islamophobes

Notice how little actual facts did the profesor used in that article

I find the need to put muslims calling for reforms of their beliefs most interesting in that article.

Clearly he wants any criticism be recognised as phobic reaction

opinion pieces should not be protected by freedom of press

if its an opinion piece its not different to a random person writing something on some random blog and should be protected/not protected just like that

Press should be fact based not opinion based but at the same time I'm wary about giving the government more power.

I dont mind ppl publishing their opinions

But the press should be held acountable for them

That article was bordering on libel imo

specialy if you pay for it. Like any product... standards should be met.

Worst thing is that sometimes guardian does good job

But lots of opinion pieces in there are just rubbish

Ad i dont mean them having opinions i disagree with

I mean them publishing halftruths and oversimplifications like that one.

the word you are looking for is "lies" 😉

Opinions and emotional half truths sell, that is just how it is unfortunately. Just look at one of the biggest daily papers here in Germany, Bild. Most people agree that that paper is a terrible mess of fake news and blowing unimportant stories out of proportion, but it still sells more than any other publication, because people just like to read it, regardless of truth.

“ Rotherham child sexual abuse claim ‘made up to boost EDL cause’ “ by The BBC

The British government claims it put journalists/activist Tommy Robinson in prison for a year because his reporting could influence the Rotherham trail, yet the BBC is free to write slanted articles throwing shade at an alleged rape victim. Keep in mind , the BBC is run by the government. Looks to me like they have an agenda.

http://archive.today/UA9xk

Bild sprach zuerst mit den toten.

http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/trump-land-delusion-article-1.4010243

> "Wilson is a Republican political strategist."

http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/001/101/068/aa9.jpg

“ Huddersfield child sex inquiry sees 29 in court “ by the BBC

Tommy Robinson has been condemned for using defendants names in these sex trafficking trials. You can clearly see that these names were made public as far back as April 12 2017 by the BBC in this article during the trials . One rule for us, another for the government.


http://archive.today/41tz3

>when you try pinning something on Trump but it backfires and hurts Obama instead http://dailycaller.com/2018/05/27/shaun-king-linda-sarsour-trump-immigration-obama/

And the funny thing is that Shaun King clearly didn’t learn from his last fake news incident.

Yeah, but it's not exactly fake news. It's just old news.

Misleading then.

Shaun King is a like those professional victims,
that fake news incident was him being sorry it was fake, not him being sorry for being outraged and demanding action

all these "news" sites