CDU defeat would be its worst ever federal election result
Ministers suspend Competition Act to allow oil firms to co-ordinate supplies as crisis deepens
Warm reception from industry as Rachel Reeves declares Labour is ‘pro-worker, pro-business’
‘Rather than having learnt from all that’s happened in the last year and a half, the government has gone the other way’ says independent SAGE expert
Transferred households will be protected by the energy price cap, says Ofgem
Labour MP says move would unfairly hit ‘women and those on lowest incomes’
Sister of 21-year-old who went missing near army base believes UK troops are responsible
Rodents have become ‘bigger and braver’ during lockdown, according to a pest control expert
Rising infections among children could have been avoided if the vaccine rollout for 12- to 15-year-olds had been started before the reopening of schools, say scientists
The Cumbre Vieja volcano continues to spew lava and ash clouds a week after the initial eruption
Three more people are expected to soon turn themselves in after alleged hazing death of freshman in Virginia
As a result of the crash, a different ambulance crew was sent to attend to the emergency call
A 21-year-old Florida college student drove to South Carolina to visit her father earlier this month, but she went missing. A day after Sheridan Wahl went missing, her body was found behind a fire station in South Carolina.
Wahl, who lived in the Tampa area, drove to see her father in Myrtle Beach, South Carolina. Her mother, Kelly DeArment Wahl, said she talked to her daughter on FaceTime around 1 p.m. on Sept. 19, near Myrtle Beach. The 21-year-old told her mother that she was going to rent a scooter and was preparing to drive back home to Tampa, WFLA-TV reported. The mother allegedly encouraged Wahl to stay in the area overnight because it would be a long drive back home. The video call was the last time Kelly saw her daughter.
In the early hours of Sept. 20, the mother posted an urgent message on Facebook pleading for help finding her missing daughter after not hearing from her for several hours. The calls to her daughter's phone purportedly went straight to voicemail, and she could not reach the father.
The young female's body was found on Sept. 21 behind the Hannah-Salem Friendfield Fire Department in Pamplico, South Carolina, approximately 50 miles west of Myrtle Beach.
Two days earlier, Wahl's car was found torched and abandoned about 10 miles from where her body was discovered. The Florence County Sheriff's Office said the vehicle was found in a ditch in Scranton, South Carolina. The sheriff's office said the burned-out vehicle did not have its license plate and that the VIN was unreadable.
On Sept. 23, Kelly shared a Facebook update about her daughter's tragic death.
"We are heartbroken beyond belief to share the news that our beloved Sheridan Lynne Wahl has passed. Sheridan was our cherished and loving daughter, sister, niece and friend. She will be missed more than words can ever express," the grieving mother wrote.
"Please note that the case has yet to be closed – and details have not been confirmed," the Facebook post stated. "A full statement will be released pending more information. In the meantime, the family graciously requests that their privacy be respected and deeply appreciates the outpouring of love and support from all."
An autopsy is underway and a cause of death has not been released.
A GoFundMe has been started to raise money for Wahl's family to have a memorial and funeral by Elizabeth Echenique, Sheridan's roommate and friend. Echenique said Wahl was an "amazing musician" and had a "heart of gold" in the crowdfunding campaign.
A permanent resident of the United States and former combat interpreter who worked with the U.S. military in Afghanistan says he and his family are trapped in Afghanistan. Now that the country is dominated by the oppressive Taliban regime, he doesn't believe he'll be able to safely escape the country.
The man, a resident of Arizona, told Fox News that he is now in hiding in Afghanistan because the Biden administration didn't have a "clear evacuation plan." The 31-year-old also revealed that he is not alone in being an American resident stranded in Taliban-controlled Afghanistan.
"There are a lot of people still left behind. My friends, I know them, they are stuck here. Four of them are American citizens. Two from Arizona and two from California," the man said.
The man, who is only identified by his first name "Zekria" for his protection, slammed the Biden administration for its botched evacuation plan.
"The Biden administration left without any plan, and that is why there are thousands of allies who worked for the U.S. military, American citizens, Afghan Americans, all stuck here," he explained.
He added that the Afghans who did escape the country were likely "beggars displaced from other provinces," and probably "not qualified" members of the Afghan Special Immigrant Visa program.
"There are a lot of people like me," Zekria said. "We are the ones who are qualified. We put ourselves and our families in danger, and they took people that don't even have documents."
"It was impossible to get into the airport," he said, adding that his brother "got beaten by the Taliban" when attempting to access the Kabul airport. He said the Taliban was demanding $600 to get past checkpoints near the Hamid Karzai International Airport.
Zekria served as an officer in the Afghan Army, then worked with the U.S. military from 2011 to 2015 as a linguist combat interpreter. He reportedly received a green card and legal residence in the U.S. in return for his service. He provided Fox News with documents supporting his claims and dozens of emails he wrote to the State Department and U.S. embassies.
He attempted to evacuate Afghanistan in July, but was allegedly provided no assistance from the State Department, who told him "only help citizens – not green card holders" were being helped out of the country. He claimed that he filled out repatriation forms and other necessary documents nearly 40 times, but was never approved.
"I don't know how this process is working but there is something that is not right," Zekria said. "I pay taxes. The worst thing is my rent and car payment is due in a week and I am scared to get eviction in Arizona while I am here."
Zekria believes he missed the opportunity to escape, "To be honest, I don't believe I'm getting out safe."
Zekria is currently living in a house with his wife, three brothers, four sisters, his parents, and his uncle in Kabul. He acknowledged that if the Taliban finds out that he helped the Americans then he and his family could be in grave danger.
"There is no safety for anyone – especially for interpreters and the ones who worked with Americans, their families, plus all of the military and the Afghan military – they just arrest whoever worked for the government," he said. "This is why I was scared, and why I came to Afghanistan, to do something, at least, to save my family, but it didn't happen, and now I got stuck here, too."
"There is curfew at 10 p.m. and the Taliban, every night, is getting into houses. They are beating people. I am witnessing it," Zekria said.
He noted that Taliban militants are "searching people's phones and pockets."
"No one can get out of the country. You cannot get out. It is like a prison," he said. "The Taliban are finding any possible way to keep people inside and not let anyone leave the country."
Democrats, including President Joe Biden, are now trying to sell the $3.5 trillion spending package by claiming the massive bill "costs zero dollars."
Over the weekend, Biden shared a message from his Twitter account claiming the bill has no cost — despite its massive $3.5 trillion price tag.
"My Build Back Better Agenda costs zero dollars," Biden tweeted. "Instead of wasting money on tax breaks, loopholes, and tax evasion for big corporations and the wealthy, we can make a once-in-a-generation investment in working America. And it adds zero dollars to the national debt."
My Build Back Better Agenda costs zero dollars. Instead of wasting money on tax breaks, loopholes, and tax evasi… https://t.co/3KGPRqKcBh— President Biden (@POTUS) 1632616471.0
White House spokesperson Andrew Bates told Axios on Friday, "The bill's price tag is $0 because it will be paid for by ending failed, special tax giveaways for the richest taxpayers and big corporations, adding nothing to the debt."
Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), chairwoman of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, repeated the erroneous claim during an interview Sunday on CBS News' "Face The Nation."
"President Biden also said something very important the other day, which is, this is a zero-dollar bill because it's going to be completely paid for with taxes on the wealthiest and the largest corporations," Jayapal said.
Washington Post columnist Catherine Rampell boasted a similar claim Sunday on CNN's "Reliable Sources."
"The bill itself will not cost $3.5T in the sense it will be entirely, or at least partly, paid for. So the actual cost, in terms of deficits, will be smaller than that, perhaps even zero, although I think that's unlikely," Rampell claimed.
As CBS News host Margaret Brennan told Jayapal, the massive spending package that Democrats want to pass, hardly knowing everything that is in it, does not cost zero dollars.
"The joint committee on taxation says actually that, in raising this revenue, taxes could go up at least 2% on those making between $200,000 and $500,000 a year," Brennan explained. "It also will raise taxes for corporations and those who are wealthier. So it's not no cost."
The Wall Street Journal aptly characterized Democrats' new talking point as the "the largest tax increase as a share of GDP and the largest entitlement expansion since the 1960s costs nothing. And money grows on trees."
In fact, according to the WSJ, the proposed tax increase does not even cover the spending Democrats have proposed.
In the real world, Congress's Joint Committee on Taxation says the bill raises $2.1 trillion over 10 years. Somebody must be paying more. Among the tax hikes are a 5.5 percentage point increase in the corporate income tax rate that will be paid by workers in lower wages, consumers in higher prices and investors in lower returns. Though they'll be pleased to know this all adds up to "zero dollars."
As for the spending, the $3.5 trillion figure that Bernie Sanders considers a "compromise" doesn't even capture the full cost of what Democrats are proposing. As we explained Friday, that amount is based on budget gimmickry including entitlement phaseouts and phase-ins, and the real cost will be at least $5 trillion, probably far more.
So even after $2.1 trillion in tax hikes, the entitlements in the reconciliation package that include the child allowance, college tuition, national pre-K, universal child care, expanded Medicare and a new Medicaid program will add to the U.S. debt for decades to come.
Even if Democrats found enough money via tax increases to cover the cost of the bill, the National Review's Philip Klien pointed out the bill would still leave a fiscal footprint.
"Any time the government raises taxes to pay for newly-passed spending it taps revenue sources that are no longer available to meet existing obligations," Klein explained. "Increasing spending, in every circumstance, increases the burden on government finances."
Andreas Malm is an associate professor at Sweden's Lund University, and the author of the book "How to Blow Up a Pipeline: Learning to Fight in a World on Fire." Malm's book does not only have an eye-catching title; he actually advocates destroying any and all fossil fuel infrastructure.
Malm wrote in his book, "Damage and destroy new CO2-emitting devices. Put them out of commission, pick them apart, demolish them, burn them, blow them up. Let the capitalists who keep on investing in the fire know that their properties will be trashed."
Malm contends that obliterating private property associated with fossil fuels is "precisely what the climate movement needs."
When climate activists shut valves and destroy pipelines, when they set fire to heavy machinery owned by oil companies, they assert their rights to this infrastructure and their rights to the land and air and water that it is destroying. It is what I have referred to elsewhere as "prefigurative expropriation"; a momentary, but informative and empowering challenge to the economic system of private property and the morality that it produces. Sabotage, as its earliest proponents understood, is a powerful threat to the owning class and this is precisely what the climate movement needs.
Malm appeared on the New Yorker podcast last week, where he literally championed destroying pipelines.
Malm said he felt "panic and desperation" in the summer of 2018 because of heatwaves, wildfires, and droughts in northern Europe, which pushed him into radical ideas in his climate change activism.
He called for an "escalation," for the "movement to diversify its tactics, and move away from an exclusive focus on polite, gentle, and perfectly peaceful civil disobedience."
"I am recommending that the movement continues with mass action, civil disobedience, but also opens up for property destruction," Malm told host David Remnick. "I do think we need to step up, because so little has changed, and so many investments are being poured into new fossil fuel projects."
"So I am in favor of destroying machines, property, not harming people," he added. "I think property can be destroyed in all manner of ways or it can be neutralized in a more gentle fashion...or in a very spectacular fashion as in potentially blowing up a pipeline under construction," Malm proclaimed.
The internet reacted with shock that New Yorker magazine would provide a platform to someone advocating for violence, and encouraging what many called "terrorism."
Insurrectionist https://t.co/qrrtSZbt9P— Benjamin Weingarten (@bhweingarten) 1632658129.0
Just listened to the actual segment and it's insane. It's an extended love-fest with a disturbed activist that enco… https://t.co/caduRyWZhr— AG (@AGHamilton29) 1632633163.0
No it should not and this is completely irresponsible and inappropriate. We live in the dumbest time, Exhibit #2… https://t.co/1SJjNQyyNL— David Fisman (@DFisman) 1632664872.0
As always, let’s picture the meltdown by media and Wray’s FBI if a pro-Trumper wrote this. https://t.co/EhwyrUevyf— Yossi Gestetner (@YossiGestetner) 1632637146.0
For those keeping track at home, both the New Yorker and the New York Times are debating and soft endorsing terror… https://t.co/Hijj4DXAMv— Stephen L. Miller (@redsteeze) 1632674762.0
Other media outlets presented Malm's ideas of carrying out acts of violence against energy infrastructure. In May, the New Republic argued that Malm's proposal to destroy private property should be heard in an article titled: "The Climate Case for Property Destruction."
What, then, is to be done? The main argument of How to Blow Up a Pipeline is simple: The climate movement should itself enact, through direct action, that prohibition on new fossil fuel infrastructure, and that dismantling of existing pipelines and power plants, which governments have so far refused to take on. Only if such equipment is damaged often and badly enough as to make its continued operation unprofitable does the stabilization of the climate stand a chance. For climate activists to confine themselves to peaceful protest is meanwhile to watch the earth become less and less hospitable to human life. Plenty of readers will react (as I did) with a sort of instinctive skepticism to Malm's case that only widespread property destruction can forestall civilizational suicide, but his case deserves a hearing.
In July, another influential outlet platformed Malm's ideas of blowing up pipelines — the New York Times.
Former Vox co-founder Ezra Klein, who wrote the article, appeared to conflate possible eco-terrorist acts advocated by Malm to violence used during the American Revolution and during the Civil Rights movement in the 1950s and 1960s.
"Malm's rebuttal to potted histories of past social movements, which is persuasive in parts," Klein wrote. "He's surely right that we sanitize past uprisings, lionizing the peaceful and blackening or forgetting the names of the violent. There is at least an argument that it's the interplay of forces that transforms societies. There was no peaceful American Revolution. There were riots and rifles woven into the civil rights movement. 'Does this movement possess a radical flank?' asks Malm."
"Still, violence is often deployed, even if counterproductively, on behalf of causes far less consequential than the climate crisis," Klein reasoned.
Klein did acknowledge that blowing up pipelines would increase energy prices, which would hurt the poor the most.
Despite endorsing blowing up a pipeline, writing a book about blowing up a pipeline, and encouraging others to blow up a pipeline, Malm has yet to put his own words into action. Possibly because those who are caught sabotaging energy infrastructure go to prison for years.
In June, the Des Moines Register reported on two eco-terrorists who were sentenced to eight years in prison for causing millions of dollars in damage to the Dakota Access pipeline.
Climate activists Jessica Reznicek, 39, and Ruby Montoya, 31, were indicted on nine federal charges each in September 2019, including charges for damaging an energy facility, use of fire in the commission of a felony, and malicious use of fire. Reznicek and Montoya both pleaded guilty to a single count of damaging an energy facility. In July 2017 the women claimed credit for a series of acts of sabotage, including burning pipeline construction equipment at a Buena Vista County worksite in November 2016 and using oxyacetylene cutting torches or gasoline-soaked rags to damage other pipeline sites around the state between March and May 2017. At the time of their admission, they were affiliated with the Des Moines Catholic Workers' social justice movement.
In the name of climate activism, Malm has admitted that he deflated tires of SUVs in 2007, according to the Los Angeles Review of Books.
In the summer of 2007, five dozen SUV owners in an affluent part of Stockholm awoke to find their cars "reclining on the asphalt." On their windshields, they found a leaflet. "We have deflated one or more of the tyres on your SUV," it read. "Don't take it personally. It's your SUV we dislike." The leaflets continued by pointing out how much gasoline the SUVs burned, this burning was directly connected to the rapid warming of the planet, and the drivers would be fine — they might be mildly inconvenienced, but clearly they had money and lived in a city with good public transit. At roughly the same time, the small band of SUV saboteurs published a statement taking credit for the action, exhorting others to copy their work, and making available a "simple manual" for how to release the air from a tire.
Texas Gov. Greg Abbott announced Sunday that he would hire any Border Patrol agent punished by the Biden administration over the controversy involving mounted agents and Haitian migrants last week.
Biden's comment came after the photographer who snapped the infamous images of the mounted Border Patrol agents spoke out, saying he did not witness what Democrats and the media claimed.
Speaking on "Fox News Sunday," Abbott promised to hire any Border Patrol agent punished by the Biden administration.
"What the president said — going after the Border Patrol, who were risking their lives and working so hard to try to secure the border — if he takes any action against them whatsoever, I have worked side by side with those Border Patrol agents," Abbott began. "I want them to know something: iIf they are at risk of losing their job at a president who is abandoning his duty to secure the border, you have a job in the state of Texas."
"I will hire you to help Texas secure our border," the Republican governor promised.
Abbott, who characterized Biden as having "scapegoated" the Border Patrol, said Border Patrol agents would not have been in that position "had the Biden administration enforced the immigration laws and secured the border."
The Texas governor claimed Border Patrol agents told him the flood of migrants into Del Rio only stopped after he took action, which he said was necessary because the Biden administration has abdicated their constitutional responsibilities.
"Because the Biden administration is refusing to do its duty to enforce the laws of the United States, they have left Texas in no position other than for us to step up and do what we have to do," Abbott said.
"You know, you mentioned the people in Del Rio and the way that Del Rio was overrun by a population about the same size of Del Rio that have been coming across the border illegally. As governor, I'm not gonna let that happen," he continued. "I am going to step up and do whatever I have to do to make sure that I protect the people of Del Rio, as well as all these other communities in the state of Texas that the Biden administration is ignoring."
"The people in South Texas, they are angry about the Biden administration for ignoring them, for abetting them," Abbott said. "The Biden administration cares far more about people who are not in this country than he does of the people— American citizens who live in this country."
"I see the administration wants to fry our agents," that agent said.
Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas admitted Sunday that as many as 12,000 Haitian migrants who recently entered the United States illegally have been released into the U.S. — not repatriated to their home country.
The Biden administration promised "widespread expulsions" of the Haitian migrants that encamped under the Del Rio International Bridge, the Associated Press reported. That promise was exposed as yet another lie when the AP reported the Biden administration was actually releasing the migrants on a "very, very large scale."
While the Biden administration promised repatriation for the migrants, administration officials said nothing about the migrants staying in America.
"Fox News Sunday" host Chris Wallace confronted Mayorkas about the discrepancy Sunday after noting that Mayorkas told him that 12,400 of the migrants are having their cases processed by immigration courts, while another 5,000 migrants are currently being processed by Homeland Security.
"Mr. Secretary, of those 17,400, how many have been released into the U.S., and how many more potentially could be released into the U.S.?" Wallace asked.
Mayorkas admitted that only "about 3,000" of the Del Rio migrants are currently detained.
When Wallace asked Mayorkas the question again, noting that Mayorkas dodged the question, Mayorkas said that "approximately 10,000 or so" of migrants who were encamped in Del Rio have been released into the U.S. — then Mayorkas immediately revised his estimate to 12,000.
For the remaining 5,000 migrants who are being processed by the DHS, Mayorkas said immigration officials would determine whether they are released or repatriated based on "our public health and our public interest."
"It could be even higher," Mayorkas then admitted of the number of released migrants when Wallace asked for a clarification.
When Wallace confronted Mayorkas with the fact that a significant number of migrants who are conditionally released into the U.S. end up settling here permanently, the DHS secretary deflected and said that fact highlights "that our immigration system is broken and legislative reform is needed."
Later in the interview, Wallace asked why the Biden administration did not stop the "flood" of migrants from illegally entering the U.S. With a straight face, Mayorkas claimed, "we did."
"Why didn't you build a wall or a fence to stop them from walking— this flood of people coming across the dam?" Wallace asked. "It looks like a highway that allows them to cross the Rio Grande."
"It is the policy of this administration. We do not agree with the building of the wall," Mayorkas said. "The law provides that individuals can make a claim for humanitarian relief. That is actually one of our proudest traditions."
The NBA denied a request for a COVID-19 vaccination exemption based on religious reasons for Golden State Warriors player Andrew Wiggins on Friday. The Warriors — who play their home games at the Chase Center in San Francisco — are subjected to stricter COVID-19 vaccination requirements based on the city's public health order.
"The NBA has reviewed and denied Andrew Wiggins' request for religious exemption from the San Francisco Department of Public Health's order requiring COVID-19 vaccination for all participants age 12 and older at large indoor events," the professional basketball league said in a statement. "Wiggins will not be able to play in Warriors home games until he fulfills the city's vaccination requirements."
Wiggins is set to make more than $31 million this season, but he could lose half his salary if he misses all of the Warriors' home games.
The San Francisco Department of Public Health released a statement on Friday:
At large and mega indoor events, all patrons 12 and older must be vaccinated at this time. Under the current order, if unvaccinated, they cannot enter indoor areas regardless of the reason they are unvaccinated and cannot test out of this requirement even if they have a medical or religious exemption. This same rule applies to performers and players employed by the host at large and mega indoor events who are covered by the vaccination requirements of the Health Order.
Players from two other NBA franchises also face "get the vaccine or get benched" propositions: the New York Knicks and Brooklyn Nets. New York City has a rigid coronavirus vaccination mandate that requires vaccinations for everyone entering indoor public spaces, including NBA players and coaches.
The NBA told teams that visiting clubs are exempt from the New York and San Francisco vaccine requirements.
The New York Knicks said their entire roster is vaccinated.
Nets general manager Sean Marks said last week that a couple of players have yet to be vaccinated, and would not be eligible to play when the regular season begins on Oct. 19.
A report on vaccine-hesitant NBA players from Rolling Stone suggested that superstar Kyrie Irving is one of the Brooklyn Nets players who have yet to be vaccinated. The outlet acknowledged that Irving's rep and "multiple people familiar with his thinking" declined to reveal Irving's vaccination status.
Tyki Irving — Kyrie's aunt who runs the All-Star playmaker's KAI Family Foundation — suggested that Irving and other players against vaccine mandates could sit out home games to avoid the public health orders in New York City and San Francisco.
"There are so many other players outside of him who are opting out, I would like to think they would make a way," Tyki Irving told Rolling Stone. "It could be like every third game. So it still gives you a full season of being interactive and being on the court, but with the limitations that they're, of course, oppressing upon you. There can be some sort of formula where the NBA and the players can come to some sort of agreement."
Orlando Magic player Jonathan Isaac — who made national headlines in 2020 for being the first NBA player to stand for the national anthem — is another vaccine-hesitant player, according to the report.
The 23-year-old Isaac — who is a devout Christian and ordained minister — has questioned the seemingly inconsistent NBA COVID protocols.
"You can play on the same court. We can touch the same ball. We can bump chests. We can do all those things on the court," he said. "And then when it comes to being on the bus, we have to be in different parts of the bus? To me, it doesn't seem logically consistent."
Isaac asked, "If you are vaccinated, in other places you still have to wear the mask regardless. It's like, 'OK, then what is the mask necessarily for?'" And if Kyrie says that from his position of his executive power in the NBPA, then kudos to him."
On Sunday, Isaac appeared to slam the Rolling Stone report in a tweet, which indicated he is against vaccine mandates but not an anti-vaxxer.
"Misrepresentation only allows for others to attack straw men, and not reason with the true ideas and heart of their fellow man," Isaac wrote on Twitter. "It helps no one! True journalism is dying! I believe it is your God given right to decide if taking the vaccine is right for you! Period! More to follow."
Misrepresentation only allows for others to attack straw men, and not reason with the true ideas and heart of their… https://t.co/PGhFLZ3Cbm— Jonathan Isaac (@JJudahIsaac) 1632660327.0
NBA legend Kareem Abdul-Jabbar believes the NBA should require all players and staff to be vaccinated.
"The NBA should insist that all players and staff are vaccinated or remove them from the team," Abdul-Jabbar said. "There is no room for players who are willing to risk the health and lives of their teammates, the staff and the fans simply because they are unable to grasp the seriousness of the situation or do the necessary research. What I find especially disingenuous about the vaccine deniers is their arrogance at disbelieving immunology and other medical experts. Yet, if their child was sick or they themselves needed emergency medical treatment, how quickly would they do exactly what those same experts told them to do?"
With NBA training camps starting later this week, there is a report that 90% of NBA players are vaccinated against COVID-19.
Jeff Probst, host of the hit reality TV show "Survivor," will no longer use his signature catchphrase — "Come on in, guys" — because the phrase is not inclusive enough.
During the premiere of season 41 last week, Probst asked "Survivor" contestants whether he should drop "guys" from his catchphrase — which he has used for more than 20 years to welcome contestants to challenges on the show — because he wants to be "of the moment."
"I need your guidance on something. For 20 years I have used one phrase to call people in for challenges," Probst began.
The contestants responded in unison, "Come on in, guys!"
"Come on in, guys: Love saying it, it's part of the show, but I, too, want to be of the moment," Probst responded. "So my question to you to decide for us: In the context of 'Survivor,' is a word like 'guys' OK, or is it time to retire that word?"
One contestant, who identified herself as a "queer woman," said she had no problem with word. "I personally think 'guys' is OK. 'Come in guys' is such a signature expression. I, as a woman, as a queer woman, do not feel excluded by 'guys,'" the contestant said.
In fact, none of the contestant dissented, and they agreed Probst should continue using his phrase. However, several days later, contestant Ricard Foyé requested that Probst drop the word "guys."
The reality is there was so much going on, there's so much commotion, cameras, my hair is messed up, I'm half crying — I don't have the capacity to do what I'm really supposed to do, which I regret. I don't agree that we should use the word "guys." I fully agree we should change it, whether it just be dropping the "guys," changing it to something else. I just don't really agree with it.
The reality is "Survivor" has changed over the last 21 years, and those changes have allowed all of us, all of these brown people, black people, Asian people, so many queer people to be here simultaneously.
Probst praised Foyé for speaking out, framing it as a courageous move, and admitted that he also wanted to change his catchphrase.
Survivor 41 - Jeff Probst Will NEVER Say "Come On In, Guys" Ever Again!! www.youtube.com
While many online commentators praised the move, Probst and "Survivor" were criticized for the decision.
The entire scenario, after all, felt scripted and reeked of woke virtue-signaling. Probst told Foyé that he wanted to edit his catchphrase from the beginning, which Probst could have done without making the phrase a major talking point of the episode. Probst simply could have never said "guys" again.
"I mean this is just ridiculous. This is being woke just for the sake of being woke. Absolutely pointless. You're only losing audience with this move. Nobody is now tuning in because you dropped 'come on in guys.' Pathetic @JeffProbst," one critic said.
"I'm not covering survivor this year! ... This woke s**t! I rather not even watch!!" another critic said.
"[W]hy did @JeffProbst let ONE MAN decide that "come on in guys" was offensive when EVERY WOMAN ON THE SHOW AGREED THAT IT WAS FINE," another critic said.
Former Democratic Rep. Tulsi Gabbard sharply denounced President Joe Biden Saturday over the ongoing border crisis, comparing Biden, whom she called her friend, to an "autocrat" for attacking Border Patrol agents who were falsely accused of abusing Haitian migrants.
Biden commented on the controversy involving the mounted Border Patrol agents on Friday by regurgitating the debunked narrative of migrant abuse and promising the Border Patrol agents involved would "pay."
"It was horrible [what] you saw. To see people treated like they did [sic]. Horses nearly running people over and people being strapped," Biden said at the White House.
"It's outrageous. I promise you those people will pay. They will be investigated. There will be consequences," he declared.
Speaking with Fox News host Jesse Watters, Gabbard condemned Biden for attacking the mounted Border Patrol agents despite facts that clearly showed the agents were not guilty of abusing the migrants.
"I consider Joe Biden a friend. But he's absolutely wrong and he needs to apologize to the American people for saying what he said," Gabbard said.
"Here's why: He's somebody who's been very outspoken as being against autocrats, autocracies, dictators. But what he essentially did was act as judge, jury, and executioner for these Customs and Border Patrol agents on horseback," she added.
Tulsi Gabbard: There is an 'increasing feeling' we are 'losing our democracy' www.youtube.com
Gabbard said the practical effect of Biden's public condemnation is a compromise in the integrity of the investigation into the incident. Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas confirmed Friday the investigation would continue despite Biden's remarks.
"How can they expect to have a fair outcome to an investigation when the president of the United States has already declared their guilt and that they will be punished?" Gabbard questioned.
"The bigger issue that this points to, which is one that we all need to be concerned about, is that if we are no longer a country of laws, if we are no longer a country where we know we will be presumed innocent unless proven guilty, then we don't have a democracy," she explained. "And that's the increasing feeling that a lot of us have is we are losing our democracy and moving closer and closer to what essentially is an autocracy."
The former Hawaii representative said the "saddest part" about the wrongful condemnation of the Border Patrol agents is that it highlighted how the "powerful elite" are "working with the media, working with the deep state" to "preserve their power, their position, or money."
"Who suffers as a result of this? It's the American people, it's our democracy, and they don't care about the cost and the toll that [it] takes," Gabbard said.
Scientific American is a science magazine founded in 1845 that has published articles by more than 200 Nobel Prize winners. The magazine has featured brilliant minds such as Hans Bethe, James D. Watson, J. Robert Oppenheimer, Linus Pauling, and Albert Einstein. However, now one of the science magazine's goals is "advancing social justice," which was evident in a recent article attempting to cancel the Jedi in "Star Wars" for being "problematic."
It took a total of five Scientific American writers to spew out a 2,060-word article titled: "Why the Term 'JEDI' Is Problematic for Describing Programs That Promote Justice, Equity, Diversity and Inclusion." The opinion piece oozed out an exhausting laundry list as to why the Jedi are "inappropriate symbols for justice work." The wokescold composition explained why Jedis — the mythical knightly order in the fictional movie "Star Wars" — should not be compared to the acronym "JEDI," which stands for "justice, equity, diversity and inclusion."
The article listed all of the ways that the members of the fabled Jedi order are problematic, including white saviors, toxic masculinity, and even the phallic-shaped lightsabers (which are also used by the enemy Sith).
They are a religious order of intergalactic police-monks, prone to (white) saviorism and toxically masculine approaches to conflict resolution (violent duels with phallic lightsabers, gaslighting by means of "Jedi mind tricks," etc.). The Jedi are also an exclusionary cult, membership to which is partly predicated on the possession of heightened psychic and physical abilities (or "Force-sensitivity"). Strikingly, Force-wielding talents are narratively explained in Star Wars not merely in spiritual terms but also in ableist and eugenic ones: These supernatural powers are naturalized as biological, hereditary attributes. So it is that Force potential is framed as a dynastic property of noble bloodlines (for example, the Skywalker dynasty), and Force disparities are rendered innate physical properties, measurable via "midi-chlorian" counts (not unlike a "Force genetics" test) and augmentable via human(oid) engineering. The heroic Jedi are thus emblems for a host of dangerously reactionary values and assumptions. Sending the message that justice work is akin to cosplay is bad enough; dressing up our initiatives in the symbolic garb of the Jedi is worse.
The social justice overreaction over the beloved space opera then attacked the "Star Wars" franchise for "trafficking in injustices such as sexism, racism and ableism."
Even Darth Vader's heavy breathing is allegedly a problem, "The series regularly defaults onto ableist tropes, memorably in its portrayal of Darth Vader, which links the villain's physical disability with machinic inhumanity and moral deviance, presenting his technology-assisted breathing as a sinister auditory marker of danger and doom."
But even when the science-fiction franchise became more inclusive, it wasn't enough. "And while recent films have increased gender and racial diversity, important questions remain regarding how meaningfully such changes represent a departure from the series' problematic past," the writers alleged.
"Those unfamiliar or uncomfortable with Star Wars—including those hurt by the messages it sends—may feel alienated by the parade of jokes, puns and references surrounding the term JEDI," the article said.
Even saying the word "Jedi" is apparently an issue because it provides Disney "with a form of free advertising, commodifying and cheapening our justice work in the process." The SJW authors then trashed Disney for a "long and troubling history of circulating racist, sexist, heterosexist and Orientalist narratives and imagery."
Many people on the internet blasted the article quicker than Han Solo could shoot Greedo with his DL-44 at the Mos Eisley cantina. Numerous Twitter users deemed the article to be more worthless than bantha fodder.
Someone just blow up the Internet already… https://t.co/OpzkHPotqQ— Dave Rubin (@RubinReport) 1632435606.0
@sciam So @sciam was founded in 1845. Is it weird to be deliberately burning through 170+ years of credibility by… https://t.co/pCQG3Bkryk— Geoffrey Miller (@primalpoly) 1632428761.0
"Scientific" American lmao https://t.co/x3myA8cHro— Hayden Daniel (@HaydenWDaniel) 1632433516.0
Re: that insanely woke Scientific American anti-Jedi op-ed, it seems like every time something like this comes up,… https://t.co/e3igxOYzhB— Rod Dreher (@roddreher) 1632444448.0
@sciam Legitimacy crisis. @sciam has been corrupted by woke ideology.— Peter Boghossian (@peterboghossian) 1632439222.0
“For over a thousand generations the Jedi were the guardians of peace and justice. Before the woke times. Before Th… https://t.co/qltvdmot9G— Matt Taliaferro (@MattTaliaferro) 1632439649.0
@sciam 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 https://t.co/OBzVz2ztwz— Tim Andrews (@TimAndrewsHere) 1632438404.0
Some activists for Justice, Equity, Diversity, Inclusion call themselves JEDI, which is kinda cool. But no, this is… https://t.co/vCphvaE7Lm— Michael Shermer (@michaelshermer) 1632495306.0
Five people wrote this. They’re not embarrassed. Neither are the editors at @sciam. They all should be. https://t.co/HpB3t9DyZ7— Jason Rantz on KTTH Radio (@jasonrantz) 1632443410.0
The @sciam article about why Jedi are problematic contains thoughts that should have never escaped the weed-soaked… https://t.co/qymU5ZDtE2— Jack Butler (@jackbutler4815) 1632505490.0
Well I’ve seen it all now. This is the fanbase you wanted Disney. Hope you are happy 😂 Why the Term 'JEDI' Is Prob… https://t.co/ll7SRIu9Y2— MasteroftheTDS (@MasteroftheTDS) 1632437599.0
.@sciam is an absolute joke. "Through its connections to Star Wars, the name JEDI can inadvertently associate our… https://t.co/AIr0L9goXF— Colin Wright (@SwipeWright) 1632435411.0
@sciam You’ve got to be kidding me! I submitted a proposal for an article in SciAm, which was not even reviewed, on… https://t.co/KCK58t3Lhz— Kristina Lerman (@KristinaLerman) 1632422408.0
Did Chancellor Palpatine write this? https://t.co/zlTXASpsyK— J.R.R. Jokin (@joshcarlosjosh) 1632440008.0
@sciam Opinion: Why the term 'Scientific American' is problematic for describing a journal that publishes articles… https://t.co/55ttTKvafe— Kritische Kritische Theorie (@schnabelkatz) 1632433525.0
Joe Rogan delivered a dire prediction for President Joe Biden and the Democrats for the 2024 election. The hugely successful podcast host doesn't believe Biden or Vice President Kamala Harris have what it takes to win the 2024 presidential election.
Amanda Knox, the American woman who was wrongfully convicted of murdering her roommate in Italy, appeared on a recent episode of "The Joe Rogan Experience." Knox mentioned Silvio Berlusconi, who was a real estate developer, media tycoon, and three-time prime minister of Italy. Knox compared Berlusconi to Donald Trump, and then asked if the former American president was going to run again in 2024.
"Oh yeah," Rogan replied. "He's gonna 100% try. He's probably gonna win."
Rogan asked a series of questions, which doubted Biden's cognitive abilities, "How is Joe Biden gonna win? How is it possible he's gonna beat anybody? After you've seen him speak? After you've seen the decay and the decline? How is it possible?"
In June, Rogan questioned why the media ignores Biden's cognitive decline.
Knox agreed that Biden was "not very inspiring."
Rogan then bashed the Democratic Party for selecting the 78-year-old gaffe-prone president.
"They've done a terrible job," Rogan proclaimed. "The Democrats f***ed up royally by making that guy the president."
Knox wondered if the Democrats would select Harris instead of Biden to run in 2024; however, Rogan shot down that proposal.
"She would lose just as badly," the UFC analyst retorted. "She's the most hated Vice President according to polls. The least liked, I should say, Vice President in 50 years."
Rogan was citing an Economist/YouGov poll released in the summer that found 48% viewed Harris "unfavorably," and 40% described the vice president's job performance as "very unfavorably."
"Kamala Harris has become the most unpopular US vice president six months into an administration since at least the 1970s," the Telegraph said on Aug. 1.
The stand-up comedian also brought up how former Rep. Tulsi Gabbard "exposed" Harris during the Democratic primary debates in 2019, specifically her record as California's top prosecutor.
"She was one of the favorites, initially," Rogan said of Harris. "And then when Tulsi Gabbard exposed her, everybody was like 'What the f***! Is that real?' And they started looking it up and they're like 'Holy s***!'"
"It's crazy. It's crazy that that's the choice," Rogan continued. "Like you have Donald Trump or a man who's got something seriously wrong, right? He's a guy who's had multiple aneurysms, had actual brain surgery and is 78 years old and is experiencing some sort of pretty radical cognitive decline and is in some way controlled by the other people in the party whether it is Nancy Pelosi or whoever else."
Rogan added, "He keeps saying things like 'They tell me not to answer questions' or 'They tell me not to' … hey motherf***er, you're the president!"
Rogan was referring to the times that Biden has told reporters that he is not supposed to take questions from the press.
The Loudoun County School Board reportedly changed the rules for an upcoming school board meeting at the last minute to prevent conservative commentator Matt Walsh from speaking at the meeting.
Walsh went viral last month after he confronted the Metro Nashville Public School Board over the district's face mask mandate for elementary school students.
"You the school board have decided that our kids should go to school all day, every day wearing muzzles like rabid dogs. I have listened to your arguments and I've noticed that they're missing a few things, namely, evidence, data, science, common sense, and basic human decency. You presented no facts at all, so let me do that now," Walsh said.
After a short speech in which Walsh explained the data on children and COVID-19, chided the school board for "depriv[ing] [students] of the ability to see each other's faces," and questioning what a face mask does "to a child's developing immune system," Walsh concluded, "It's a disgrace and you should all be ashamed. Thank you for your time."
Just like in Nashville, Walsh is planning to voice his opinion at an upcoming Loudoun County School Board meeting in northern Virginia.
However, according to the Daily Wire, the school board changed its rules at the last minute to block out-of-town speakers, like Walsh, from speaking at the Sept. 28 meeting. Now, only local residents are permitted to speak at the public meeting.
The Loudoun County School Board revealed this week changes to speaker eligibility for the upcoming board meeting. Eligible speakers now must meet strict residency requirements, and will be forced to show proof they meet the new rules before speaking.
"The School Board is making these changes in order to ensure that the voices of our parents and the LCPS community are heard rather than out-of-town agitators who would make Board meetings a platform for national politics or to enhance their own media profiles," School board chair Brenda L. Sheridan said.
So what did Walsh do? He announced Friday that he signed a lease in Loudoun County to comply with the new residency requirements, therefore making him eligible to speak at the board meeting.
"Loudoun County changed the rules so that only residents can speak at the school board. In unrelated news, I'm proud to announce that I am now a resident of Loudoun County. Just rented a home in the area. I'll have the lease agreement. See you at the meeting!" Walsh announced Friday.
How do you do, fellow Virginians?— Matt Walsh (@MattWalshBlog) 1632516511.0
On Facebook, Walsh explained why he wants his voice to be heard at the Loudoun County School Board meeting.
"The Loudoun County school board in VA has imposed a radical trans policy allowing males access to girl's restrooms and teams. Teachers are required to use preferred pronouns," Walsh wrote. "To protest this madness, I'll be leading a rally outside the school board meeting on September 28."
The search continues for Brian Laundrie, the fiancé of Gabby Petito. Law enforcement resumed their manhunt for Laundrie on Saturday at the Carlton Reserve natural preserve in southwestern Florida, marking the eighth straight day police searched for the person of interest in the disappearance and death of Petito.
Brian Laundrie reportedly left his parent's home in North Port without his wallet or cell phone. Laundrie left the house on Sept. 14, and was said to be taking a hike at the 25,000-acre Carlton Reserve. Laundrie's parents have said they haven't seen or heard from him since. Laundrie was reported missing by his family on Sept. 17.
Laundrie's parents were worried that their 23-year-old son would harm himself, a source told CNN.
North Port Police public information officer Josh Taylor declined to comment on the report, saying, "I cannot give any statement to a timeline at this time. That investigation is being conducted by the FBI."
The U.S. District Court of Wyoming issued a federal arrest warrant for Laundrie, according to the FBI's Denver field office. The arrest warrant is not for the death of Petito, but for bank fraud charges. Laundrie allegedly used a debit card and PIN number for accounts that did not belong to him, according to the indictment. He allegedly ran up charges totaling over $1,000 between the dates of Aug. 30 and Sept. 1. A grand jury indicted him for his "use of unauthorized devices."
"It is my understanding that the arrest warrant for Brian Laundrie is related to activities occurring after the death of Gabby Petito and not related to her actual demise," Laundrie family attorney Steve Bertolino said in a statement. "The FBI is focusing on locating Brian and when that occurs the specifics of the charges covered under the indictment will be addressed in the proper forum."
FBI special agent in charge Michael Schneider stated, "While this warrant allows law enforcement to arrest Mr. Laundrie, the FBI and our partners across the country continue to investigate the facts and circumstances of Ms. Petito's homicide. We urge individuals with knowledge of Mr. Laundrie's role in this matter or his current whereabouts to contact the FBI."
This federal warrant will allow law enforcement to arrest Laundrie across the nation.
On September 22, 2021, the U.S. District Court of Wyoming issued a federal arrest warrant for Brian Christopher Lau… https://t.co/wnTX3AgQP0— FBI Denver (@FBIDenver) 1632433228.0
An attorney in North Port placed a $20,000 bounty on information regarding Laundrie's whereabouts.
"We have an office in North Port, and our employees work and live there," Tatiana Boohoff told Fox News. "We serve clients there — and we want to do what we can to help find answers and get justice."
"I think a missing child is every parent's worst nightmare," Boohoff said. "Our hearts go out to her family and to the community, and we hope that together we can get some answers and get justice for Gabby."
Reality TV star Dog the Bounty Hunter is joining the search for Laundrie.
"Dog and Francie have experienced extreme loss themselves," his team said in a statement. "Their hearts go out to Gabby's family for what they're going through and want to help bring justice for her death."
On Saturday afternoon, Duane "Dog" Chapman arrived at Laundrie's parents' home and knocked on the door, but didn't get a response.
DOG ON THE HUNT: Watch moment famous reality TV bounty hunter knocks on front door of Laundrie Florida home… https://t.co/e8Hg1lmtt4— Fox News (@FoxNews) 1632601380.0
At a memorial in North Port, people mourned Petito's death by leaving flowers, stuffed animals, and heartwarming messages.
On Saturday night at the memorial, people will light candles and release butterflies to honor the beloved van-life girl.
"Join us for a memorial butterfly release and candle lighting in remembrance of Gabby Petito," reads an invitation by Lisa Correll for the event called "Butterfly Wings to Heaven for Gabby," the Daily Sun reported.
Gabby Petito memorial in North Port, Florida. People are traveling from all over to leave flowers and messages. https://t.co/Sjf4hO2l80— Brian Entin (@BrianEntin) 1632589283.0
Residents of Blue Point, Long Island — Gabby Petito's hometown in New York — held a memorial on Friday night. In the "Light the Night For Gabby Petito" tribute, people lit candles to pay their respect to the slain 22-year-old.
Driveway vigil held for Gabby Petitio, funeral details released www.youtube.com
Funeral services for Gabby Petito — which will be open to the public — will be held from noon to 5 p.m. on Sunday at the Moloney Funeral Home in Holbrook, Long Island, in New York, according to her father, Joseph Petito.
"In lieu of flowers for the service, please send donations for the Future Gabby Petito Foundation through the Johnny Mac Foundation," the father wrote.
ABC News presented a timeline of events in the disappearance and death of Petito.
Liberal comedian Bill Maher responded to trite criticism from "The View" co-host Whoopi Goldberg, who earlier this month denounced Maher for rebuking the NFL's decision to play "Lift Every Voice and Sing," the so-called "black national anthem."
Last week, Goldberg rebuked Maher for saying America does not need two national anthems.
"I think because we have gone backwards a good 10, 15 years, we're having to re-educate people. We're having to re-educate people about how women want to be talked about, how black people want to be talked about, how Hispanic people want to be talked about," Goldberg said.
"And just so you know, Bill, 'Lift Every Voice' has always been considered the black national anthem. It's always been that because the separation of the anthems has been so clear to us," Goldberg added. "Now, maybe other people don't feel like that, but I feel like we have to re-educate and retell people. We don't think rape humor's funny. We don't think talking about Native American people in a really despicable way is not funny. It's not funny, and we have to re-educate."
BILL MAHER SAYS WOKE LIBERALS HAVE “LOST PERSPECTIVE”: @WhoopiGoldberg, @sarahaines, and @JoyVBehar react to him co… https://t.co/oefzAB3z7R— The View (@TheView) 1631574002.0
Directly responding to Goldberg's criticism, Maher invoked comparisons to "Chairman Mao."
"Whoopi Goldberg said, quote, 'We're having to re-educate people.' Because nothing ever goes wrong when you start talking about re-education," Maher said. "Just ask Chairman Mao. Maybe we can set up some sort of camp."
Maher suggested that Goldberg completely missed his point. Maher said he was not defending the "Star-Spangled Banner," but was instead promoting the use of a single national anthem and the idea that "segregating by race is bad."
"Symbols of unity matter. And purposefully fragmenting things by race reinforces a terrible message that we are two nations hopelessly drifting apart from each other," Maher explained. "That's not where we were even 10 years ago and it's not where we should be now."
New Rule: Don't Segregate the Anthem | Real Time with Bill Maher (HBO) www.youtube.com
Maher went on to say that supporting two national anthems is basically arguing for "separate but equal."
"If we have two anthems, why not three? Or five? Why not a women's anthem? A Latino anthem? A gay, trans, Indigenous peoples, an Asian Pacific Islander anthem? Because 'I'm not dealing with you, I'm not speaking to you' is not a way you can run a country and most people of all backgrounds understand that already and don't even want to try to do it that way," Maher said.
"I'm not out of step! Believing in separate but equal? That's out of step— by 67 years," Maher continued. "It was 67 years ago, in 1954, when the Supreme Court handed down their landmark Brown v. Board of Education ruling, which said 'separate but equal' isn't what we do here. We decided we're going to try to make this work together."
Later, Maher said that liberals are becoming "so woke [they're] coming out the racist side."
"We need to stop regarding this new woke segregation as if it's some sort of cultural advancement. It's not," Maher said.
"Countries do disintegrate into madness when they indulge their separatist tendencies: Hutus slaughtering Tutsis in Rwanda, Catholics and Protestants in Ireland, Sunnis and Shiites in Iraq, Hindus and Muslims in Kashmir, everyone in Afghanistan and that one Jew," he continued. "We need to unite as one nation who come together and sing one anthem always out of key."