Addressing journalists at a hotel in São Paulo, Lula vowed to reunify his country after a toxic race for power which has profoundly divided one of the world’s largest democracies.
“We are going to live new times of peace, love and hope,” said the 77-year-old, who was sidelined from the 2018 election that saw Bolsonaro claim power after being jailed on corruption charges that were later annulled.
Source: Lula stages astonishing comeback to beat far-right Bolsonaro in Brazil election | Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva | The Guardian
Back in 2018, Musk said that because of Khashoggi’s murder, he “probably would not” accept investment from Saudi Arabia’s sovereign wealth fund. As it turns out though, he did. The Saudi fund owns 16.9 percent of the Kingdom Holding Company, Musk’s new partner at Twitter.
Musk’s reversal may be explained by the fact that his previous criticism was part of his feud with the Saudi fund because they had failed to publicly back his bid to take Tesla, his car company, private. In a text message to the head of the fund, Yasir Al-Rumayyan, in August 2018, Musk said that due to the fund’s lack of vocal support, “We cannot work together.” That was before Khashoggi’s death. Apparently, money, not the murder of a journalist, was Musk’s main beef with the Saudis.
Earlier this month, Saudi Arabia sentenced Saad Ibrahim Almadi, who holds dual US-Saudi citizenship, to 16 years in prison for tweeting critically about the Saudi regime. Almadi’s son has said the kingdom has tortured his father in prison.
Musk has not weighed in. The world’s richest man will tweet conspiracy theories at Hillary Clinton, and defend the right to do it. But when real freedom of speech is at issue, he seems reluctant to put his money where his mouth is.
Source: Elon Musk, Free Speech Absolutist, Is Silent About His Saudi Partners – Mother Jones
“But you know what I got jurisdiction over this morning is an election coming up on Saturday,” Burden told parishioners. “I got a candidate that God wants to win. I got a mayor that God wants to unseat. God wants to undo. God wants to shift the balance of power in our city. And I have jurisdiction over that this morning.”
What Burden said that day in May 2021 was a violation of a long-standing federal law barring churches and nonprofits from directly or indirectly participating in political campaigns, tax law experts told ProPublica and The Texas Tribune. Although the provision was mostly uncontroversial for decades after it passed in 1954, it has become a target for both evangelical churches and former President Donald Trump, who vowed to eliminate it.
Burden’s sermon is among those at 18 churches identified by the news organizations over the past two years that appeared to violate the Johnson Amendment, a measure named after its author, former President Lyndon B. Johnson. Some pastors have gone so far as to paint candidates they oppose as demonic.
Source: Churches are endorsing in elections while the IRS looks the other way | The Texas Tribune
Using my pattern-matching eyes and lots of caffeine, I have analyzed more than 100,000 papers since 2014 and found apparent image duplication in 4,800 and similar evidence of error, cheating or other ethical problems in an additional 1,700. I’ve reported 2,500 of these to their journals’ editors and — after learning the hard way that journals often do not respond to these cases — posted many of those papers along with 3,500 more to PubPeer, a website where scientific literature is discussed in public….
Unfortunately, many scientific journals and academic institutions are slow to respond to evidence of image manipulation — if they take action at all. So far, my work has resulted in 956 corrections and 923 retractions, but a majority of the papers I have reported to the journals remain unaddressed. Source: ‘Science Has a Nasty Photoshopping Problem’ – Slashdot