Any real dad would laugh at being called a deadbeat. It’s literally only an insult if it’s true. Like literally no good dad on the planet would see that as an attack on his family… Unless it’s true.
Calling Jorge a deadbeat dad is NOT attacking someone’s kids. It’s his lame excuse to sneak attack Colby. He had 5 rounds to defend his ego and he got beat down. Jorge is sore loser, End of story dude.Colby never talked about his kids he was defensive towards them because he said Jorge was a dead beat dadColby talking shit made more people care about the fight, meaning more PPV sales, meaning more money for Masvidal who was getting points. He should be thanking Colby and sending him a fruit basket for carrying that PPV.Waiting outside a steak restaurant to sucker punch someone who called you a “deadbeat dad”… … is exactly what a deadbeat dad would do.He wanted to inflict pain to Colby and the only way he could do that was when he’s not readyNever acceptable to sucker punch someone! There’s only one reason to cheap shot someone… because he knows he can’t beat him straight up. He knows first punch wins.. kinda makes ya wonder how many times he’s done this 🤔Colby was standing up for Jorgies wife and kids. That should be commended. If more men stood up, like Colby did, there would be a lot less bad father out there in the world. But a lot of you think that its wrong to call dudes out for being bad fathers and husband. Supposed “Guy Code”, give me a break, if anybody thinks that’s right your part of the problem. And if you are one of those guys its because you are afraid your going to get called out and so you don’t think its right to do.As a dad, you can call me a dead beat dad all day, I’m gonna laugh at you. He must be a dead beat if someone saying it upsets him.Jorge had his chance, but he lost. Even if he was going to go after Colby he should have done it to his face by calling him out in the street or whatever angry buffoons do. Colby could have fought him or chose not to but you don’t assault a guy with a mask and a hood.Finally had Josh back on the podcast and he comes with every bad take lmao. You’re going to bite someone’s flesh and think he’s not going to make money off you buy suing??? What if Jorge was actually as good as sucker punching as he told Ariel he was back in the day? Colby gets seriously hurt and Jorge is locked up when Colby never said anything directly about his kids. I’ve seen people saying Jorge is justified because it “disrupts his family life”. Yes, his family directly involved with him being a bad father but I don’t think that type shit talking is off limits especially when Jorge said he was going to end Askren’s ability to reproduce.Colby literally ended masvidal’s careerI remember when Masvidal was the guy that everyone was on his coat tails and would go hard for him now 90% of the comments in any post is bashing him. He done it to his self and now people can’t stand him. We all know it wasn’t about his kids bc Colby never said a word about them he said he was a shit dadWords are not assault – especially when they are hyping a fight! Action/assault on the street is breaking a law – period!You know what I think is hilarious. Jorge would have still done this weather Covington mentioned anything about his family or not. Jorge could just not stand the fact Covington beat the living crap out of him for 25 minutes and then was hanging out in Miami with the nelkboys. Jorge was just being a crybaby because that was not him hanging out with themJoe Rogan I usually love your opinion but when a fight happens in the streets people don’t usually warn a person before they hit them your stupid if you expect a pissed off offended man to be polite!!! I grew up with ” what do you call a dirty fighter? A winner!” Now I refuse to fight dirty because overcoming without compromising yourself is what makes a man!!!Colby was told once before a fight “no matter what you do if you win or lose you’re being cut.” That was in Brazil and that’s when he started his character. Oh Joe told the story.The irony is Masvidal had the opportunity to get his respect and failed.Can you imagine if Jorge would have hit Colby and he fell head first on to the concrete? Could have easily been a homicide. Then add the dude that set him up. Then it becomes a conspiracy that led to manslaughter. Jail for all involved.I remember admiring masvidal in 2018 & 2019. In 2022? He’s become an embarrassment & bad example of a human being both professionally & beyondEveryone was on Masvidal’s side after the fight even though he lost. And now no one is defending him other than simps. He royally f-ed up. This will hurt his future fights and earnings.
Trump Sanctions Iran’s Supreme Leader, but to What End?
With the flourish of his pen on Monday, President Trump imposed sweeping sanctions on Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, as well as everyone in Khamenei’s office or appointed by him. It was a point of high drama in the escalating brinksmanship between the United States and the Islamic Republic. It was the closest that Trump has come to formally calling for a regime change. “The Supreme Leader of Iran is one who ultimately is responsible for the hostile conduct of the regime,” the President told reporters. “These measures represent a strong and proportionate response to Iran’s increasingly provocative actions.” Usually, the United States will sanction a head of state—such as Iraq’s Saddam Hussein, Libya’s Muammar Qaddafi, and Venezuela’s Nicolás Maduro—as a signal that the leader is no longer deemed legitimate. In other words, Washington believes that a leader has to go.
Trump was opaque, even puzzling, about his intentions, however. “America is a peace-loving nation,” he said. “We do not seek conflict with Iran or any other country. I look forward to the day when sanctions can be finally lifted and Iran can become a peaceful, prosperous, and productive nation. That can go very quickly; it can be tomorrow. It can also be in years from now. So, I look forward to discussing whatever I have to discuss with anybody that wants to speak. In the meantime, who knows what’s going to happen.”
The new executive order also targeted the Revolutionary Guard commanders involved in shooting down a sophisticated U.S. drone last week. The Trump Administration intends later this week to impose sanctions on the U.S.-educated Iranian Foreign Minister, Mohammad Javad Zarif, who was the chief interlocutor during the two years of negotiations that led to the Iran nuclear deal, in 2015. Zarif once quipped that he and the former Secretary of State John Kerry spent more time with each other during that period than they spent with their wives. As Iran’s top diplomat, Zarif regularly travels to New York to attend U.N. sessions. He was here in April and had been expected to return next month.
At a White House press conference, the Treasury Secretary, Steven Mnuchin, vowed that the new sanctions will “lock up literally billions of dollars more of assets.” Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, who was visiting Saudi Arabia on Monday, charged that Khamenei’s office “has enriched itself at the expense of the Iranian people. It sits atop a vast network of tyranny and corruption.” The new sanctions, Pompeo said, will deprive the Iranian leadership of the resources it uses to “spread terror and oppress the Iranian people.”
Ironically, the punitive new measure may not have major economic impact—at least not to the degree that the Administration advertised. “It’s a lot of hype, but it doesn’t mean much economically. It’s unlikely to have a damaging effect” on Iran beyond the sanctions that have already been imposed, Elizabeth Rosenberg, a former Treasury sanctions specialist who is now at the Center for a New American Security, told me. “It’s in the realm of the symbolic.” The sanctions are “a sideshow to a threat of military escalation and all-out conflict,” she said. They fuel a narrative focussed on Iran rather than the United States—and the fact that Trump blinked when he called off a retaliatory military strike last Thursday.
Former Treasury officials also claim that Trump did not need to sign a new executive order—beyond the hype and media attention it produced. The authority to sanction either entities or officials affiliated with the Iranian government has existed since 2012, when the Obama Administration issued an executive order, Kate Bauer, a former Treasury official who is now at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, said. “It’s clear that this Administration wants to send a message,” Bauer said. “This is a response to the recent escalation and the shooting down of the drone.”
The main impact of the new sanctions may be political—diminishing rather than encouraging diplomacy or deëscalation. Pompeo said that Tehran “knows how to reach us,” if it decides to “meet our diplomacy with diplomacy.” But Tehran immediately rejected talks. At the United Nations, the Iranian Ambassador Majid Takht-Ravanchi told reporters that Tehran would not succumb to pressure. “Nobody in a clear mind can accept to have a dialogue with somebody that is threatening you with more sanctions. So, as long as this threat is there, there is no way that Iran and the U.S. can start a dialogue,” he told reporters, before a closed-door session on tensions in the energy-rich Gulf. In a tweet, Zarif said that Trump’s advisers and allies “despise diplomacy and thirst for war.” Other Iranian officials condemned the new sanctions as “economic terrorism.”
Trump’s decision, a year ago, to unilaterally reimpose other sanctions—splitting with the five major powers who also brokered the nuclear deal—has battered Iran’s economy. In April, Washington vowed to sanction five nations that remain major importers of Iranian oil if they didn’t cease all purchases; the move cut off Tehran’s main source of revenue. Iran’s oil sales today are about a sixth of what they were in 2016. Inflation has exceeded fifty per cent in some months, with the price of basic necessities skyrocketing. The I.M.F. projects a six-per-cent economic contraction for Iran in 2019. Yet the Iranian economy is still far from crippled. The Islamic Republic has not witnessed the kind of economic protests that erupted nationwide in late 2017 and early 2018, Western diplomats in Tehran have told me
Sanctioning Iran’s supreme leader and his entourage could even backfire, some experts suggest. The Trump Administration’s goal is to get Tehran to make concessions on its missile development, regional interventions, and human-rights record, as well as its nuclear program. But “these sanctions will make discussions toward a new treaty very, very difficult,” Adnan Mazarei, a former deputy director of the I.M.F.’s Middle East program who is now at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, told me. “They send a bad political signal. The recent events—especially shooting down a U.S. drone—make Iran feel more comfortable and self-confident from a domestic perspective. It could say, ‘We won the last round and maybe we can talk now.’ ” No longer, Mazarei said. Tehran has boasted that it shot down the Global Hawk drone, one of the most sophisticated surveillance aircraft in the U.S. arsenal, with a homemade rocket. On Monday, the chief of Iran’s navy, Rear Admiral Hossein Khanzadi, warned that his forces could shoot down more U.S. aircraft flying in the Gulf, “and the enemy knows it.”
Over all, sanctions are an imperfect tool, former Treasury specialists told me. They can work—but they may take years, even decades. North Korea has been sanctioned to the hilt, but Trump’s negotiations with Kim Jong Un have yet to reduce his nuclear program, which is far more sophisticated than Iran’s. Iran is still more than a year from the ability to produce a bomb, whereas Pyongyang is estimated to have between twenty and sixty bombs. Sanctions to get Rhodesia’s white minority government to the negotiating table to end the country’s civil war took almost fifteen years. Sanctions are also most effective when the world unites behind punitive economic measures, as the U.N. did in invoking sanctions on Iran four times between 2006 and 2010. Today, the deepest split in U.S. relations with its transatlantic allies is over Iran policy.
As prospects of diplomacy dimmed on Monday, Trump signaled his willingness to deploy military force. “I think a lot of restraint has been shown by us,” Trump told reporters in the Oval Office. “A lot of restraint. And that doesn’t mean we’re going to show it in the future.”
Anatomy of a Moral Panic
On September 18, the British Channel 4 ran a news segment with the headline, ‘Potentially deadly bomb ingredients are ‘frequently bought together’ on Amazon.’
.. The real story in this mess is not the threat that algorithms pose to Amazon shoppers, but the threat that algorithms pose to journalism. By forcing reporters to optimize every story for clicks, not giving them time to check or contextualize their reporting, and requiring them to race to publish follow-on articles on every topic, the clickbait economics of online media encourage carelessness and drama. This is particularly true for technical topics outside the reporter’s area of expertise.
And reporters have no choice but to chase clicks. Because Google and Facebook have a duopoly on online advertising, the only measure of success in publishing is whether a story goes viral on social media. Authors are evaluated by how individual stories perform online, and face constant pressure to make them more arresting. Highly technical pieces are farmed out to junior freelancers working under strict time limits. Corrections, if they happen at all, are inserted quietly through ‘ninja edits’ after the fact.
There is no real penalty for making mistakes, but there is enormous pressure to frame stories in whatever way maximizes page views. Once those stories get picked up by rival news outlets, they become ineradicable. The sheer weight of copycat coverage creates the impression of legitimacy. As the old adage has it, a lie can get halfway around the world while the truth is pulling its boots on.
Earlier this year, when the Guardian published an equally ignorant (and far more harmful) scare piece about a popular secure messenger app, it took a group of security experts six months of cajoling and pressure to shame the site into amending its coverage. And the Guardian is a prestige publication, with an independent public editor. Not every story can get such editorial scrutiny on appeal, or attract the sympathetic attention of Teen Vogue.
The very machine learning systems that Channel 4’s article purports to expose are eroding online journalism’s ability to do its job.
Moral panics like this one are not just harmful to musket owners and model rocket builders. They distract and discredit journalists, making it harder to perform the essential function of serving as a check on the powerful.
The real story of machine learning is not how it promotes home bomb-making, but that it’s being deployed at scale with minimal ethical oversight, in the service of a business model that relies entirely on psychological manipulation and mass surveillance. The capacity to manipulate people at scale is being sold to the highest bidder, and has infected every aspect of civic life, including democratic elections and journalism.
Together with climate change, this algorithmic takeover of the public sphere is the biggest news story of the early 21st century.
Why Germany’s ‘Red State’ Still Backs Angela Merkel
Bavaria could deliver more votes for Merkel than any other
Economic success: export oriented family businesses
Germany has profited from globalization and EU membership
2% unemployment rate: No one is worried about jobs
AfD has tried to hype fear and violence
Bavaria was the birthplace of Hitler’s Nazi party