u8y
Hello! I’m Mark Olsen . Welcome to another edition of your regular field guide to a world of Only Good Movies. I recently had the pleasure of moderating this year’s Envelope Directors Roundtable with the knockout lineup of Edward Berger (“Conclave”), Brady Corbet (“The Brutalist”), Coralie Fargeat (“The Substance”), James Mangold (“A Complete Unknown”), Denis Villeneuve (“Dune: Part Two”) and Malcolm Washington (“The Piano Lesson”). The full video will broadcast on Spectrum and be available on YouTube later today. From our edited print transcript , the group began talking about what they can compromise on and what they cannot. Villeneuve and Fargeat said that, within the confines of their budget and logistics, they have an attitude of no compromise, as often as possible. As Fargeat said, “Everybody sometimes wants to try and change it and make a difference. It’s my job to keep it the way I had invented in my head.” Conversely, Berger noted that the vaping cardinal in “Conclave,” which has now become a meme and a fan favorite, wasn’t in the script, but was a response to the actor on set in his costume vaping between takes. Mangold, director of “A Complete Unknown,” said, “We all make plans before we start. But then the secret, at least in my experience — the work I’m most proud of is where I adapt. It’s not about compromise, but it’s that the world, the actor, in that moment, the weather, the location, the schedule, something within the very real confines that Denis was talking about comes up against your vision. ... The reality is how we adapt to the s— that happens, good and bad, which isn’t about compromise, but it’s about being alive.” A holiday harvest of new releases This holiday season has brought us a terrific bounty of films to round out our end-of-year moviegoing, with “Babygirl,” “The Fire Inside,” “A Complete Unknown” and “Nosferatu” all landing in theaters this week. (And that’s not even mentioning the see-it-to-believe-it “Better Man,” a biopic about British pop star Robbie Williams, portrayed by a CGI chimp.) Seeing all four of these movies in one day might be a stretch, but it would be doable to see at least three, or maybe break them up into two days of double features. I think I personally would suggest the order they land below for the best mix of genres and moods. If anyone thinks there is a better approach to this lineup, let me know. ‘Babygirl’ Written and directed by Halina Reijn, “Babygirl” stars Nicole Kidman as a Manhattan CEO who finds herself drawn into a submissive relationship with Samuel (Harris Dickinson), a strangely dominating new intern at her company. The film becomes an exploration of power dynamics and personal identity cloaked as an erotic thriller with a dash of corporate intrigue. In Amy Nicholson’s review , she noted, “Eight years into the #MeToo movement, our reaction to the plot could fall anywhere on a spectrum between ‘Yaaaas queen’ to ‘How hypocritical!’ ... Both know their affair is happening in a cultural minefield where the trip wires are economic, professional and generational. And nowadays, the intern recognizes his boss has the most to lose.” Amy added, “The smartest choice the film makes is that Samuel isn’t some “Fifty Shades of Grey” BDSM mastermind. He learns to control as she learns to submit. Their shared adventure plays out like two people learning to juggle while staring into each other’s eyes. Sometimes, it’s clumsy. Their first tryst starts off like a bad porno with Samuel and Romy improvising a script that feels phony even to them. They have to break the scene and start again, with Samuel trying to making Romy eat candy from his hand. She pauses. He’s frustrated. ‘Can you just try it?’ he asks. The whole movie hinges on that awkward moment. Right there, Reijn decides that the strongest foundation for all of our species’ sex angst is simply consent. Forget right or wrong. ‘Babygirl’s’ key question is yes or no.” Emily Zemler spoke to Dickinson , who explained how the sense of discovery in the movie is something he felt while making it as well. “I was fascinated by the writing and the character because I didn’t really know what I would do with it,” Dickinson said. “It scared me a little bit, in the sense of ‘I don’t know how exactly best to do this in a way that’s going to elevate the rest of the story.’ But I guess that’s why it eventually led me to do it.” Certified sex educator Laura Ramadei wrote about the film’s depiction of kink , noting, “‘Babygirl’ appears to understand a common reality behind the kink: Many accomplished, strong women (and men) want to turn their brains off and fully submit to the right Dom. It also highlights a common limitation — that for skillful domination, emotional intelligence is equally, if not more, important than physical talent. The film also understands the power of unlocking such a dynamic, without being gratuitous about the visual details.” ‘The Fire Inside’ Directed by Rachel Morrison from a screenplay by Barry Jenkins, “The Fire Inside” is based on the true story of Claressa Shields, who won back-to-back Olympic gold medals in women’s boxing. But the story isn’t a typical tale of sports triumph, instead paying attention to what happens — and doesn’t happen — to Shields (Ryan Destiny) and her coach (Brian Tyree Henry) after she wins her first gold. As Robert Abele put it in his review , “‘The Fire Inside’ is no pity party about a system’s inequality, and the movie’s refusal to paint anyone in Claressa’s life as simply an impediment or an ally is another sign of the movie’s welcome (and very Jenkins-esque) emotional intelligence. And while the boxing is kinetically directed, Morrison grasps that the movie’s fiercest stands are taken outside the ring, when Claressa — faced with tough choices about her future — asserts herself to the people who need to hear it. That spin on an ever-roiling motivation to win, even when the bout is over, is what sets ‘The Fire Inside’ apart from so many others of its ilk.” For The Envelope podcast , I spoke to Destiny about the role and what it means to bring Shields’ story to a broader audience. “The first time that I watched the movie, I was looking for different things that I kind of wanted to do better,” Destiny recalls. “I was just nitpicking myself. The second time it really hit me how incredible her story is and how much this means to people and to her and how much it’s needed. Her story is so inspiring and incredible, and I literally cried because it really touched me in a way that made me see it from a different standpoint and see the bigger picture of what it’s really about.” ‘A Complete Unknown’ Directed by James Mangold from a screenplay by Mangold and Jay Cocks (adapting Elijah Wald’s book, “Dylan Goes Electric!”) “A Complete Unknown” tells the story of a young Bob Dylan (Timothée Chalamet) as he arrives in New York City in 1961, continuing through to his legendary performance at the Newport Folk Festival in 1965. But it also very much tells the story of the people around Dylan, including his girlfriend Sylvie (Elle Fanning), singer and paramour Joan Baez (Monica Barbaro) and folk singer Pete Seeger (Edward Norton). Reviewing the film, Joshua Rothkopf wrote , “Superfans aren’t necessarily going to love this. It’s a movie made with affection, but also with the wisdom that visionaries can sometimes be jerks. Then again, their hero won’t get a fairer shake than in ‘A Complete Unknown,’ which presents the tunes vividly (classic after classic, all of them sung live by the cast) while keeping things neatly chronological among the four or so years that any biopic interested in Dylan’s artistic arrival would have to cover, from his penniless 1961 arrival in New York through his 1965 rebellion at the Newport Folk Festival. ... [Mangold and Cocks] have landed on a counterintuitive but brilliant organizing principle, one that no great-man biopic has, to my mind, ever tried. In order for this dream to happen, that is, in order for Dylan to become Dylan , a lot of other people’s dreams had to die.” Esther Zuckerman spoke to Fanning , whose character of Sylvie Russo is based on Suze Rotolo , the character’s name reportedly changed at the behest of Dylan himself. The singer’s involvement had an impact on Fanning’s performance, she said. “I was always aware that Bob Dylan himself wanted her name changed and that was the one character that he was very precious about,” Fanning said. “Knowing that, I just felt kind of this subconscious weight to want to do justice to what they had.” ‘Nosferatu’ Written and directed by Robert Eggers, “Nosferatu” is the filmmaker’s adaptation of the 1922 silent horror classic originally mounted by director F.W. Murnau and since remade by Werner Herzog and, to an extent, E. Elias Merhige with 2000’s “Shadow of the Vampire.” In this telling, young Thomas Hutter (Nicholas Hoult) is dispatched to a remote castle to finalize the paperwork on a property purchase by the mysterious Count Orlok (Bill Skarsgård). Hutter is unaware of the supernatural bond the Count has with his wife, Ellen (Lily-Rose Depp), who has been suffering from an unknown condition. For The Times, Katie Walsh wrote , “Eggers’ version isn’t a ‘take’ on ‘Nosferatu’ so much as it is an overly faithful retelling, so indebted to its inspiration that it’s utterly hamstrung by its own reverence. If ‘Shadow of the Vampire’ was a playful spin, Eggers’ ‘Nosferatu’ is an utterly straight-faced and interminably dull retread of the 1922 original. It’s the exact same movie, just with more explicit violence and sex. And while Eggers loves to pay tribute to styles and forms of cinema history in his work, the sexual politics of his remake feel at least 100 years old. ... The film is a feat of maximalist and moody production design and cinematography, but the tedious and overwrought script renders every character two-dimensional, despite the effortful acting and teary pronunciations.” Kenneth Turan spoke to Eggers , who talked about the intensely detailed research and production work that he has become notorious for in films such as “The Witch ” and “The Northman.” As Eggers said, “I personally enjoy the act of research and while I get tired of beating the drum for historical accuracy, I do believe an accumulation of details grounds and transports an audience, makes it easier for them to believe the metaphysical stuff in the film.” Points of interest Kathryn Bigelow’s ‘Strange Days’ To launch its new series “Cyberpunk: Envisioning Possible Futures Through Cinema” and exhibition of the same name, the Academy Museum will be screening Kathryn Bigelow’s 1995 “Strange Days” on 35mm. Seeing this movie, arguably Bigelow’s best, big and loud in the academy’s huge David Geffen theater should be a dazzling experience. With a climax set around a massive New Year’s Eve party in downtown Los Angeles, the film is set on the cusp of the year 2000, then five years away. (The film’s screenplay was written by James Cameron and “A Complete Unknown’s” co-writer Jay Cocks.) Ralph Feinnes plays Lenny Nero, a former LAPD officer who traffics in underground videos that presage virtual reality. When a tape of the murder of a popular rapper threatens to implicate the LAPD and lands Lenny in danger, he turns to an old friend, Mace (Angela Bassett), for help. Playing Lenny’s former girlfriend, Juliette Lewis performs a couple of PJ Harvey songs onscreen in the film and is almost worth the price of admission alone. Reviewing the film at the time of its release, Kenneth Turan wrote , “Through it all, ‘Strange Days’ manages to be consistently loud, violent and sleazy, which is less of an accomplishment than it may sound.”
The Samagi Jana Balawegaya (SJB) has announced the establishment of a special unit to investigate what it alleges are arbitrary transfers of public officials at the Government and provincial council levels. In a statement issued by the party, General Secretary Ranjith Madduma Bandara called on the Government and provincial council authorities to immediately suspend all such transfers. He also invited the public to provide information regarding these transfers, either anonymously or voluntarily, to aid the investigation. The statement highlighted concerns over a systematic program of transferring public officials in key sectors without just cause. This, it claimed, has disrupted the work of Local Government Assistant Commissioners, Local Government Secretaries, and Cooperative Assistant Development Commissioners, among others. The SJB criticised the Government for what it described as a betrayal of its promise to uphold the independence of the public service. “The Government, which came to power pledging to ensure public service independence, is now engaging in unprecedented levels of politicisation,” the statement said. It further alleged that the transfers are part of a strategy to influence the upcoming local government elections and ongoing cooperative society elections, with a focus on gaining political advantage. “These politically motivated transfers not only disrupt services in various fields but also cause significant personal hardships to the affected officials,” the statement added. The SJB emphasised its commitment to addressing the issue and ensuring that the public service remains independent and functional, free from undue political influence.
The Ken-Betwa rivers linking project, estimated to cost upwards of Rs 44,000 crores (around $5 billion), will be the first to be undertaken under India’s national river interlinking policy under the National River Linking Project (NRLP). It is intended to address water scarcity and irrigation needs, and generate hydropower in the drought-prone Bundelkhand region that spans Uttar Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh. Getting such a project off the ground is an enormous achievement, and this may have been facilitated by the fact that the states giving and receiving water are ruled by the national ruling party BJP. Considering the animosities in water sharing even among states ruled by allies, the initiative is to be proud of, though the politics surrounding issues big and small today did bring out some more of the prevailing animosities as the foundation stone for the project was laid. The river linking project has been a national dream of decades and the first person to put it down in writing was an Englishman, Sir Arthur Cotton, irrigation engineer of the East India Company, in 1858. Since then, river linking has had many votaries, including the main architect of the Constitution B.R. Ambedkar and former Prime Minister Vajpayee, generous praise for whom came from Prime Minister Narendra Modi along with several jabs at the Opposition party, the Congress. Principally, river linking can address the problem of flooding and droughts that occur in different parts of the country, and which may be solved to an extent by interlinking and sharing of water that could otherwise go out to sea. The perennial Indo-Gangetic rivers can feed the peninsular rivers which are mostly seasonal and the ambitious project can see equitable sharing of a resource that will get only more precious with population growth. The flip side, however, is as long as the list of benefits because big dams can impact ecosystems, need clearing and flooding of forests and invite deleterious effects on biodiversity and wildlife, besides displacement of a vast number of people that can lead to social and economic distress. The Congress points to a direct effect of the Ken-Betwa project to the Panna tiger reserve, which the Prime Minister rebuts with the assurance that the well-being of tigers will be kept in mind while routing the canals. On a more national level, inter-state as well as international disputes may arise, particularly with the Himalayan rivers, as has been the experience with China that has built mega dams to prove its engineering skills and yet controls water flow to such an extent that countries downstream are starved of water, with its 11 dams across the Mekong River. What an achievement it would be if India were to connect 14 Himalayan and 16 peninsular rivers with 30 canals and 3,000 reservoirs, never mind if the estimated cost is in the range of $200 billion now and expected to rise exponentially with time. Water distribution is, however, not new to India as irrigation canals have served their purpose well for long. Also, today, water of the Godavari does reach the Krishna and Chennai even gets its drinking water from the Krishna in a canal. The point is the consequences, intended and otherwise, are not yet fully projected or understood and the challenge of national river linking with upstream dams will remain, more so in an open and democratic society like India’s. Given the pace of decision making on such projects, the challenges may lie in the far future. But what the first project in the Ken-Betwa linking represents is that there is a way to attempt such equitable water sharing in the country, provided it comes without totally damaging river systems and inviting environmental mayhem.
The JVP-led NPP government has failed to carry out its promise to import rice due to some flaws in the process of preparing tenders. It has asked for some more time to bring in the promised rice from India. Private traders have already imported 72,000 MT of rice. The state sector stands exposed for its inefficiency. Is it that the new government is not competent enough to carry out even a simple task like importing rice, which successive governments resorted to, as an ad hoc measure, to address the issue of escalating prices of rice, instead of taming the Millers’ Mafia? Why the incumbent administration has botched the process of tendering for rice imports defies comprehension. Has anyone scuttled the government’s import plan in support of the private sector importers, as alleged by the Opposition, and some consumer rights protection groups, which have called for a probe? It has been pointed out in Parliament that the government is taxing imported rice at the rate of Rs. 65 a kilo and boosting its revenue instead of making a serious effort to make rice available at affordable prices vis-à-vis market manipulations by the Millers’ Mafia. The Opposition has alleged that some powerful millers are also among the rice importers, and they are getting the best of both worlds. Close on the heels of the JVP-led NPP’s victory in the last presidential election, the owner of Araliya Rice, Dudley Sirisena, who is one of the wealthy millers blamed for manipulating rice/paddy markets and exploiting farmers and consumers alike, promised at a media briefing to ensure that there would be enough rice in the market at the then maximum retail prices stipulated by the Consumer Affairs Authority. The medium/small scale millers panicked and released all their rice stocks to the market, but the millers’ cartel did not do so and is now making the most of the artificially created rice scarcity to earn unconscionable profits. The government, in its wisdom, increased the maximum retail prices of rice by Rs. 10 and played into the hands of the rice hoarders. As a result, the price of nadu rice has increased from Rs. 230 much to the glee of the powerful millers! The price of this particular variety of rice, which is popular among a majority of Sri Lankans, was about Rs. 180 before the 21 September presidential election. President Anura Kumara Dissanayake and other JVP/NPP stalwarts have gone on record as saying that the country has produced enough paddy, and the rice shortage is due to hoarding, but the government has baulked at taking on the hoarders and is trying band-aid remedies. The government has extended the deadline for rice imports until 10 Jan. 2025. The large-scale millers will ensure that more rice is imported before the commencement of the next harvesting period so that they can release some of their stocks, flood the rice market, bring down the prices of rice and exploit farmers by purchasing paddy at cheaper rates. Thereafter, they will hoard their paddy, causing the prices of rice to rise. They also leverage their influence derived from their financial prowess to delay bank loans for small/medium-scale millers so that the latter cannot begin purchasing paddy when harvesting commences. Previous governments did not care to put an end to the powerful millers’ sordid operations, and the people expected the incumbent administration to be different due to its rhetoric and numerous promises. That is why they voted overwhelmingly for it in last month’s general election, enabling it to secure a two-thirds majority in Parliament. But the millers’ cartel with political connections and huge slush funds, continues to call the shots. Have the people been taken for a ride again?
How the stock market defied expectations again this year, by the numbersNFL world reacts with excitement, surprise, questions after Bill Belichick is hired to coach UNC
Benazir’s assassination: unresolved grief, unanswered questions Benazir Bhutto was assassinated in gun-and-suicide bomb attack at Liaquat Bagh, Rawalpindi on Dec 27, 2007 Former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto at an election rally in Rawalpindi shortly before she was killed, December 27, 2007. — Reuters ISLAMABAD: The question “who assassinated Benazir Bhutto?” remains for the last 17 years. After the tragic elimination of Benazir Bhutto, the search for justice remains elusive as the court has acquitted five individuals previously accused of involvement in the case. The men — Eitzaz Shah, Sher Zaman, Abdul Rasheed, Rafaqat and Hasnain — were linked to the assassination as alleged members of Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), formed under Baitullah Mehsud’s command just 12 days before Bhutto’s killing on December 27, 2007. googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('div-gpt-ad-1700472799616-0'); }); The law-enforcement agencies had arrested five suspects, claiming to have “concrete evidence” of their involvement in the high-profile assassination. However, on December 15, a court exonerated them, citing insufficient evidence and raising further questions about the investigation’s integrity and the judicial process surrounding the case. Benazir Bhutto, Pakistan’s first female prime minister and an iconic political figure, was assassinated in a gun-and-suicide bomb attack at Liaquat Bagh, Rawalpindi, shortly after addressing a large election rally. Her death shocked the nation and the world, sparking widespread grief and demands for accountability. The failure to identify and prosecute the real perpetrators, conspirators and planners behind Bhutto’s assassination has fueled ongoing criticism of Pakistan’s intelligence and investigative agencies. Despite early accusations linking the TTP to the attack and subsequent investigations, no definitive conclusion has been reached. The acquittal of these five individuals highlights lingering gaps in the case and underscores the challenges of bringing those responsible to justice. For many, it is a painful reminder of the unanswered questions surrounding Benazir Bhutto’s assassination and the justice that remains unserved. In all, 17 years have passed since Pakistan’s prime political leader and two-time Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto was assassinated in a tragic suicide gun-and-suicide bomb attack outside Liaquat Bagh, Rawalpindi, on December 27, 2007. The incident, which unfolded shortly after she addressed an election rally, plunged the nation into despair and sparked widespread outrage. The aftermath of Benazir’s assassination was marked by controversy with critical evidence reportedly destroyed, raising questions about the investigation’s integrity. The crime scene was hastily washed, wiping away crucial forensic evidence, while a significant shake-up in local bureaucracy fueled public suspicions. A press conference by the officials of ministry of interior at the time labelled the incident a terrorist attack, presenting intercepted calls and sketches of alleged perpetrators linked to Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP). However, these claims failed to convince many, including Benazir’s Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP), which demanded a transparent and independent probe. The PPP, under the leadership of President Asif Ali Zardari, rejected an investigation by Scotland Yard initiated by then military ruler Gen Pervez Musharraf, accusing him of complicity in the assassination. Repeated calls for an independent United Nations’ inquiry led to a UN Fact-Finding Mission in 2009, which conducted extensive interviews and investigations. Yet, its report was criticised for being vague and inconclusive, further fueling suspicions. Adding to the intrigue, Gen Musharraf later admitted intelligence agencies had credible threats against Benazir’s life. He revealed then ISI Chief Gen Nadeem Taj had met Benazir on December 26, 2007, warning her against addressing the Liaquat Bagh rally due to imminent threats. Despite the warnings, Benazir proceeded with her plans, demonstrating her unwavering commitment to public service — a decision that ultimately cost her life. Over the years, numerous conspiracy theories came to surface, implicating various actors, but no definitive evidence has come out to pinpoint the culprits. The PPP, which held power from 2008 to 2013, struggled to make substantial progress in uncovering the truth. As Pakistan marks the 17th anniversary of Benazir Bhutto’s assassination, her death remains an enduring mystery. Despite her party’s demands for justice and the public’s outcry for answers, the circumstances surrounding her violent demise continue to haunt the nation, leaving behind a legacy of unresolved grief and unanswered questions.AP Business SummaryBrief at 2:23 p.m. EST
Global Tensions Surge: Political and Military Shifts in FocusIs he a hero? A killer? Both? About the same time the #FreeLuigi memes featuring the mustachioed plumber from “Super Mario Brothers” mushroomed online, commenters shared memes showing Tony Soprano pronouncing , the man charged with , a hero. There were posts lionizing Mangione’s physique and appearance, the ones speculating about who could play him on “Saturday Night Live,” and the ones denouncing and even threatening people at a Pennsylvania McDonald’s for spotting him and calling police. It was all too much for Pennsylvania's governor, a rising Democrat who was nearly the vice presidential nominee this year. Josh Shapiro — dealing with a case somewhere else that happened to land in his lap — decried what he saw as growing support for “vigilante justice.” The curious case of Brian Thompson and Luigi Mangione captivated and polarized a media-saturated nation. It also offers a glimpse into how, in a connected world, so many different aspects of modern American life can be surreally linked — from public violence to politics, from health care to . It summons a question, too: How can so many people consider someone a hero when the rules that govern American society — the laws — are treating him as the complete opposite? Luigi Mangione, a suspect in the fatal shooting of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson, on Monday at the police station in Altoona, Pa. Writings found in Mangione's possession hinted at a vague hatred of corporate greed and an expression of anger toward “parasitic” health insurance companies. “deny,” “defend” and “depose,” reflecting words used by insurance industry critics, written on them. A number of online posts combine an apparent disdain for health insurers — with no mention of the loss of life. “He took action against private health insurance corporations is what he did. he was a brave italian martyr. in this house, luigi mangione is a hero, end of story!” one anonymous person said in a post on X that has nearly 2 million views. On Monday, Shapiro took issue with comments like those. It was an extraordinary moment that he tumbled into simply because Mangione was apprehended in Pennsylvania. Shapiro's comments — pointed, impassioned and, inevitably, political — yanked the conversation unfolding on so many people's phone screens into real life. “We do not kill people in cold blood to resolve policy differences or express a viewpoint,” the governor said. “In a civil society, we are all less safe when ideologues engage in vigilante justice.” But to hear some of his fellow citizens tell it, that's not the case at all. Like Bonnie and Clyde, John Dillinger, D.B. Cooper and other notorious names from the American past, Mangione is being cast as someone to admire. Luigi Nicholas Mangione is escorted into Blair County Courthouse on Tuesday in Hollidaysburg, Pa. Regina Bateson, an assistant political science professor at the University of Colorado at Boulder, has studied vigilantism, the term to which Shapiro alluded. She doesn’t see this case as a good fit for the word, she says, because the victim wasn’t linked to any specific crime or offense. As she sees it, it's more akin to domestic terrorism. But Bateson views the threats , and ticking up — plus the against President-elect Donald Trump this past summer — as possible signs that personal grievances or political agendas could erupt. “Americans are voicing more support for — or at least understanding of — political violence,” she said. Shapiro praised the police and the people of Blair County, who abided by a 9/11-era dictum of seeing something and saying something. The commenters have Mangione wrong, the governor said: “Hear me on this: He is no hero. The real hero in this story is the person who called 911 at McDonald’s this morning." A person demonstrates Monday near the McDonald's restaurant in Altoona, Pennsylvania, where police earlier in the day arrested Luigi Nicholas Mangione, 26, in the Dec. 4 killing of UnitedHealthcare's CEO in Manhattan. Even shy of supporting violence, there are many instances of people who vent over how health insurers deny claims. Tim Anderson's wife, Mary, dealt with UnitedHealthcare coverage denials before she died from Lou Gehrig’s disease in 2022. “The business model for insurance is don’t pay,” Anderson, 67, of Centerville, Ohio, . The discourse around the killing and Mangione is more than just memes. Conversations about the interconnectedness of various parts of American life are unfolding online as well. One Reddit user said he was banned for three days for supporting Kyle Rittenhouse, after testifying he acted in self-defense when he fatally shot two people in 2020 during protests. “Do you think people are getting banned for supporting Luigi?” the poster wondered. The comments cover a lot of ground. They include people saying the UnitedHealthcare slaying isn't a “right or left issue" and wondering what it would take to get knocked off the platform. “You probably just have to cross the line over into promoting violence,” one commenter wrote. “Not just laughing about how you don’t care about this guy.” Luigi Mangione is taken into the Blair County Courthouse on Tuesday in Hollidaysburg, Pa. Memes and online posts in support of the 26-year-old man, who's charged with killing UnitedHealthcare's CEO, have mushroomed online. Get the latest in local public safety news with this weekly email.
OpenAI's legal battle with Elon Musk reveals internal turmoil over avoiding AI 'dictatorship'Cardinals' Kyler Murray faces Patriots for 1st time since his ACL injury against them 2 years ago
- Previous: g888-1
- Next: 5.88 usd to php
