"Going only off of that vid, I'm inclined to take the managers side on this one."
I agree that there's probably more to this. I hate videos without context. That said....

"There's an air of entitlement about the way they handled the whole thing. "

Sorry, but "entitlement" is exactly the right attitude when you're paying for a service. You don't have to be a dick about it, but it's not unreasonable to expect to get what you pay for.

"That manager doesn't come across like a guy being an asshole for the sake of it "

Really? "My dad owns this place" guy doesn't come across as an asshole? Sorry, but he seems like a spoilt little shit to me.

"If so, he's a braver man than I and should be commended for putting his self respect ahead of a mere job!"

Again, it depends on what actually happened to set this off, but from the video, this isn't a "mere job" for him. He's not some guy working there for a paycheck until he gets something better, he plans on owning the place, and as such, he needs to pull his head out of his arse and learn how to deal with customers.

"Either way the two filming should probably try to find a little perspective."

I didn't think they were particularly rude or abusive.

Going only off of that vid, I'm inclined to take the managers side on this one.

The couple filming set off my arsehole detector straight away. Far more than he did anyway, though I have nothing to go on other than my experience with such people.

I'm willing to bet the couple instigated it at any rate. There's an air of entitlement about the way they handled the whole thing.

Though as I say, I'm basing this largely on intuition rather than facts. That manager doesn't come across like a guy being an asshole for the sake of it & I've certainly thought about telling customers to fuck off in just such a way in previous jobs. (though I'm a coward and never actually did)

If so, he's a braver man than I and should be commended for putting his self respect ahead of a mere job!

If not then fuck knows, maybe he's an asshole too.

Either way the two filming should probably try to find a little perspective.

I'd hold off for a bit.

The Sheriff doesn't say that he's posted all the dashcam videos to YT, he said it was all included along with the police report that was given out the to the media. That would be the media that was in the room there with him. The media people in the room where NOBODY called out the Sheriff to say they'd watched all the dashcam video and found him to be lying. If the Sheriff is lying about the existence of the dashcam footage, 100% of the media present never bother to look at the footage to check for themselves.

I'm inclined to believe at least one of the media folks did at least that much of their job. If they did NOT, I'm not entirely inclined to leap in with both feet to believing their side fo the story just yet either.

Is it so hard to accept the possibility the police aren't monsters out there trying to murder civilians every chance they get?

It's only entrapment if government agents induce someone to commit a crime they wouldn't otherwise be inclined to commit. In most jurisdictions courts have ruled that simply leaving something available, such as a bait car, is not entrapment.

On top of all this, according to several sources, including Edward Snowden, the FBI already have the ability to reset the number of attempts to unlock the phone. Here's an ACLU post about it:
https://www.aclu.org/blog/free-future/one-fbis-major-claims-iphone-case-fraudulent

According to the article, if there are too many attempts to unlock, the data on the phone doesn't get deleted, just the key to unlock that data. It's possible (and not all that difficult for an organisation like the FBI) to take a copy of the key ahead of time, and restore that key if they cause it to be wiped.

The money and manpower that have already gone into this case would easily cover the effort to go through this process. For those of you so inclined, this raises the question (and obvious answer) of why would the FBI go to so much bother to force apple to do it. You don't get a locked mass-murderer's phone and public support like this too often.

I've been watching for a good counter to that claim since I read it about a week ago, and haven't seen one. Anyone out there able to enlighten me?

The bit about pop culture portraying New Yorkers as criminals, with the "stigma" leading some to intentionally lose their accents, that was pretty lame for an otherwise intelligent video. It gets presented as a researched fact when it sounds more like a ridiculous theory.

From my experience, current generations weaned on those movies shown in the clip would be more inclined to adopt that accent as just another affectation, tattoo, piercing, meme, avatar, email signature, sampling, bumper sticker.

And the bit about the accent losing favor after WWII, "as Americans were focused on their own identity, rather than maintaining ties to England". Sounds like something a college freshman would write at the last minute to fill out a 1000 word essay.

It almost sounds like he is suggesting to keep an open mind and learn about other cultures, religions & mythology in order to understand those perspectives; and overall to be humble to the mystery: that we do not know.

In my opinion some of his opinions were a little contradictory - he doesn't believe in any sort of god or gods, but it seems that a wiser statement would be that he doesn't know, which would correspond with the "I don't believe in atheists" theme.

Furthermore, I honestly don't think that those who (in Hedges' words), "do not explore the religious impulse" are inhuman. Even if someone never explores it in their lifetime. In my opinion - the late bloomers who have disconnected themselves from all inclination of organized religion or spirituality, to find it on their own later in life might have a few more advantages than those that did not disconnect themselves from it at some point.

My personal preference is that I do believe in god because I want to believe in god. Whether it's a metaphor, completely abstract energy, a point in spacetime, a massive intelligent energy field that existed long before the big-bang, a life-force found only on Earth or the Milky Way or a fucking super mega alien technological consciousness program experiment or even a microscopic white dude flying on a microscopic magic carpet or all of the above and none of the above. I just believe even though my version of whatever creation/god is, is completely unidentifiable, it's everything and it's nothing.

The Jews were not fleeing anything but fear in the 30s...or came too late and missed the cutoff.

So, the Jews that fled in the 30s weren't legitimately fleeing anything but fear, and the Jews that fled after the 30s weren't legitimate because they waited until too late. Gotcha.

Perhaps you came closer to summarizing your position earlier:
Perhaps if those Jews were still in Europe fighting against the Nazis, they wouldn't have made it out of Germany.

Historically, there is a zero percent chance that more Jewish fighters in Europe could've kept the Nazi's from making it out of Germany. Worse, the ambiguity of your sentence also suggests that maybe your suggesting that if the Jews had stayed in Europe fighting, it was them that wouldn't have made it out of Germany, which would be quite correct.

You are making it very difficult to interpret your view in any kind of positive light. Despite the fact that one of the greatest genocides in history was about to hit them and their children, you insist that Jews fleeing in 30s were fleeing "nothing but fear". More over, you seem adamant in defending the notion that as the holocaust survivors landed in Palestine and were being looked after by existing Jewish Palestinians, it is they and they alone that were the aggressors in Palestine. It is well established history that BOTH Arab and Jewish Palestinians treated each other equally poorly through the 30s and 40s. More over, the Jewish Palestinians remained the minority. I'm inclined to lend a bit of understanding to an aggressive response from holocaust survivors yet again facing repression and saying NO! Doubly so when upon accepting a 2 state solution, all the surrounding nations of the middle east jointly declared war upon them with the declared intent of driving the Jews into the sea. It was only 2 years prior that the whole of Europe was controlled by Nazis trying to do the same thing. What can be realistically expected of the Jewish refugees in Palestine? Fighting kept them alive, in Palestine and I find it hard to fathom an alternate history were laying down arms would've seen any Jews still alive in the area,

I don't know about giving it a "fail" on gravity, but a "cheat" on the storm. If you are willing to give it a "cheat" on the storm, then the reality of filming on Earth should give the gravity a "cheat" as well. It would have been much much harder to replicate the gravity on Mars itself and maintain any sort of sense of budget etc. I'd be more inclined to fail it for the storm than the gravity, the storm is a cheat to setup the story, the gravity is a cheat due to the reality of filming on Earth.

I appreciate that his intentions were cute, but (if I had a daughter) I'd be inclined to assume malicious intent and go ballistic.

Thanks goodness I don't have a daughter. I'd be one of those helicopter gunship parents.

They're awesome and all, but I'd have been inclined to add something to muffle the hiss of releasing air.

And that is genuinely how the "war on terror" will be won.

People with flat screen TVs and lay-z-boys are much less inclined to blow themselves up....

http://yanisvaroufakis.eu/2015/07/14/on-the-euro-summits-statement-on-greece-first-thoughts/

An interview with Varoufakis about the actions of Schäuble will be published on Thursday. With every additional interview, he seems to be less inclined to pull any punches, so it ought to be interesting.

This kind of attitude is depressing. It's none of your business what someone does in their spare time when no one else is affected by it. There are functioning alcoholics turning up for work pissed, flying planes, driving buses, teaching children. But no, let's go after the guy who sits in his bedroom playing music with a joint. Let's prevent him from having a life, even if he is self medicating a mental illness. It serves him right - if he's got an illness, he shouldn't be using naturally occurring medicine like our ancestors have for thousands upon thousands of years, no! He should be paying hundreds of pounds to a big pharma company for a pill that they invented a few years ago.

The premise behind drugs testing people is based on many things i disagree with:
1) the spectacular failure of the war of drugs - not only has drug use increased in the timeframe, but it has ruined probably millions of lives, needlessly turning ordinary, hard working people into criminals for no good reason other than "we like this plant, but we don't like this plant, and now neither may you"
2) the origin of the war on drugs - which iirc from a well sourced and produced video on here recently was instigated by a vindictive racist who wanted to go criminalise things that were seen as "black people" pastimes
3) the bias of the war on drugs - where drugs associated with the poor and underprivileged are relentlessly pursued to the detriment of functioning happy families across the world, but drugs associated with rich white folk such as those boardroom jockeys who snort coke in the office bathroom, nah, give them an easy time
4) the american prison business - which demands a steady supply of low cost, low maintenance, low rights workers who have no choice in the matter
5) the spreading of disinformation through formal education/popular media, and lack of actual knowledge or experience of drugs - which has led to a generation of people who now firmly believe that the moment you inhale a particle of THC (or "inject 1 marijuana" to the uninitiated), your brain turns into a fried egg, and you immediately begin stealing, cheating, and peddling dangerous items to children

Some of the brightest and best humans were influenced and inspired by drugs. If i wrote a list of people that i had the greatest respect for and who i considered to have made a positive influence on the world, half of them would almost certainly be drugs users; and i mean scientists, writers and artists. Your philosophy is a detriment to society, but thankfully as the decades pass, there are less and less with that philosophy. I loathe being blunt, but there is nothing worse than someone who feels the need to dictate to others what they should and shouldn't do on the basis of what they personally do or don't approve of.

We might get about 90 years on this planet with a bit of luck - why the hell do the minority spend so much time trying to dictate to the majority what they do with that time? And why do the majority let them? What sort of control fetish is it that inclines people to want to do that?

This guy's life has been fucking ruined by your adopted philosophy towards drugs, and you offer to help him as long as he bends to your will? How magnanimous of you to stoop to gutter level to help a mere drug-addled cretin... I think he'd tell you to stick your job, he's overqualified to work under you.

I'm not thinking in binary. There's gray area.

There's no debate about the fact that virtually everyone is somewhat racist. This isn't a debate about that.

I'm saying making any joke that is related to race isn't racist every single time, just as avoiding saying anything that could be construed as racist doesn't mean you're absolved of being a racist.

A joke that is actually racist is expressing an idea or feeling of one race's superiority over another directly or indirectly through humor.

Ironically making racial statements that I absolutely don't believe is NOT racist because I'm not expressing racial superiority. I'm pointing out the idiocy of racism and poking fun at racists.

About the random black person overhearing my joking, yeah, they'd be offended. Thank you for making my point. They'd be offended precisely because they heard those words out of context.

If you saw a grown man say this to a little girl sternly:

"...go cry me a river..."

You might be inclined to think he was acting like a jerk to her. But what if you had heard....

"It's a figure of speech. If you ever for example hear someone say 'go cry me a river', they don't actually mean one person's tears can be that much water."

It's the SAME THING. That man did nothing wrong, but you heard him say 'go cry me a river' to a little girl without context, it may look bad, when it's not.

Just because someone may get offended by hearing something out of context, it is not automatically something wrong with what that person said.

Even the dreaded N-word... Are you telling me that it was wrong and racist for Mark Twain to use it in The Adventures of Huckleberry Fin?

The one thing I would agree with you is that you also have to be mindful of context before saying the joke. Those racial jokes I make? I'm not going to say those in situations where there's a high likelihood that those statements could be overheard and misinterpreted. If I wanted to tell those to a black person, I'd make REALLY sure they knew I didn't actually believe the racial statement.

And you know what? Usually, it turns out fine. I've played that Louis CK thing for a black friend of mine, but I laid down the context first that it's Patrice O'Neal, etc. And they laughed hysterically at it.

Richard Pryor is considered by most comics as being a pioneer in using comedy to shed light and provide insights into racial tensions, etc., and actually is credited by many people far beyond just comedians to have helped further the cause of fighting against racism.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5048430

His use of the N-word wasn't racist. The use of the word was communicating that he was not Bill Cosby, not that there was anything wrong with Cosby's comedy, but it was to signal that he was talking more about reality, including the rough edges especially about racial topics, and there wasn't anything wrong with that either.

The kill somebody thing. You ever seen someone say something like, "My roommate AGAIN left all the lights on! I'm gonna kill him!"? My point there is you shouldn't call the cops because you think he's homicidal.