CFCs, banned since decades ago, are being produced again in Asia, and this is slowing the reduction of the ozone hole.

A UK politician is being attacked for reporting that many Syrians support Assad.

Assad is a dictator who has killed thousands of Syrians and driven millions into exile. He is also supported by millions of Syrians — basically, Arabs that are not Sunni. The Arab rebels are Sunni, and tend more or less to oppress non-Sunnis.

This is why there is no side in Syria that deserved support, except Rojava. However, Rojava, which is mainly Kurdish, could not become a government of Syria. Arabs mostly won't accept a government by Kurds nowadays.

The collapse of a conglomerate that implemented privatized public services in the UK was due to corruption which the new privatization system was unable to detect until too late.

This demonstrates that privatization of public services is an invitation for companies to cheat the state, as well as to cheat the public and to cheat their employees.

The US Senate passed the resolution to restore network neutrality.

Now the battle goes to the house of representatives. It may be possible to win there. The cheater could veto it, but might decide not to if faced with so much public support for it.

What Senator Thune said is interesting for its deceptiveness. First he said, "Don't vote for this because it can't win." But even if that were true, it would not be a reason not to vote for net neutrality.

Second he praised the end of network neutrality because it is deregulation. His position, evidently, is that the government should not interfere when giant businesses, in an only slightly competitive market, systematically mistreat people.

That's what government is for, silly senator!

His words show only that he's with those businesses, against the public.

Note that these network neutrality rules may not have been necessary 20 years ago, since there was a lot more competition among ISPs.

The FBI is investigating around 1000 Americans as suspected possible future "lone wolf" terrorists.

How many of them, left to themselves, would commit terrorism? Based on general ideas of human behavior, I would guess around 10. Suppose that investigation might prevent 5 of them. (Stopping a crime which would be committed on the spur of the moment cannot be counted on.)

Are roughly 1000 FBI investigations of people only thinking of committing a crime less harmful to Americans than a handful of attempted crimes?