OK… It is in the very first sentence of the article.

No it isn’t. The first sentence is “New York police have defended their actions after a bystander was shot in the head as two officers tackled a fare-evader armed with a knife in a busy subway station”. Nowhere there does it specify that the police were the ones that did the shooting.

Edit: The article seems to have been updated since my initial comment, the opening sentence now reads “Protesters in New York have demanded accountability after police fired at a suspected fare-evader in a busy subway station, hitting a bystander in the head”. However, the headline is also different, and is about protests, so I wonder if the whole article has been replaced.

You can get shot by the NYPD any day, but how many opportunities are you going to get for a free knife.

What an oddly flattering photo of Trump.

To be a bit of a pendant

To be a bit of a pedant, it’s pedant.

I feel like you’re overestimating your ability to subtly shit yourself.

I too am a fan of the film Sesevenen.

I’ll grant you, Boebert wasn’t the first person to make the claim. But I doubt she’s got an awareness of historical allegations from an association that most people who don’t follow boxing won’t have heard of. I suspect she’s either jumping on a bandwagon of other people making the claim, or making a claim based on her ‘feeling’ that Khelif doesn’t look traditionally feminine.

But it didn’t. She was disqualified from the competition, it wasn’t clearly stated why. And as previously mentioned, there are huge questions of trustworthiness regarding that organisation. I also have my doubts that Lauren Boebert has any awareness of previous allegations, but suspect she has just jumped on an assumption as many online seem to have done.

The ‘accusation’ is that Imane Khelif is a ‘biological male’, which is absolutely some bullshit she just made up. Maybe there’s an argument to be had around testosterone levels in female athletes (although again, the allegation that Khelif has higher than average levels has not actually been corroborated) but I personally don’t think so, and I don’t think this is an example that necessitates that conversation.

I would disagree. As another poster pointed out, there are serious questions about the integrity of the IBA, not least the fact that they aren’t recognised by the IOC. To suggest that the IOC wouldn’t have clear eligibility criteria feels at best misguided.

If everyone doing it gets away with it, then is it actually illegal?