Tues: Huge Event Today is Not in NYC. They are Dying of QOP

A Mosque Too Far

Egypt has opened a record-breaking mosque in its new administrative capital city - but has been widely criticised for the costs involved.

The government has been building a new city in the desert, to try to move people away from heavily-congested Cairo.

But the unveiling of the new centre and mosque was criticised on social media.

It comes at a time when Egypt has been fighting soaring prices, with inflation running at just over 30% in March.

The New Administrative Capital of Egypt has been purpose-built 45km (28 miles) east of Cairo.

Its new Islamic Cultural Centre also includes the Grand Mosque, which covers more than 19,000 sq m and is capable of hosting 107,000 worshippers.

The mosque cost 800 million Egyptian pounds ($25.9m; £20.7m) to build and is the second-biggest mosque in the Africa.

State media celebrated the mosque for breaking three world records - including the highest pulpit in the world, standing at 16.6m (54.5ft) and handcrafted from the finest types of wood.

The second and third were for the main chandelier of the mosque, which is the heaviest in the world at 24,300kg (53,572lb), and the largest, with a diameter of 22m (72.2ft) and comprising four levels.

The opening event was attended by President Abdul Fattah al-Sisi, with state media describing it as showing Egypt's "grandiosity".

But on social media there was severe criticism.

Egypt is facing a deepening economic crisis. Its currency has lost half of its value against the dollar over the past year, causing inflation to reach its highest level in five years.

The country has also been selling state assets to Gulf investors to help plug a widening budget deficit.

Many people went to Twitter and Facebook to criticise lavish spending on religious places at this critical time, as millions of Egyptians struggle every day to put food on their table.

One Facebook user posted: "Overspending, insanity and waste of money. The tallest pulpit, the heaviest chandelier and people can't find anything to eat. Sell this chandelier and pulpit and the whole mosque if this will help solve the problem."

Poor Previous Guy.  He LOVES, LOVES, LOVES NDAs.

A National Labor Relations Board ruling renders employer-based non-disclosure agreements nearly useless.

The board held that broad nondisparagement and confidentiality provisions violate Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act, which guarantees employees “the right to self-organization, to form, join, or assist labor organizations, to bargain collectively through representatives of their own choosing, and to engage in other concerted activities for the purpose of collective bargaining or other mutual aid or protection … [or] to refrain from any or all such activities.” To exercise those rights, employees must be able to share information about their workplace.

The NLRB decision said workers’ rights “are not limited to discussions with coworkers, as they do not depend on the existence of an employment relationship between the employee and the employer, and the Board has repeatedly affirmed that such rights extend to former employees.” The ability to talk with ex-employees protects “employee efforts to improve terms and conditions of employment or otherwise improve their lot as employees through channels outside the immediate employee-employer relationship.”

All of this spells bad news for employers accustomed to buying silence from former workers. Indeed, the current administration has been generous preserving ex-employees’ freedom of speech and employment. The NLRB case follows a proposal by the Federal Trade Commission to bar noncompete agreements, which often accompany nondisparagement restrictions. Together, these two moves would drastically curtail an employer’s ability to control ex-employees, to the delight of union organizers, the media and business competitors.

The QOP Hates People Who Don't Agree With Them

Republicans in Tennessee took steps to expel three Democrats from the GOP-controlled state House for speaking at a gun control protest following the shooting at a Nashville school that killed six people, including three children.

The saga began last week when the Democrats — state Reps. Gloria Johnson, Justin Jones and Justin Pearson — led protestors in a string of chants on the chamber floor without being recognized to speak. Hundreds gathered at the Capitol to call for gun restrictions after the shooting at a private Christian school in Nashville.

The action violated chamber rules, and Republicans filed a series of resolutions Monday to expel the three Democrats for “disorderly behavior” that “knowingly and intentionally” brought “disorder and dishonor to the House of Representatives.” The GOP holds a supermajority in the Tennessee House, with 75 of 99 seats.

Final votes are scheduled for Thursday, when the three lawmakers will be able to defend their actions. They’ve already been stripped of their committee assignments.

Could the Tennessee QOP Get Worse?  Of Course They Could

A Tennessee politician attempted to school some students protesting gun violence at the Tennessee Capitol on Monday, but he missed the mark by a long shot.

The students were reacting to a recent shooting at a private Christian school in Nashville that led to the deaths of three children and three adults.

State Rep. William Lamberth (R) agreed to talk with the protesters, but had a weird way to trying to win a debate with students worried about getting shot in class.

Lamberth’s approach was to ask the students which firearm they’d prefer to be shot with.

“If there is a firearm out there that you’re comfortable being shot with, please show me which one it is,” he asked rhetorically.

Lamberth probably thought the question he asked the protesters was deep and Socratic, but it came across as heartless ― especially when accompanied by a shrug.

Maybe the QOP Should Just Cut to the Chase and Stop Teaching Kids to Read.

While negotiating the state budget last week, Missouri House Republicans voted to defund all of the state’s public libraries. As the proposal moves to the Missouri Senate, public librarians are worried about how the draconian move would hurt the communities they serve.

The attempt to completely defund public libraries actually began with Senate Bill 775, legislation that was intended to provide more rights to sexual assault survivors.

Republican state Sen. Rick Brattin hijacked the bill and included an amendment that banned educators from “providing sexually explicit material” to students. Like many similar proposals, the wording was broad and unclear. The bill became law, and just a few months later, conservative parents began using it to target books with LGBTQ themes, smearing books about gender or sexual identity as “pornography.”

The new law led to 300 books being removed from schools across the state between last August and November, according to PEN America.

In February, the ACLU of Missouri, the Missouri Association of School Librarians and the Missouri Library Association filed a lawsuit against the state, arguing that the ban violated the First Amendment.

Republicans decided to retaliate against MLA, a nonprofit organization of professional librarians, for joining the lawsuit. Their proposal: cut the $4.5 million allocated to public libraries each year.

“I don’t think we should subsidize that effort,” Republican House Budget Chairman Cody Smith said. “We are going to take out the funding and that is why.”

But neither professional organizations named as plaintiffs in the lawsuit receive state aid, which goes directly to the libraries, and the ACLU of Missouri is paying for the lawsuit.

“They’re choosing to punish librarians for exercising their right to question their government,” Katie Hill Earnhart, the executive director of the Cape Girardeau Public Library, told HuffPost.

The UK Is Actually Trying to Make Air Travel Less Painful

London City Airport has, on Tuesday, become the first major U.K. airport to drop its 100 milliliter liquid rule, meaning passengers departing from the airport may now carry liquids of up to 2 liters in their hand luggage.

Passengers will also no longer have to remove items such as laptops, electronics, make-up and other items from their luggage for security screening at the airport. Officials hope this will improve the passenger experience and streamline security procedures which will, in turn, allow the airport to process an estimated 30% more passengers per hour.

The scrapping of the 100 ml rule -- which has been in place since 2006 -- comes following the replacement of older security scanners with new generation high-tech C3 scanners that will enable security to thoroughly screen travelers' bags from all angles.

“The good news for anyone planning a holiday or a business trip is that we will be the first mainstream U.K. airport to offer a fully CT security experience,” said Robert Sinclair, London City Airport Chief. “The new lanes will not only cut hassle, but also cut queuing times which I know passengers will love.”

Over the next two years, major U.K. airports are to gradually follow suit following an overhaul of screening equipment with a U.K. government deadline of June 2024.

Can they Give Us Some More Leg Room? Maybe They Can Require Passengers Shower Within 48 Hours of a Flight.

Go Directly to Joil.  Do Not Pass Go.  Collect Your Secret Service Pay.

Secret Service agents would accompany former President Donald Trump if he goes to jail, a retired US judge told Sky News.

Joseph Cosgrove, formerly of the Court of Common Pleas of the 11th Judicial District in Pennsylvania and the Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court, told Sky News on Tuesday that the agents would follow him to jail for his protection.

"No matter where he goes, he will have secret service protection, which creates just this bizarre image," Cosgrove said.

"Let's assume the worst for Mr Trump: if he were sentenced to some sort of confinement, he would be confined with his secret service agents," he added.

RJudge Cosgrove told Sky News that Trump's agents were legally bound to "protect him at all cost," with former presidents entitled to Secret Service protection for life under federal law.

By All Means. Let's Assume the Worst for Previous Guy.