Protection of grizzly bears has enabled their population to increase, but they are now threatened by global heating effects, so it is a mistake to remove the protection.

It seems to me that there needs to be an intermediate status of partial protection for species that seem to have recovered. They may not need the full protection that enabled the population to recover, but they need some protection so we don't wipe them out.

French thugs complain that criticism of them is unfair, but plenty of people can testify about how thugs attacked protesters.

I criticize any protesters that start avoidable violence against thugs. But don't be too quick to assume that isn't the fault of the thugs. Those "protesters" might be thugs, acting as provocateurs to give the protesters a bad name. I don't know whether this is happening in France, but it has happened in other places.

As the Alberta fires continue to grow in "unseasonably hot" weather, the Guardian's coverage avoids relating this to Alberta's oil exports.

Most Syrian refugee minors can't go to school, and many of them are forced to work in sweatshops instead.

Americans' debt is mostly due to dooH niboR, not to frivolous purchases.