The Google engineer fired over writing a 10-page viral memo about diversity has filed a complaint with federal labor officials, reports Business Insider. James Damore filed the complaint against Google on August 7th, and the case page on the National Labor Relations Board website states that law firm Paul Hastings will represent Google. Damore's name isn't listed, but it has been confirmed by Business Insider. The only details available so far about the complaint is the allegation's classification, which is stated as "Coercive Statements (Threats, Promises of Benefits, etc.)"

The manifesto caused a media storm over the weekend, after Damore argued that biological differences between men and women are the cause of the gender gap at Google and the broader tech industry. Damore was fired on Monday - the same day he filed the suit - for "perpetuating gender stereotypes" and violating the company's code of conduct.

Damore had previously told other news outlets he planned to file a complaint, with The New York Times reporting that he's claiming Google's upper management was "misrepresenting and shaming" him. "I have a legal right to express my concerns about the terms and conditions of my working environment and to bring up potentially illegal behavior, which is what my document does," Damore told The New York Times. Legal experts say the case has legs, with one lawyer telling Wired that "Damore's lawyer might argue that his memo was protected under California law, because it related to allegedly unequal treatment of employees."

Before we proceed any further on this subject, if you haven't done so already, please stop what you're doing and actually read the leaked internal memo that got a Google employee fired. Here it is. It's only ten pages long, and its points are fairly digestible -- even if the prose reads like it was written by, well, an analytically-minded engineer. It is essential that you consider its contents for yourself prior to consuming the deluge of terribly misleading headlines, reporting, and social media takes that have erupted from this controversy. Those who don't bother to grapple with the original source material are liable to accept, at face value, that the memo's author uncorked an "anti-diversity screed" that "embarrassed his employer" and created a "hostile work environment" by arguing that women "aren't suited for" tech jobs. None of that is fair or accurate. In truth, the now-unemployed writer makes several core points:

(1) Google has a viewpoint diversity and political correctness problem that stifles dissenting views, especially those held by traditionally-minded and politically conservative employees. The company's ideologically-monolithic culture makes open discussion very difficult, if not impossible.

(2) Diversity is a valuable and worthy goal ("I strongly believe in gender and racial diversity"), but forcibly implementing it through anti-merit discriminatory practices can be a harmful business practice. People should be treated as individuals, not as members of a preordained groups.

(3) Perhaps the dearth of women in certain tech jobs is not the result of rampant bias and discrimination, but rather is the product of choices, preferences and inherent abilities that arise from hard-wired differences between the sexes.

A Bangladeshi citizen living in Maryland was indicted for attempting to murder a member of the US military and a uniformed FBI agent on behalf of Islamic State, the Department of Justice said.

Nelash Mohamed Das, 25, was charged by a federal grand jury on Tuesday of "attempting to murder a federal employee; and using and carrying a firearm during and in relation to a crime of violence," in addition to the earlier charges of knowingly supporting Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL), filed in October 2016.

Das attempted to murder "an individual who was a member of the uniformed services and a Special Agent with the FBI," the announcement said, noting that IS had posted information about members of the US military online in hope that supporters would attack them.

James Demore of Google recently wrote a memo detailing his thoughts about Google's various diversity initiatives. Inside the company, and then outside, it went viral. He lost his job, in consequence: for "perpetuating gender stereotypes." The problem is that everything James claimed is solidly backed by well-developed scientific literatures. Thus, the company that is arguably in charge of more of the world's communication than any other has now fired a promising engineer for stating a series of established scientific truths.

That's worth thinking about.

In this full 50 minute interview, James and I discuss his motivations, and the consequences of his actions. We are joined (audio only) by another Google employee who wishes, for obvious reasons, to remain anonymous.

A fund-raiser for James has been established, here.

"Flawed policies" by EU governments amid the refugee crisis have left migrants trapped in "a living hell" in Libya, Oxfam said, adding that those trying to flee are being forced into slavery and face torture.

"Thousands of refugees and migrants face kidnap, slavery, torture and sexual violence in Libya before crossing the Mediterranean Sea to reach Italy - if they are not killed first," said a new report, 'You aren't human anymore,' by UK-based humanitarian group Oxfam.

Libya has become a major launchpad for asylum seekers who opt for a highly dangerous route through the Mediterranean while attempting to reach Italy.

James Damore is fortunate that we don't burn heretics at the stake, because he has blasphemed.

The fired Google engineer might as well have been writing a script designed to prove that one of the world's largest companies embodies every left-wing stereotype imaginable -- blinkered, intolerant and authoritarian. Damore's memo alleged that one problem with Google's corporate culture is that people feel "shamed into silence" on important questions, and, bam, they fired him. Hollywood might have rejected such a script, because who would believe that Google could do something so confirming of suspicions people harbor about the left? These are supposed to be the smartest people, right?

Damore told the truth. This is not to endorse every word of his memo, but he was completely right that the subject of innate differences between men and women has become taboo. He pointed out, completely fairly, that whereas some on the right reject science on questions of climate change and evolution, some (many?) on the left resist science on issues of biological differences between men and women. Among left-leaning intellectuals, and that includes the types who run Google, it is not only assumed that all observed differences in traits, interests and choices between the sexes are the result of oppression (or are "socially constructed"); it is heresy to question this view.

Ask Matt Labash, who longs for a time when Kooler heads prevailed.

Dear Matt,

I had this thought that America was more civil when everyone smoked. You learned from an early age that people will do something you don't like but there wasn't much you could do other than walk away. Then smokers became not just people doing something others don't like, but bad people whose second hand smoke (allegedly) kills. Nowadays, anyone who disagrees with you isn't just different or misguided, they are a bad person who must be ostracized/destroyed. Thoughts?

Charles Zambori, Dallas, TX

At the risk of sounding like some heedless libertine, I've always loved smokers, even though I've never been one. Not habitually. I sometimes tried to smoke cigars during cocktail hours back in the nineties, when twentysomethings felt duty-bound to pretend they liked swing-dancing and pork pie hats and Squirrel Nut Zippers shows while smoking Cohibas as thick as baby legs. ('Twas an unfortunate chapter in our history, which served as a sneak preview of what our culture would become: a wan remix of a more vital, authentic time from decades past. The redux version feels more like kids playing dress-up.)

An Army court will decide this week whether to review and perhaps reduce the life sentence of a soldier who massacred Afghan civilians - and in the process it will judge a controversial malaria drug given to troops that is known to cause hallucinations, anxiety and paranoia.

Attorneys for Staff Sgt. Robert Bales, the serviceman convicted in 2013 of killing 16 Afghans in the worst U.S. military massacre since Vietnam, are expected to raise the soldier's use of mefloquine, also known by the brand name Lariam, before or during his deployment.

The prescription was not considered during the investigation and his legal team will use this as the U.S. Army Court of Criminal Appeals weighs whether Bales is entitled to a new sentencing hearing on two procedural issues - whether the prosecution failed to disclose evidence related to his case and that the court failed to investigate a military judge's disclosure of protected information.

Mefloquine is a malaria treatment medication that was commonly used by the U.S. military as a prophylactic in malaria endemic regions, taken once a week by troops. It has been controversial since its commercial introduction in 1989, as it is known to cause neurological and vestibular problems in a small percentage of users.

Yesterday, after reading the news, my daughter asked me a question. "Mom, is it true that there are biological reasons why there are fewer women in tech and leadership?"

That question, whether it's been asked outright, whispered quietly, or simply lingered in the back of someone's mind, has weighed heavily on me throughout my career in technology. Though I've been lucky to work at a company where I've received a lot of support - from leaders like Larry Page, Sergey Brin, Eric Schmidt, and Jonathan Rosenberg to mentors like Bill Campbell - my experience in the tech industry has shown me just how pervasive that question is.

Time and again, I've faced the slights that come with that question. I've had my abilities and commitment to my job questioned. I've been left out of key industry events and social gatherings. I've had meetings with external leaders where they primarily addressed the more junior male colleagues. I've had my comments frequently interrupted and my ideas ignored until they were rephrased by men. No matter how often this all happened, it still hurt.

A human rights organization issued a report Tuesday, in which it accused Israeli authorities of discrimination against thousands of Palestinians from East Jerusalem who had been deprived of a residency status in the last five decades.

According to the Human Rights Watch report, the residency of over 14,500 Palestinians from East Jerusalem was revoked between 1967 and the end of 2016. The Israeli authorities reportedly explained revocations by people's failure to prove that Jerusalem was "a center of life." In recent years, the withdrawal of residency status has been used as a punitive measure for Palestinians who were involved in attacks on Israelis.

"Israel claims to treat Jerusalem as a unified city, but the reality is effectively one set of rules for Jews and another for Palestinians... Entrenched discrimination against Palestinians in Jerusalem, including residency policies that imperil their legal status, feeds the alienation of the city's residents," Sarah Leah Whitson, the Middle East director at Human Rights Watch, was quoted as saying in the report.

According to the statistics provided in the report, fewer than 6,000 of about 15,000 Jerusalem's Palestinians, who applied for citizenship since 2003, have been granted their request.

The Human Rights Watch has also accused Israeli authorities of budget discrimination against Palestinians, which results in bad quality of infrastructure and inadequate health, recreation and education facilities.

"According to the Israeli rights organization Ir Amim, only 10.1 percent of the 2013 municipal budget was allocated for projects and spending in Palestinian neighborhoods in East Jerusalem, though Palestinians are 37 percent of the population," the report said.

Jerusalem is inhabited by 300,000 Palestinians who have a residency status but are not Israeli citizens. According to a legislation adopted in 1995, the status may be revoked if claimants cannot prove consecutive residence in Jerusalem for seven years.

Israel declared Jerusalem its capital in 1949, but the United Nations recognizes East Jerusalem, including the Old City, to be part of Palestine. In 1967, Israel recaptured East Jerusalem from the neighboring Arab nation of Jordan.