1601: Unkool & The Gang

After the war ended, the founders joined the Momentum organizing community — the same community where Sunrise Movement, Cosecha, By the People, and many more organize for a brighter future — and spent a year developing a long-term strategy. The demand for American Jewish institutions to end their support for the occupation and the need to transform the political status quo has only grown more urgent and clear since then.

Link

By Anne Applebaum

This summer I spent several days in Israel talking with people who were afraid for their country’s future. They were not, at that moment, focused on terrorism, Gaza, or Hamas. They feared something different: the emergence of an undemocratic Israel, a de facto autocracy. In January, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his justice minister had announced a package of judicial “reforms” that, taken together, would have given their coalition government the power to alter Israeli legal institutions to their own political benefit. Their motives were mixed. Netanyahu, who is on trial for corruption, was eager to stay out of jail. Some of his coalition partners wanted courts to stop hampering their plans to create new Israeli settlements on the West Bank, others to maintain military exemptions for Orthodox religious communities. All of them were interested in doing whatever it would take to stay in power, without the hindrance of an independent judiciary.

In response, Israelis created a mass movement capable of organizing long marches and enormous weekly protests, every Saturday night, in cities and towns across the country. Unlike similar protest movements in other countries, this one did not peter out. Thanks to the financial and logistical support of the Israeli tech industry, the most dynamic economic sector in the country, as well as to organized teams of people coming from academia and the army reserves, the protests kept going for many months and successfully blocked some of the proposed legal changes. I was trying to understand why these Israeli protests had succeeded, and so I met tech-industry executives, army reservists, students, and one famous particle physicist, all of whom had participated in organizing and sustaining the demonstrations.

After the surprise Hamas attack on southern Israel earlier this month, I listened again to the tapes of those conversations. In almost every one of them, there was a warning note that I didn’t pay enough attention to at the time. When I asked people why they had sacrificed their time to join a protest movement, they told me it was because they feared Israel could become not just undemocratic but unrecognizable, unwelcoming to them and their families. But they also talked about a deeper fear: that Israel could cease to exist at all. The deep, angry divides in Israeli politics—divides that are religious and cultural, but that were also deliberately created by Netanyahu and his extremist allies for their political and personal benefit—weren’t just a problem for some liberal or secular Israelis. The people I met believed the polarization of Israel was an existential risk for everybody.

Link

Adam,

I’ve been an avid NA listener since my son “hit me in the mouth” a couple of years ago (I’ve also donated treasure twice totaling $549.23). I heard you mention that AIPAC (The American Israel Public Affairs Committee) “will primary out any candidate who doesn’t support Israel”) on last Thursday’s show and, based on personal experience with AIPAC, the opposite is the truth which actually caused me to cease my support of them. I’ll try to be brief in my explanation:

AIPAC is not a PAC (pollical action committee), so as an organization they cannot make direct contributions to any politician or political organization.

However, AIPAC members can, as individuals, donate as they please. At higher levels of AIPAC contributions, doors open to “backroom” members coordinating efforts to raise funds for political donations.

I was one of these AIPAC supporters who was asked to donate as an individual to specific campaigns. Being able to combine my campaign dollars with others would yield a very impressive donation sum and this was very appealing since I believed that was a logical next step to getting the “best” politicians elected.

But here is where AIPAC and I parted ways: they valued existing relationships with currently serving congressmen (regardless of that congressman’s stance on Israel) a higher priority than supporting a potentially better candidate with regards to Israel. In other words, the proverbial bird in the hand…

In other words, instead of supporting a rival who would be a much better elected representative I was being asked to donate to dreadful hacks that needed to have their political careers ended. I said, “no thanks”, and ended my support of AIPAC. Thought you should know the real story.

And here is the key point. “It is a mirror for the failings of individuals, social structures and state systems. Tell me what you accuse the Jews of, I’ll tell you what you are guilty of.”

I can’t tell you how many times in my life I have seen this. And never more than in the past fortnight.

Look at the protests against Israel that have erupted across Europe since the Hamas massacres two weeks ago today. There were no mass rallies in solidarity with the Jews who had been gunned down at a music festival, shot in the head at a bus stop, or decapitated in front of their parents.

Because one thing the West now knows with utter certainty is that it contains large numbers of people, many of whom we have imported as immigrants, who are not only instinctively anti-Israel, but openly anti-Semitic.

After the events of the last fortnight, it’s not a secret any longer. It’s not a secret in Sydney where crowds gathered outside the Opera House to chant “Gas the Jews”. It’s not a secret in Berlin where a synagogue has been fire-bombed and stars of David painted on the doors of Jewish houses.

Bidens use of the word ((Team))

Is from Obama

Isis Being called the VJ team

Hi Adam. I hope you’re well! I wanted to share a story that happened this week. When the Israel conflict began, I tuned in to Ben Shapiro because I figured he would have boots on the ground reports. I’m not a regular listener of his anymore, but this warranted some attention. In the middle of one of his reports, he began talking about President Trump. Shapiro’s never been a Trump supporter, but admits he will vote for him if he’s a nominee in the next election. He began to criticize Trump for Trump’s alleged castigation of Netanyahu when the attacks began. Shapiro was furious about how Trump could use the events to boost his own ego/agenda etc. etc.. I just listened and didn’t think much of it UNTIL I heard John’s deconstruction of Brooks and Dunn on episode 1599. Shapiro had used the same decontextualized clip of Trump that Brooks and Kpart had used! I was so flabbergasted that the next day on the way to school, I made my husband and children listen to the whole segment (my kids listen anyway, but the husband doesn’t always). At the end of the deconstruction, my husband turned to me and said, “I think I’m ready to start listening to your No Agenda guys now.”

Lord High Imperator Curry,

Greetings from Fema Region Deep South New Zealand.

I need to take issue with the tone of your No Agenda story on the Westminster Declaration. You were downright snide and your trademark MTV sneer was used to ill effect on a group of people merely highlighting the censorship regimes being installed in all Western democracies.

Why wouldn't you be supportive of this?

I expected immediate, fierce pushback from John C Dvorak — but nothing. He joined you!!! The Snidely brothers. Brothers in Harms. UnKool and the Gang.

Love your work.

Please send cash.

Kiwi Paul.

Hey Adam,

Sorry for the double send but I had more info to give about your last show. This new Westminster twitter thing is an obvious play on the Westminster Catechism or the Westminster Confession of Faith. The Westminster Confession of Faith was a large treatise on the Christian Faith during the Protestant Reformation. It was meant to be a all encompassing statement of belief in opposition to the Catholic Church. I hope this info was of use.

P.S. I find it kind of interesting that a bunch of self acclaimed atheists are using a strategy from Church history. Also, I am not a pastor or anything like that but I am a History major and I am taking Seminary classes as well. I always double check info before I use it.

Thanks for all that you do,

Luke Ferguson

Article 19

Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

Link

he report, by Toronto-based cybersecurity firm Feroot Security, analyzed hundreds of healthcare websites and found that more than 86% are collecting private data and transferring it to advertisers, marketers and Big Tech social media companies without user consent and in violation of privacy laws.

As patients or consumers browse their favorite or trusted medical websites or sign in to hospital portals to access their private health records, invisible bits of HTML code — called “tracking pixels” — embedded on the websites harvest private information, such as whether patients have cancer, erectile dysfunction or are behind on their hospital bill.

The information is repackaged and sold for a variety of uses, including to companies that target individual users with internet ads, according to the report.

Link

Hello Adam.

Regarding the loneliness theme-see attached from Multnomah County, which is Portland, Oregon. A class on the impact of loneliness.

This class info came to me via the Nation Emergency Training (NET) group in Pdx.

I joined NET years ago in an attempt to figure out what was unfolding in Pdx as it became evident to me that Pdx was a testing ground, Beta city for testing mind control. (This was confirmed by a reliable source in 2020).

I’m a healthcare professional who use to work for a major medical system. In ~2017 I witnessed the rollout of a whole new level of questioning pts regarding loneliness (and safety, family details, pt personal and financial concerns).

I also have a background in medical informatics and know that all data collected at the healthcare level equates to money for the hospital system. Our information that the healthcare system collects is worth more than what we can even imagine.

My theory is that the loneliness theme has to do with moving people into a “co-housing” (over used term in Pdx)/nice prison system AND taking conservatorship over people, their assets. Loneliness rides that edge of being bumped into the mental heath arena, which makes it easier to take conservatorship of another person.

In the last two years I’ve met three people who had family members get “hijacked” recently via conservatorship, even though the family member had a valid trust, a POA and a fully functioning spouse. There are many variables to being able to take conservatorship over another person, and it appears it depends on the state.

I hope this info and the below is a puzzle piece to the nefarious activities unfolding so we can refine our ability to be agile verses fragile.

Adam—I’m sitting here at Reagan Washington National Airport, and I just got notice that the Supreme Court has taken action on Missouri v. Biden. It’s an unusual move in an unusual case.

Long story short, Justice Alito referred the government’s motion for a stay to the full court. This is not unheard of, but also not the norm. To make things even more unusual, the Supreme Court treated the motion for stay as a cert petition. This cuts out an entire step from the Supreme Court review process.

So the bottom line is this: The Supreme Court has accepted the case for review. It will determine whether the District Court, and by extension, the Fifth Circuit, got it right in condemning the Fed’s laundering of censorship.

The media has no choice but to report on this now, and hopefully you are well equipped to get a jump on things.

For your reading pleasure, I have attached the Supreme Court’s order, which includes a dissent from Justices Alito, Thomas, and Gorsuch (who would have denied the stay altogether).

It’s very short at five pages, so take a look and see the points that the dissent makes. In a nutshell, Alito, Thomas, and Gorsuch are worried what will happen in the next election.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 22 Oct 2023 16:19

Sidney Powell pleads guilty in Fulton County

Sidney Powell pleads guilty in Fulton County 01:56 Sidney Powell , an attorney who was a key figure in former President Donald Trump's alleged efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 election, pleaded guilty to six misdemeanor counts after reaching an agreement with prosecutors in Fulton County, Georgia.

Powell appeared in the Superior Court of Fulton County in Atlanta on Thursday, where a prosecutor laid out the terms of the plea deal. In exchange for her pleading guilty, Powell was sentenced to six years on probation and must pay a $6,000 fine and $2,700 in restitution to the state of Georgia. Judge Scott McAfee, who is overseeing the case, signed off on the agreement at the hearing.

Powell is also required to testify "truthfully against any and all co-defendants in this matter," McAfee said.

A Nov. 19, 2020, photo shows Sidney Powell speaking during a press conference at the Republican National Committee headquarters in Washington, D.C. MANDEL NGAN/AFP via Getty Images Powell was among the conservative lawyers who pushed baseless claims of widespread fraud in the 2020 election, endorsing outlandish theories of foreign interference and ballot manipulation to try to reverse the results. She participated in a contentious meeting at the White House in December 2020, during which White House lawyers confronted her and lawyer Rudy Giuliani about their election claims.

She and 18 others, including Trump, were charged by a grand jury in Fulton County in August. Powell initially faced seven charges and pleaded not guilty. Prosecutors agreed to dismiss the charges in the original indictment as part of the plea deal.

The guilty plea comes shortly before Powell and Kenneth Chesebro, another co-defendant, were set to go on trial. Chesebro has pleaded not guilty, and jury selection for his trial will begin as scheduled on Friday. An attorney for Chesebro declined to comment on Powell's plea.

Powell's guilty pleaCourt documents filed in Fulton County Superior Court showed Powell pleaded guilty to six counts of conspiracy to commit intentional interference with performance of election duties. All six counts were related to a scheme in which Powell coordinated with a data company, SullivanStrickler, to access election data from Coffee County, Georgia.

"The purpose of the conspiracy was to use Misty Hampton's position to unlawfully access secure elections machines in Coffee County, Georgia," Assistant District Attorney Daysha Young explained at the hearing, referring to the elections director in the county who has also been charged. The objective was to "willfully tamper with electronic ballot markers and tabulating machines" and remove voting data from elections systems. Powell entered into a contract with SullivanStrickler to travel to Coffee County to obtain the data.

Seated beside her attorney Thursday, Powell said she understood the terms of the plea agreement and admitted to the facts laid out by the prosecutor.

Judge Scott McAfee presides as Sidney Powell pleads guilty to six misdemeanors on Thursday, Oct. 19, 2023, in Atlanta. Superior Court of Fulton County via AP Powell is also barred from communicating with "co-defendants, witnesses and media until this case has been completely closed against all defendants." She is required to hand over documents to prosecutors and wrote an apology letter to Georgia citizens as part of the deal.

When asked if anyone has forced, threatened or promised her anything in exchange for her guilty plea, Powell responded, "other than what is recited in the documents, no."

Powell is the second defendant to plead guilty in the sprawling case. Scott Hall, a bail bondsman, became the first when he changed pleaded guilty to five misdemeanor counts at the end of September. He was sentenced to five years probation, a $5,000 fine and 200 hours of community service.

Trump and the rest of the co-defendants have pleaded not guilty and denied all wrongdoing.

What the plea could mean for the special counsel's casePowell's guilty plea in Georgia could have implications for her involvement in special counsel Jack Smith's federal case against Trump in Washington, D.C. , according to Scott Fredericksen, a former federal prosecutor and independent counsel. He said Powell's plea may be "the single most important development" in either of the probes dealing with the aftermath of the 2020 election.

Powell was identified by CBS News as likely being the unnamed and unindicted individual known as "Co-conspirator 3" in Trump's federal indictment, in which he was accused of engaging in alleged schemes to overturn Joe Biden's victory in 2020.

"If she is cooperating with Willis, she should be available to be interviewed by Smith and testify," Fredericksen said. "She may insist on some kind of protection or immunity from Smith in Smith's case, but her ability to testify directly to what Trump may have said about the plans to overthrow the election could make her a critical witness."

Trump has pleaded not guilty in that case as well, and says the four ongoing prosecutions against him are politically motivated.

Melissa Quinn, Faris Tanyos and Graham Kates contributed to this report.

Trump Investigations More More Thanks for reading CBS NEWS.

Create your free account or log in for more features.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 22 Oct 2023 13:33

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is about the essay by Peggy McIntosh. For other uses, see

White privilege.

"White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack" is a 1989 essay written by American feminist scholar and anti-racist activist Peggy McIntosh.[1][2][3] It covers 50 examples, or hidden benefits,[4] from her perspective, of the privilege white people experience in everyday life.[5]

Themes [ edit ] McIntosh outlines "invisible systems" at work,[1] as well as the main theme of an "invisible package of unearned assets", examined in the form of a metaphorical knapsack. The essay features 50 of her insights into experiential white privilege, listed numerically. These have been described as "small benefits that white Americans enjoy every day".[6]

Reception [ edit ] The Atlantic has written that the intention behind the essay was to inspire "self-reflection, enhancing their capacity for empathy and compassion".[7] It has been described by Vice as one of the most authoritative texts on the subject of white privilege,[8] and The Harvard Gazette have called it a "groundbreaking article" and the most important of McIntosh's academic career.[9] It has been cited as responsible for the mainstreaming of discussion of white privilege,[10] becoming a "staple of discussions about bias" in society.[11] In 2018, artwork and studies inspired by the essay had become popular in social justice sections of social media, such as Tumblr.[12]

Influence on education [ edit ] The essay has become one of the key teaching resources in the study of white privilege in North America.[13][8] In 2016, some New York City public schools assigned the reading to high school students.[4] In 2017, a high school in Caledon, Ontario discussed the essay as part of an 11th Grade anthropology class.[13] Conor Friedersdorf has recommended the essay's inclusion in college curriculums.[14] The essay has inspired "Privilege Walks", workshops, and similar activities to help students concretely identify their privileges,[15] though McIntosh has disavowed the walks as "too simple for complex experiences relating to power and privilege" and thus as "counterproductive".[16]

References [ edit ] ^ a b "Beto O'Rourke and the proliferation of white privilege accusations". BBC. March 27, 2019. ^ Spencer, Kyle (February 20, 2015). "At New York Private Schools, Challenging White Privilege From the Inside". New York Times. ^ Pearson, Luke; Verass, Sophie (January 7, 2019). "10 things you should know about white privilege". sbs.com.au. ^ a b Edelman, Susan (July 23, 2016). "City's public schools join fight against 'white power' ". New York Post. ^ Love, Catherine (March 13, 2016). "Deborah Pearson: 'It's about using my privilege to amplify other voices' ". The Guardian. ^ Desmond-Harris, Jen(C)e (July 24, 2015). "White people have a race '-- but everyone flips out when we talk about it". Vox Media. ^ Friedersdorf, Conor (September 17, 2019). "The Corruption of 'Privilege' ". The Atlantic. ^ a b "White People Talk About Their White Privilege". Vice Media. September 17, 2019. ^ Koch, Katie (December 19, 2012). "Using privilege helpfully". The Harvard Gazette. ^ Leonard, David (September 2, 2016). "The NFL is 67% black. Diversity hasn't helped white players and coaches understand racism". Vox Media. ^ "Educator: Time to unpack your invisible knapsack of privileges". The Seattle Times. April 13, 2017. ^ Sarappo, Emma (December 13, 2018). "How Tumblr Taught Social Justice to a Generation of Teenagers". Pacific Standard. ^ a b Bascaramurty, Dakshana (October 16, 2017). "How Legos helped build a classroom lesson on white privilege". The Globe and Mail. ^ "What Does 'Cultural Appropriation' Actually Mean?". The Atlantic. April 3, 2017. ^ Milstein, Tema; Pileggi, Mairi; Morgan, Eric (2017). Environmental Communication Pedagogy and Practice. Routledge. p. 212. ISBN 978-1138673090. This exercise, inspired by Peggy McIntosh's (1989) "White privilege: Unpacking the invisible knapsack," helps learners locate themselves within a spectrum of environmental privilege, centering the roles of socio-economic class, race, gender, sexuality, colonialism, and global disparities in environmental experience. ^ Parenti, Christian (November 18, 2021). "The First Privilege Walk". Nonsite.com . Retrieved February 4, 2022 . External links [ edit ] Peggy McIntosh (1989). "White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack". The National SEED Project - Wellesley Centers for Women. Wellesley College . Retrieved 19 February 2022 .

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 22 Oct 2023 12:37

Removing Paywall

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 22 Oct 2023 12:36

Momentum is dedicated to building popular social movements to transform common sense and win on the most pressing justice issues of our time. Your donation will support more trainings, more movement experiments, and more victories. Thank you for joining us.

Contribution rulesThis contribution is made from my own funds or the funds of an authorizing corporation or other entity, and the funds are not being provided by any other person or entity.ActBlue Charities is a registered charitable organization formed to democratize charitable giving. All donations made through our website are contributions to the organization(s) to which you've selected to contribute. A copy of our latest financial report may be obtained by emailing info@actblue.com or calling (617) 517-7600. Alternatively, our report detailing our programs, a financial summary, and the percentage of contributions dedicated to our charitable purpose, along with a copy of our license, may be obtained from the following state agencies: FLORIDA (registration #CH46938) '' A COPY OF THE OFFICIAL REGISTRATION AND FINANCIAL INFORMATION MAY BE OBTAINED FROM THE DIVISION OF CONSUMER SERVICES BY CALLING TOLL-FREE, 1-800-435-7352 (800-HELP-FLA) WITHIN THE STATE OR VISITING www.FloridaConsumerHelp.com; GEORGIA (registration #CH012361) '' contact ActBlue Charities; MARYLAND (registration #29971) '' For the cost of copies and postage, documents and information filed under the Maryland charitable organizations laws can be obtained from the Office of the Secretary of State, State House, Annapolis, MD 21401; MISSISSIPPI (registration #100024326) '' Secretary of State's Office 1-888-236-6167; NEW JERSEY (registration #CH3867000) '' INFORMATION FILED WITH THE ATTORNEY GENERAL CONCERNING THIS CHARITABLE SOLICITATION AND THE PERCENTAGE OF CONTRIBUTIONS RECEIVED BY THE CHARITY DURING THE LAST REPORTING PERIOD THAT WERE DEDICATED TO THE CHARITABLE PURPOSE MAY BE OBTAINED FROM THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY BY CALLING (973) 504-6215 AND IS AVAILABLE ON THE INTERNET AT http://www.state.nj.us/lps/ca/charfrm.htm; NEW YORK (registration #45-25-27) '' New York Attorney General's Charities Registry at www.charitiesnys.com or, the Office of the Attorney General, Charities Bureau, 28 Liberty Street, New York, NY 10005, or (212) 416-8686; NORTH CAROLINA (registration #SL009830) '' FINANCIAL INFORMATION ABOUT THIS ORGANIZATION AND A COPY OF ITS LICENSE ARE AVAILABLE FROM THE STATE SOLICITATION LICENSING BRANCH AT 1-888-830-4989.; PENNSYLVANIA (registration #104758) '' Department of State, 800-732-0999; VIRGINIA '' Virginia State Office of Consumer Affairs, Department of Agricultural and Consumer Services, PO Box 1163, Richmond, VA 23218; WASHINGTON (registration #37969) '' Secretary of State, Charities Division, Olympia, WA 98504-0422, 800-332-4483; WEST VIRGINIA (registration #9826) '' Secretary of State, State Capitol, Charleston, WV 25305; WISCONSIN (registration #16203-800) '' contact ActBlue Charities. Registration with and reporting to these agencies does not imply endorsement, approval, or recommendation of ActBlue Charities.DONATE BY CHECK: If you would like to make a planned gift or donate by check, please contact amanda@momentumcommunity.org.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 22 Oct 2023 11:30

The prime minister brought about a situation in which all the options are bad.

Ron Haviv / VII / ReduxOctober 21, 2023, 6:43 PM ET

This summer I spent several days in Israel talking with people who were afraid for their country's future. They were not, at that moment, focused on terrorism, Gaza, or Hamas. They feared something different: the emergence of an undemocratic Israel, a de facto autocracy. In January, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his justice minister had announced a package of judicial ''reforms'' that, taken together, would have given their coalition government the power to alter Israeli legal institutions to their own political benefit. Their motives were mixed. Netanyahu, who is on trial for corruption, was eager to stay out of jail. Some of his coalition partners wanted courts to stop hampering their plans to create new Israeli settlements on the West Bank, others to maintain military exemptions for Orthodox religious communities. All of them were interested in doing whatever it would take to stay in power, without the hindrance of an independent judiciary.

In response, Israelis created a mass movement capable of organizing long marches and enormous weekly protests, every Saturday night, in cities and towns across the country. Unlike similar protest movements in other countries, this one did not peter out. Thanks to the financial and logistical support of the Israeli tech industry, the most dynamic economic sector in the country, as well as to organized teams of people coming from academia and the army reserves, the protests kept going for many months and successfully blocked some of the proposed legal changes. I was trying to understand why these Israeli protests had succeeded, and so I met tech-industry executives, army reservists, students, and one famous particle physicist, all of whom had participated in organizing and sustaining the demonstrations.

After the surprise Hamas attack on southern Israel earlier this month, I listened again to the tapes of those conversations. In almost every one of them, there was a warning note that I didn't pay enough attention to at the time. When I asked people why they had sacrificed their time to join a protest movement, they told me it was because they feared Israel could become not just undemocratic but unrecognizable, unwelcoming to them and their families. But they also talked about a deeper fear: that Israel could cease to exist at all. The deep, angry divides in Israeli politics'--divides that are religious and cultural, but that were also deliberately created by Netanyahu and his extremist allies for their political and personal benefit'--weren't just a problem for some liberal or secular Israelis. The people I met believed the polarization of Israel was an existential risk for everybody.

Read: There are no rules

This is certainly what Michal Tsur was trying to tell me. Tsur is a co-founder and the president of Kaltura, a video cloud platform. She is also one of many entrepreneurs who donated time and money to help organize the protest campaign. Back in January, when Netanyahu's justice minister first proposed changes to the powers of the Supreme Court, to the system of appointing judges, and to rules obliging government ministers to listen to legal advice, Tsur and her colleagues began talking about their industry and the open, networked, mobile society it needs to thrive. They believed Netanyahu's judicial changes would crush that society, persuading many talented people to plan their futures elsewhere. Tsur told me that she had felt for a long time that Israel was on a slippery slope, that people had not understood how vulnerable the country's institutions could become. Israel doesn't have a written constitution. Its political system works according to informal norms as well as formal law, and Netanyahu has spent years attacking these norms. ''It feels as if the country is at real risk,'' Tsur told me. ''Looking at Israel, if these trends do not turn, I either think Israel won't exist in 20 or 30 years, or else it will definitely not exist in its current form.'' She worried that the kinds of people whose time and energy are necessary for Israel's self-defense would not work on behalf of a religious or nationalist dictatorship. Israel's citizens' army functions, she told me, because it can ''get really smart people to serve.'' Without democracy, she feared that ''people will not serve. People will leave.''

She was not exaggerating: ''We will not serve'' was one of the threats made by Brothers in Arms, the Israeli reservists who also came together to fight Netanyahu's assault on the Israeli judiciary. Ron Scherf, one of the group's founders'--also a veteran of one of Israel's most elite special-forces units'--told me that he and his fellow veterans had started the group because ''the government is breaking the basic contract, the unwritten contract between itself and the soldiers.'' If someone is going to risk his life, he told me, they need to feel a deep connection to the country, that it is their country. Netanyahu was trying to cut that connection, to change what it meant for some people to be Israeli. Scherf couldn't accept that, and so he and his fellow veterans staged protests in front of the homes of ministers, put banners on bridges and cliffs, even planted Israeli flags in front of the homes of far-right government officials to remind them where their loyalties should lie. Students and academics joined them, and the protests had a snowball effect, convincing others that change was possible. Shikma Bressler, a particle physicist who became one of the most prominent and outspoken leaders of the protest movement, told me that one important impact of the protests was to convince many protesters that they were not alone: ''We really had felt that they controlled the conversation,'' she said, referring to Netanyahu's government. ''You could not say a word without literally being attacked all over the place. And all of a sudden, we understood that, you know, the majority of the people in this country want something different.''

The government, and Netanyahu himself, reacted to this challenge in the way that all autocratic populists react to any challenge: They accused their opponents of disloyalty. They refused to listen. The prime minister and his supporters slowed down the judicial overhaul, passing one element and tabling the rest, but persisted in polarizing the country, even when they were warned that doing so was dangerous. The links that some members of the protest movement had to the military seemed to fuel the government's suspicions of the people who were most responsible for national security. Earlier this year, the head of Shin Bet, the Israeli domestic intelligence service, warned that Israeli settlers who were attacking West Bank Palestinians posed a security threat to the country. One member of parliament from Netanyahu's Likud party responded using language that will sound familiar to Americans: ''The ideology of the left has reached the top echelons of the Shin Bet. The deep state has infiltrated the leadership of the Shin Bet and the IDF'''--the Israel Defense Forces.

And that rhetoric was typical: In order to pass his judicial program, Netanyahu and his government attacked the judges, the courts, the independent media, the civil service, the universities, and eventually even the protesting army reservists and the military leaders who warned that the division of the country was creating a grave security risk. They attacked the people who were protesting with thousands of national flags, at times calling them ''traitors.'' This long, drawn-out public battle damaged Israel's sense of national unity, that mystical but essential element of national security. It created distrust inside the system. It also gave the government an excuse to make the protection of West Bank settlers a military priority, to sideline the Palestinian authority, and to ignore anyone who objected. It may even have been one of the reasons Hamas dared to launch its attack. As Jesse Ferris of the Israel Democracy Institute told me, ''The single-minded focus on the judicial overhaul created deep and visible divisions within Israeli society that projected weakness, which tempted aggression.'' Last week, the Israeli education minister, Yoav Kisch of Likud, seemed to acknowledge publicly that this division, although it was fostered and promoted by his government, was a mistake. ''We were busy with nonsense. We'd forgotten where we live,'' he told an Israeli website.

Keren Yarhi-Milo and Tim Naftali: The lessons Israel failed to learn from the Yom Kippur War

In one sense, the protesters' fears proved unjustified: After October 7, Israel's divided society instantly unified. Netanyahu had not yet succeeded in changing the nature of the country; Israel is still able to inspire the loyalty of its citizens and of the reservists, who went back to their units. Someone described the current moment to me not just as full mobilization but as ''150 percent mobilization,'' because even those who were not called up are asking if they can join. One opposition party's leader, Benny Gantz, agreed to take part in an emergency war cabinet, partly to contribute his experience'--he is a retired general and former defense minister'--and also to help bridge the divide.

But anger at the Netanyahu government remains'--80 percent of Israelis say they want Netanyahu to take responsibility for the attack'--especially because the intelligence and security failure on October 7 has since been compounded by a failure of the state to cope with the aftermath. Some members of Brothers in Arms, now expanded to Brothers and Sisters in Arms, who are too old to fight or otherwise ineligible have spent the days since the attack volunteering in the Israeli border communities most badly affected, helping to feed and evacuate people. Within hours, they had set up computer systems to keep track of who was missing, sourced supplies for civilians, and gone to places that had been bombarded to pull out survivors. In Israel, the instinct to protest for democracy on the one hand, and the desire to volunteer in order to make up for the state's failures on the other, are both coming from the same source: anger at a political class that shunned expertise, thrived on polarization, and threw suspicion on all kinds of state institutions and then neglected them.

There is a lesson here for Americans: We need to look hard at what happened in Israel, and start asking which security risks are posed by the scorn that American far-right politicians and propagandists now pour on the American military, the FBI, and of course the federal government as a whole. They have already weakened public trust and, if Donald Trump becomes president again, they may deliberately set out to weaken the institutions themselves: Preparation to replace civil servants has already begun. The impact of their campaign to undermine Americans' faith in American democracy has already been felt, and its security implications are already evident. To take just one example, online disinformation campaigns of the sort the Russians ran in the 2016 election work best on polarized societies, where levels of distrust are especially high.

The lesson for Israel is similar, only in the past tense: An autocratic populist party, in alignment with extremists, created the present crisis. Netanyahu's political choices, including the decision to divide the country, as well as the decision to pretend regional peace could be achieved without the Palestinians, have created a world in which Israel has only bad options. Any response that allows Hamas to keep ruling Gaza could encourage more terrorist violence in the future; at the same time, a horrific ground war in Gaza will kill many Israelis and many more Palestinians, probably creating more anger, feeding more grievance, and maybe inspiring more terrorism in the future too.

We are too far from a solution right now to even imagine what that might look like. I can only offer this imprecise thought: Someday, Israelis and Palestinians have to find some way to live next to each other, both relatively prosperous and relatively free, in states that they feel at home in. A unified Israel will find it very difficult to ever reach that solution. A divided Israel never will.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 22 Oct 2023 10:41

Amanda SaichInterim Executive Director

As Momentum's Interim Executive Director, Amanda guides the team's institutional health, leadership team, and fundraising strategy and supports the larger strategic direction of the organization.

They immigrated to Wampanoag land as a little toddler and now live in Lenape land (aka Brooklyn). When they're not organizing or wrapped in the world of Momentum, you can catch them jamming out to live music, reading sci-fi in a local park, or cooking their mom's Sichuanese recipes.Pronouns: They/She.

Cristina DuQueTraining Director

As Training Director, Cristina's focus is making sure that Momentum's foundational training reaches movement practitioners across many issue areas. Her favorite part of her job is getting to write curriculum, support trainers, and connect with leaders.Cristina grew up in Marietta, Georgia and currently lives in East Point, Georgia. She enjoys watching early '00's reality TV, hosting backyard gatherings, and trying to grow vegetables.

Delaine Andrea PowerfulManaging Director

As Momentum's Managing Director, Delaine's focus is to guide the growth of our organizational structure and healthy organizational culture and to support staff in being well.Delaine is a disabled Black queer Jamaican who lives and organizes on the occupied lands of the Council of the Three Fires: the Ojibwe, Odawa, and Potawatomi Nations in Chicago, IL. They enjoy playing soccer, being a plant auntie, wining their waist, and absorbing all things Afrofuturist, Octavia Butler, and Marvel Universe.

Pronouns: They/Themme

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 22 Oct 2023 10:35

If I am not for myself, who will be for me?

We are IfNotNow, a movement of American Jews organizing our community for equality, justice, and a thriving future for all: our neighbors, ourselves, Palestinians, and Israelis. We are Jews of all ages, with ancestors from across the world and Jewish backgrounds as diverse as the ways we practice our Judaism.

Our tradition was formed through thousands of years of telling and re-telling stories of our persecution and liberation. Every year, we sit together at Passover to remember both the bitterness of slavery and the joy of liberation. We recall the narrow places we've left through stories of the lives lost and families displaced '' from the shtetls of Eastern Europe to the communities from Spain, Iraq, Ethiopia, Morocco, and countless other places around the world. And still today, our community is not free '-- white nationalists march in American streets chanting ''Jews will not replace us,'' and for some, the simple act of wearing a kippah is a risk to their safety.

Nevertheless, the resilience of our people is a gift we pass from generation to generation. We carry the imprint of our ancestors who struggled for thousands of years to preserve our tradition: who lit candles in the darkness, adapted ancient rituals for their time and place, built vibrant communities with their neighbors, and refused to dwell in despair.

Our elders taught us that because of our history, we must oppose oppression everywhere '-- whether it preys upon us or others. It is up to us to keep their wisdom alive. Today, as we hold onto our stories of genocide and expulsion, we must understand them as connected to the historic and ongoing oppression of other peoples.

If I am only for myself, what am I?

We live in a time where it is impossible to ignore the links between the different forms of oppression across the globe. Authoritarians around the world use racism, islamophobia, and antisemitism to divert blame for the insecurity they cause, pitting communities against each other. As we face a raging pandemic alongside mass shooters who target synagogues, mosques, and Black churches, it has never been clearer that none of us can thrive until all of us can thrive '-- and only collective struggle can ensure a safe future for all.

Despite our tradition of justice, a roadblock stands at the core of our communal life, preventing us from joining this collective fight for the future. So long as we teach our children that our safety can only come through oppressing Palestinians, we will remain severed from our partners in justice.

It is long past time for the American Jewish community to confront our role, alongside the U.S. government, in the systemic displacement of the Palestinian people. We acknowledge with compassion the circumstances that Jewish refugees faced over the past century, leading many to settle in what is now Israel-Palestine. Nevertheless, we must face what these actions led to: apartheid, a system of inequality and displacement that oppresses Palestinians throughout the entire land.

We must detach our rich Jewish tradition from this cycle of violence and end our support for the ongoing Nakba '-- the expulsion of Palestinians from their homes beginning in 1948 and continuing today. And we must reject the tools maintaining this larger system of oppression: the ongoing military occupation in the West Bank, Gaza Strip, and East Jerusalem, as well as the hierarchy of race, class, and ethnicity in Israeli civil society.

We must end our complicity with the alliance of U.S. military, financial, and political interests that exploits Jewish fear to protect Israel's system of apartheid. This powerful coalition hides behind Jewish institutions like AIPAC, DMFI, the ADL, and the Conference of Presidents, who all remain convinced that maintaining power over Palestinians is necessary for Jewish safety.

Despite ever-increasing grassroots Jewish support for equality, justice, and human rights for all people, these undemocratic Jewish institutions and leaders claim to speak for us. They exploit traumatic events of our past and present to justify planting trees on top of former Palestinian villages, erasing the Nakba from Jewish classrooms, delegitimizing Palestinian nonviolent resistance, and lobbying for unconditional military aid to Israel.

As we were dehumanized by the oppression we faced, we are now dehumanized by that which we inflict.

If not now, when?

As long as the myth remains that Palestinian rights and Jewish safety are in conflict, this alliance will continue to take advantage of the very real threat of antisemitism to justify their anti-democratic agendas and silence dissent. They will profit as everyone fighting for justice remains confused and distracted, unable to achieve the progressive unity we need to confront the U.S. government's role in upholding apartheid and win transformative change at home.

Our community faces a choice: Will we continue to teach our children that Jews can only be safe if we have power over others? Or will we recognize that Palestinian and Jewish safety are intertwined, and join together in the fight for equality, justice, and a thriving future for all?

We call on our community to imagine a future beyond ''us or them'' '-- where Israelis and Palestinians are both safe:

A future of equality, where everyone from the river to the sea has individual and collective rights to safety, the resources they need to live, freedom of movement, and political representation.

A future of justice, where Palestinians can return to the places they call home, rebuild their communities, and receive reparations for the dispossession they've faced '-- from the Israeli government, the U.S., and other nations that have aided in Palestinian oppression.

A future where Jews and their neighbors can thrive, knowing that none of us are free until all of us are free.

A rising coalition is already fighting for this future, with a generation of Palestinians rising up to demand equality and justice and a growing number of Israelis uniting with them in joint resistance. And in Congress, new voices are speaking out against unconditional aid for human rights abuses on every continent, including in Israel-Palestine.

Many in our community are already choosing, showing up proudly as Jews for a progressive agenda at home and for justice for Palestinians. For those who are still deciding, who feel confused and afraid '-- we invite you to join us in finding the courage to stand up both for ourselves and for others.

Now is the time for equality for all people '-- no exceptions. If not now, when?

How IfNotNow Began & Our StrategyDuring the violence of Operation Protective Edge in 2014, young Jews angered by the overwhelmingly hawkish response of American Jewish institutions came together under the banner of IfNotNow to demonstrate their resistance through the beauty of Jewish ritual. Moved to act by moral anguish and inspired by Hillel's three questions, they organized Mourner's Kaddish actions in nearly a dozen cities across the country to honor the loss of both Israeli and Palestinian life. They had three demands: Stop the War on Gaza, End the Occupation, and Freedom and Dignity for All.

After the war ended, the founders joined the Momentum organizing community '-- the same community where Sunrise Movement , Cosecha , By the People , and many more organize for a brighter future '-- and spent a year developing a long-term strategy. The demand for American Jewish institutions to end their support for the occupation and the need to transform the political status quo has only grown more urgent and clear since then.

We are bringing this crisis of conscience into full public view for our communal and political leaders. Through public action and imaginative ritual, we are demanding that our community take action in the struggle for mutual liberation. Our strategy is inspired by a long legacy of social movements in this country '-- from the Labor Movement to the Civil Rights Movement to Occupy to Black Lives Matter '-- that have used nonviolent action to create urgency around moral crises and catalyze massive changes in the mainstream.

We know that those of us who believe in freedom and dignity for all Israelis and Palestinians are the membership, youth, volunteers, and workforce upon which our political and communal institutions depend. IfNotNow is the expression of our generation's collective power and the cultural shift necessary to build a flourishing, joyous, liberated Jewish community that supports the dignity of all people.

Our logo, inspired by the burning bush, symbolizes our generation's call to leadership in the Jewish community. Just as Moses was commanded to return to Egypt and fight for the liberation of his people, we too feel called to take responsibility for the future of our community. We know the liberation of our Jewish community is bound up in the liberation of all people, particularly those in Israel and Palestine. The bush burns bright but is not consumed '' the fire is not a mechanism of destruction, but rather a force of inspiration and transformation.

Get connected with IfNotNow in your community.Want to get involved in IfNotNow? Use the map to get connected to your local field organizer.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 22 Oct 2023 03:53

According to multiple news sources, the Lake City ammo plant has cancelled all of its commercial contracts.

This means that stores will no longer be able to purchase ammo from Lake City, which currently supplies 30% of the civilian market for 5.56 ammunition.

The Lake City ammo plant is owned by the US Government, but operated by Olin Winchester. Winchester produces ammo and sells it to the government.

When the facility is able to produce more ammo than the government requires, they sell it either to consumers or distributors.

If it's true that they've cancelled their commercial contracts, this means the US Government is requiring more ammunition, enough that they can't produce enough to sell the excess.

I haven't been able to confirm this with Lake City or Winchester themselves, but I've reached out to hear what they have to say. I will update this article as soon as I have something.

Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.

Your subscription has been successful.

Stores Will No Longer Be Receiving Ammo From Lake CityWinchester 5.56 is, or was, one of the most abundant brands of 5.56 in the country.

Lake City is not only the largest supplier for the US Government and Military, but is the largest small arms ammunition factory in the world.

Winchester has three facilities for making ammo, but as far as I can tell only makes 5.56 at Lake City.

This all means that as Lake City cancels contracts, you'll stop seeing Winchester 5.56 on the shelf at your local gun store.

Distributors won't be able to purchase new shipments, so as they run out of their current stock, the shelves will slowly, or quickly, dry up.

Prices Are Only Going UpI'm no economist, but if 30% of a goods' supply disappears overnight, the price of said goods are sure to rise.

We're also heading into an election year, which almost always provides positive pressure for guns/ammo prices.

The same week that Winchester started cancelling contracts, a Hornady ammo facility had an explosion that caused one fatality. It's not certain how this will affect the market, but it definitely won't cause prices to lower.

Why Cancel the Contracts?As I mentioned earlier, ammo plants that are government owned but contractor run are only able to sell ammo commercially when they produce an excess over what the government requires.]

This means that they're either having production problems or the government is requiring, or anticipating to require, more ammo.

This is announced the same week as the conflict with Israel and Palestine. Is the government anticipating US involvement? Is the government supplying Israel, or someone else, with millions of rounds of 5.56?

Either way, I'm not able to say the real cause, but something is happening to cause the US Government and Military to require millions of more rounds than they required last week.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 22 Oct 2023 03:41

Americans of all shapes and sizes are heading to pharmacies and doctors' offices this fall for flu and Covid shots, but they may not know that size matters when it comes to the needle going into their arms.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidance stipulates that men and women up to around 150 pounds should get a one-inch long needle.

But a longer needle of about one and a half inches will be necessary for adults over 200 pounds to penetrate fat and deep muscle tissue.

Fat people are already disproportionately more likely to get sick from Covid, which compounds the issue.

The majority of people without experience in medical care may not realize that needle length matters, which means very few know to even bring it up with their doctor or pharmacist

The injection needle used has to penetrate adipose, or fat tissue, to reach the muscles where the contents of the shot, i.e. the Covid vaccine, is deposited

Dr William Schaffner, an expert in infectious diseases at Vanderbilt University, told DailyMail.com: 'Doctors don't want to risk the vaccination not being an immunization in their patients if they're large. Therefore, use a larger needle when you're giving intramuscular vaccinations.'

Recommending that vaccine administrators consider a person's weight when choosing a length of needle to use is not new. Healthcare professionals learn it in school and on the job.

The CDC has said for years that a decision on needle length 'must be made for each person on the basis of the size of the muscle, the thickness of adipose tissue at the injection site'...and the depth below the muscle surface into which the material is to be injected.'

Yet that guidance is not widely used in practice.

Dr Schaffner said: 'I wouldnt think the average person will have given that any thought. Once they do and give it five seconds of thought, they wouldnt be too surprised.

'It shouldn't be dependent on the patient to bring that up. However, cooperation is always good and if a patient is aware of this, it would be a good thing to bring up in a friendly and helpful way.'

Some studies estimate that clinicians vaccinating overweight and obese people get needle length wrong as often as 75 percent of the time.

Using a needle slightly longer than the standard one-inch length for an overweight person gives the medicine a better chance of penetrating fat tissue and depositing it into the muscle, which is the whole point of a vaccine.

According to the CDC: 'Appropriate needle length depends on age and body mass. Injection technique is the most important parameter to ensure efficient intramuscular vaccine delivery.

'For all intramuscular injections, the needle should be long enough to reach the muscle mass and prevent vaccine from seeping into subcutaneous tissue, but not so long as to involve underlying nerves, blood vessels, or bone.'

While needle length is important, the majority of people without experience in medical care may not realize it. That means very few people in line for a booster with their sleeves rolled up likely know to even bring it up with their doctor or pharmacist.

Population surveys have consistently shown that professionals administering shots reach for the wrong size needle. In 1997, one study showed that the standard one-inch needles failed to penetrate the deltoid muscles in 17 percent of men's arms and 48 percent of women's.

A 2013 study in the journal Applied Nursing Research found that among all patients of all weights surveyed, only 50 percent of shots were administered correctly. And in overweight and obese patients, that error rate reached as high as 75 percent.

Getting the wrong-sized needle could diminish the vaccine's efficacy, though evidence on this is mixed.

A 2010 study published in the journal Pediatrics sought to determine how body mass index and needle length influence the efficacy of the hepatitis B vaccine which, like Covid and flu shots, is meant to be administered deep into the muscles.

Obese adolescents who were given the vaccine through a needle measuring 1.5 inches in length had a significantly higher antibody response than those who received the shot through a one-inch needle.

Meanwhile, a study published in the May 2023 issue of Nature Medicine argued that needle length did not change the Covid vaccine's efficacy.

Researchers determined that peak antibody response was actually higher in obese people who got the shot with the same length needle as non-obese people, though their immunity tended to wane more quickly.

Obese people who have a body mass index of 30 or higher should still get vaccinated for Covid and flu. Being obese significantly increases one's risk of getting a severe case of Covid and has been shown to triple the risk of being hospitalized.

The CDC reported in spring 2021, around the first anniversary of the outbreak that started it all, roughly 78 percent of all people who had been hospitalized, needed a ventilator, or died from Covid had been overweight or obese.

And a 2021 study conducted by researchers at Tufts University in Massachusetts concluded that 89 percent of Covid hospitalizations as of November 2020 could be attributed to one of four chronic conditions, including obesity '' which was blamed for 30 percent of cases, the largest share '' as well as high blood pressure, diabetes, and heart failure.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 22 Oct 2023 03:38

Peter Thiel has worn many hats over the years: Silicon Valley founder, Trump megadonor, cryptocurrency booster, democracy skeptic.

But there is yet another facet to Thiel, one that has remained secret until now: FBI informant.

In the summer of 2021, Insider has learned, Thiel began providing information as a "confidential human source," or CHS, to Johnathan Buma, a Los Angeles-based FBI agent who specializes in investigating political corruption and foreign-influence campaigns.

Charles Johnson, a longtime associate of Thiel's and a notorious figure in the far-right movement that Thiel has subsidized for a decade, told Insider in a statement that he helped recruit the billionaire as an informant by introducing him to Buma.

A source with knowledge of Thiel's relationship to the FBI, whose identity is known to Insider but who insisted on anonymity, corroborated Johnson's account, telling Insider that Johnson brokered a relationship between Thiel and Buma. Insider was able to confirm through an additional source that the FBI added Thiel to its formal roster of registered informants.

Another source close to Thiel told Insider that while they could not confirm that Thiel was a CHS, Thiel did speak to Buma occasionally. The source said that any assistance Thiel might have provided to the FBI should be understood as part of Thiel's gradual distancing of himself from Trump and the broader MAGA movement, which has vigorously criticized the FBI and other federal law-enforcement agencies.

Valuable information on a recurring basisThe FBI maintains a vast network of informants to keep tabs on organized crime, terrorist threats, extremist groups, and other criminal and intelligence targets. These sources, according to the bureau's Confidential Human Source Policy Guide, are more than casual tipsters.

Confidential human sources enter "into a relationship with the FBI, and that relationship will forever affect the life of that individual," the guide says. "[They] will be either an 'FBI source' or a 'former FBI source' and, in turn, his or her conduct or misconduct will reflect upon the FBI." As such, the process for recruiting and maintaining such sources is highly regulated, requiring multiple layers of approval. Only people who are able to provide "valuable information '... on a recurring basis" are granted CHS status, according to the policy.

Then President-elect Donald Trump shakes hands with Peter Thiel during a meeting at Trump Tower in December 2016. Years later, Thiel would become a confidential human source for the FBI. He was directed not to report on his interactions with Trump or other US political figures, an associate said. Drew Angerer/Getty Images As a CHS, Thiel was assigned a code name and an internal serial number to track his reporting. The information he passed on about foreign contacts and Silicon Valley intrigue was reviewed and "validated," or cross-checked against other sources, by his case agents and their colleagues.

Thiel did not respond to multiple requests for comment. A Thiel spokesperson stopped responding to inquiries after being told that Insider was reporting on Thiel's relationship with the FBI.

The FBI's national press office and Scott Horton, an attorney who represents Johnathan Buma, both declined to comment.

No reporting on political tiesThiel is a citizen of Germany, the United States, and New Zealand; as of last year, he was reportedly in the process of acquiring yet another passport, from Malta. In 2016, he donated $1.25 million to Trump's campaign and endorsed him from the stage at the Republican National Convention. After Trump won, Thiel served on his transition team.

Johnson, who said that he was also an informant for Buma, told Insider that he believes that Thiel's reporting to the FBI was largely limited to foreign contacts and attempts by foreign governments to penetrate Silicon Valley. Thiel has publicly called on the FBI to investigate Google's ties to the Chinese government.

Thiel, Johnson said, was directed by the FBI not to report on his interactions with Donald Trump or other US political figures.

Many of the politicians that Thiel has bankrolled '-- including Trump, Sen. J.D. Vance of Ohio, and Blake Masters, a former Arizona senatorial candidate '-- have repeatedly attacked the bureau and its leadership in public. In 2022, Vance, whose campaign and affiliated PACs received a total of $15 million from Thiel, falsely claimed that the FBI had illegally wiretapped Trump's phone. Vance accused the bureau of "harassing faithful Christians" and pledged to block all of President Joe Biden's Department of Justice nominees in retaliation for the Trump prosecutions. (Most but not all of Thiel's donations occurred in early 2021, before the launch of Vance's campaign and the many false claims he made over the course of the race.)

While serving as an FBI informant, Thiel bankrolled the campaign of now-Senator J.D. Vance of Ohio. Vance has made a number of false and disparaging claims about the FBI. Anna Moneymaker/Getty Masters, whose campaign received $20 million of support from Thiel, has endorsed the false conspiracy theory that undercover FBI agents fomented the January 6, 2021, insurrection and accused the FBI agents who executed a search warrant on Mar-a-Lago of "going after President Trump because they hate him." (As with Vance, most but not all of Thiel's donations to Masters occurred before Masters made his most inflammatory and baseless statements during the later stages of his campaign.)

Thiel is reportedly planning to sit on the sidelines of the 2024 election.

Neither Trump, Masters, nor Vance responded to requests for comment.

Doing business with the FBISome of Thiel's business interests rely on the FBI and other government agencies as potential revenue sources. He retains a 10% stake in Palantir, a data company that has sold more than a billion dollars of software and related services to the federal government, including the Pentagon, the CIA, the National Security Agency, and the FBI. A $250 million contract with the US Army in September adds to the evidence that Palantir is essentially "a government service provider," a financial analyst said.

Thiel also backed Boldend, a spyware company marketing itself as an American competitor to the Israeli NSO Group, Forbes reported last year. NSO's products have been bought and tested by the FBI.

(Mithril Capital, another entity Thiel cofounded, was reportedly a subject of FBI interest in 2019, although nothing appears to have come of the inquiry. Mithril's co-founder did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The FBI did not respond to a question regarding the Mithril matter.)

Johnson, who revealed Thiel's FBI ties, is a tech investor and far-right agitator with long-standing ties to both Thiel and to the network of MAGA political operators surrounding Trump. He claims to have had a hand in founding Clearview, a facial-recognition startup, and Traitwell, a genomics company. According to Forbes, he worked with Thiel to help vet and select senior staffers for the Trump transition in 2017.

Johnson claimed to be an FBI informant in a lawsuit he filed against Clearview's founders. He told Insider he recruited Thiel to serve as a CHS and introduced him to Buma, the FBI special agent who was Johnson's handler.

Charles Johnson (left) with Rep. Matt Gaetz (right) and Gaetz's now-wife Ginger Gaetz (center), in 2021. Johnson told Insider that he brokered an introduction between Thiel and the FBI special agent who would become his handler. Charles Johnson It's unclear whether Thiel remains a CHS for the FBI. Johnson told Insider that he believes that the relationship has been severed but declined to offer details; Buma wrote in his statement to the Senate Judiciary Committee that he was ordered to cease contact with all his sources in late 2022.

Johnson's ties to Trump and Thiel are well-documented. But he is also a self-identified "troll" with a history of spreading false information and smearing his rivals. In this instance, his claims are corroborated by two additional sources, as well as supported in part by a third who says Thiel and Buma spoke occasionally.

'Join up or get crushed'Buma came forward in August as a whistleblower, alleging that the FBI under Trump and Attorney General Bill Barr shut down his efforts to determine whether Rudy Giuliani had been compromised by a Russian asset. Insider was the first news organization to report on his claims.

In a statement prepared for the Senate Judiciary Committee, Buma said that FBI headquarters had closed his most valuable human sources, including one code-named "Genius," who had reported on far-right figures involved with planning the attack on the Capitol on January 6, 2021. Johnson told Insider that "Genius" was his CHS code name. Insider was able to confirm Johnson's identity as "Genius" with two additional sources. The statement does not mention Thiel.

Thiel speaking at the Republican National Convention in 2016. He donated $1.25 million to Trump's campaign in 2016. He backed MAGA-aligned congressional candidates in 2020 and 2022. He has said he will be staying on the sidelines of the 2024 presidential race. Alex Wong/Getty In a written statement to Insider, Johnson said he was stepping forward as a CHS to support Buma's effort as a whistleblower to bring about what Buma believes to be necessary reforms in how the FBI handles informants. Johnson said that he was exposing Thiel's work as a CHS as retribution for what Johnson perceives to be bad decision-making by the Founders Fund, Thiel's venture-capital firm.

Johnson also told Insider he felt betrayed that Thiel did not invest in Johnson's own startups, which he had expected Thiel to do in exchange for introducing him to Buma. Johnson said that he told Thiel that by offering the FBI a window into his contacts with foreign governments, he could demonstrate his loyalty to the United States.

He described Thiel's motivation for working with Buma as a kind of hedge in an environment where extravagant wealth no longer affords the safety it used to. He pointed to ProPublica's reporting on Thiel's income-tax avoidance and the death of Jeffrey Epstein, who had reportedly scheduled several meetings with Thiel.

"I told him to join up or get crushed," Johnson said.

The FBI's recruitment of Thiel as a CHS puts him among the bureau's most prominent assets, but he is not alone among right-wing figures who have collaborated with the bureau. Trump himself offered to help the FBI fight organized crime in Atlantic City in the early 1980s. Truth Social, the Trump-owned social-media company, has quietly tipped the FBI off to users who threaten violence, even as it seeks to cash in on their anger. At least two of the rioters who showed up to storm the Capitol on January 6 were also FBI informants, as was Enrique Tarrio, the Proud Boys leader who was sentenced to 22 years in prison for seditious conspiracy and other felonies stemming from the Capitol breach. Tarrio reportedly served as a source for federal and local law enforcement, assisting with the prosecution of more than a dozen people.

Mattathias Schwartz is chief national security correspondent at Insider. He can be reached at schwartz79@protonmail.com.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 22 Oct 2023 03:22

Peace, dignity and equality on a healthy planet The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) is a milestone document in the history of human rights. Drafted by representatives with different legal and cultural backgrounds from all regions of the world, the Declaration was proclaimed by the United Nations General Assembly in Paris on 10 December 1948 (General Assembly resolution 217 A) as a common standard of achievements for all peoples and all nations. It sets out, for the first time, fundamental human rights to be universally protected and it has been translated into over 500 languages. The UDHR is widely recognized as having inspired, and paved the way for, the adoption of more than seventy human rights treaties, applied today on a permanent basis at global and regional levels (all containing references to it in their preambles).

PreambleWhereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,

Whereas disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind, and the advent of a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of the common people,

Whereas it is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law,

Whereas it is essential to promote the development of friendly relations between nations,

Whereas the peoples of the United Nations have in the Charter reaffirmed their faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person and in the equal rights of men and women and have determined to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom,

Whereas Member States have pledged themselves to achieve, in co-operation with the United Nations, the promotion of universal respect for and observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms,

Whereas a common understanding of these rights and freedoms is of the greatest importance for the full realization of this pledge,

Now, therefore,

The General Assembly,

Proclaims this Universal Declaration of Human Rights as a common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations, to the end that every individual and every organ of society, keeping this Declaration constantly in mind, shall strive by teaching and education to promote respect for these rights and freedoms and by progressive measures, national and international, to secure their universal and effective recognition and observance, both among the peoples of Member States themselves and among the peoples of territories under their jurisdiction.

Article 1All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.

Article 2Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.

Article 3Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.

Article 4No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms.

Article 5No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

Article 6Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law.

Article 7All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. All are entitled to equal protection against any discrimination in violation of this Declaration and against any incitement to such discrimination.

Article 8Everyone has the right to an effective remedy by the competent national tribunals for acts violating the fundamental rights granted him by the constitution or by law.

Article 9No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile.

Article 10Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him.

Article 11Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence.No one shall be held guilty of any penal offence on account of any act or omission which did not constitute a penal offence, under national or international law, at the time when it was committed. Nor shall a heavier penalty be imposed than the one that was applicable at the time the penal offence was committed.Article 12No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.

Article 13Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each state.Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country.Article 14Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution.This right may not be invoked in the case of prosecutions genuinely arising from non-political crimes or from acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.Article 15Everyone has the right to a nationality.No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to change his nationality.Article 16Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. They are entitled to equal rights as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution.Marriage shall be entered into only with the free and full consent of the intending spouses.The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State.Article 17Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others.No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property.Article 18Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.

Article 19Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

Article 20Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association.No one may be compelled to belong to an association.Article 21Everyone has the right to take part in the government of his country, directly or through freely chosen representatives.Everyone has the right of equal access to public service in his country.The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government; this will shall be expressed in periodic and genuine elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret vote or by equivalent free voting procedures.Article 22Everyone, as a member of society, has the right to social security and is entitled to realization, through national effort and international co-operation and in accordance with the organization and resources of each State, of the economic, social and cultural rights indispensable for his dignity and the free development of his personality.

Article 23Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favourable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment.Everyone, without any discrimination, has the right to equal pay for equal work.Everyone who works has the right to just and favourable remuneration ensuring for himself and his family an existence worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection.Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests.Article 24Everyone has the right to rest and leisure, including reasonable limitation of working hours and periodic holidays with pay.

Article 25Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.Motherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and assistance. All children, whether born in or out of wedlock, shall enjoy the same social protection.Article 26Everyone has the right to education. Education shall be free, at least in the elementary and fundamental stages. Elementary education shall be compulsory. Technical and professional education shall be made generally available and higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit.Education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and to the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. It shall promote understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations, racial or religious groups, and shall further the activities of the United Nations for the maintenance of peace.Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children.Article 27Everyone has the right freely to participate in the cultural life of the community, to enjoy the arts and to share in scientific advancement and its benefits.Everyone has the right to the protection of the moral and material interests resulting from any scientific, literary or artistic production of which he is the author.Article 28Everyone is entitled to a social and international order in which the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration can be fully realized.

Article 29Everyone has duties to the community in which alone the free and full development of his personality is possible.In the exercise of his rights and freedoms, everyone shall be subject only to such limitations as are determined by law solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society.These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.Article 30Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 22 Oct 2023 03:12

18 October 2023

Governing Council to start digital euro preparation phase following conclusion of two-year investigation phase on design and distribution of a digital euroPreparation phase will lay foundations for a potential digital euro, with work to include finalising rulebook and selecting providers to develop platform and infrastructurePreparation phase will pave way for potential future decision on issuing a digital euroThe Governing Council of the European Central Bank (ECB) decided today to move to the next phase of the digital euro project: the preparation phase.

This decision follows the completion of the investigation phase launched by the Eurosystem in October 2021 to explore possible design and distribution models for a digital euro. Based on the findings from this phase, detailed in a report published today, the ECB has designed a digital euro that would be widely accessible to citizens and businesses through distribution by supervised intermediaries, such as banks.

The design envisages the digital euro as a digital form of cash that could be used for all digital payments throughout the euro area. It would be widely accessible, free for basic use and available both online and offline. It would offer the highest level of privacy and allow users to settle payments instantly in central bank money. It could be used from person to person, at the point of sale, in e-commerce and in government transactions. No digital payment instrument offers all these features. The digital euro would fill that gap.

The next phase of the digital euro project '' the preparation phase '' will start on 1 November 2023 and will initially last two years. It will involve finalising the digital euro rulebook and selecting providers that could develop a digital euro platform and infrastructure. It will also include testing and experimentation to develop a digital euro that meets both the Eurosystem's requirements and user needs, for example in terms of user experience, privacy, financial inclusion and environmental footprint. The ECB will continue to engage with the public and all stakeholders during this phase. After two years, the Governing Council will decide whether to move to the next stage of preparations, to pave the way for the possible future issuance and roll-out of a digital euro.

The launch of the preparation phase is not a decision on whether to issue a digital euro. That decision will only be considered by the Governing Council once the European Union's legislative process has been completed. The ECB will take into account any adjustments to the design of the digital euro that may become necessary as a result of the legislative deliberations.

''We need to prepare our currency for the future,'' said Christine Lagarde, President of the ECB. ''We envisage a digital euro as a digital form of cash that can be used for all digital payments, free of charge, and that meets the highest privacy standards. It would coexist alongside physical cash, which will always be available, leaving no one behind.''

The digital euro would make data protection a priority. The Eurosystem would not be able to see users' personal data or link payment information to individuals. The digital euro would also achieve a cash-like level of privacy for offline payments.

The digital euro would promote resilience, competition and innovation in the European payments sector. It would ensure that there is a pan-European payment solution for the euro area under European governance. It would rely on its own infrastructure, thereby strengthening resilience. And it would provide a platform on which European supervised intermediaries could build pan-European services for their customers, increasing efficiency, reducing costs and fostering innovation.

''As people increasingly choose to pay digitally, we should be ready to issue a digital euro alongside cash,'' said Fabio Panetta, ECB Executive Board member and Chair of the High-Level Task Force on a digital euro. ''A digital euro would increase the efficiency of European payments and contribute to Europe's strategic autonomy.''

Digital euro distributionUsers could access digital euro services via their payment service provider's proprietary app and online interface, or via a digital euro app provided by the Eurosystem. People without access to a bank account or digital devices would also be able to pay with digital euro, for example by using a card provided by a public body such as a post office. Users would also be able to exchange digital euro for cash or vice versa at cash machines.

The Eurosystem envisions a digital euro that would be free for basic use for individuals. A compensation model between intermediaries and merchants would ensure that there are incentives for intermediaries to distribute digital euro, as is the case for other electronic payment instruments, and that there are adequate safeguards against excessive service charges for merchants. The Eurosystem would bear its own costs, including those related to scheme management and settlement processing.

Transparency and close cooperation with stakeholders remain key pillars of the project. The Eurosystem has benefited greatly from feedback from European decision-makers, market participants and potential users, and will continue to engage actively with a wide range of stakeholders. We will also continue to cooperate closely with EU legislators.

For media queries, please contact Silvia Margiocco, tel.: +49 69 1344 6619, or Paula Gonzlez Escribano, tel.: +49 1512 3815096.

NotesProposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the establishment of the digital euro, European Commission, COM(2023) 369 final, 28 June 2023; and Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the provision of digital euro services by payment services providers incorporated in Member States whose currency is not the euro and amending Regulation (EU) 2021/1230 of the European Parliament and the Council, COM(2023) 368 final, 28 June 2023.The Eurosystem has established a digital euro scheme Rulebook Development Group to support the drafting of a single set of rules, standards, and procedures for the digital euro. The Group is composed of Eurosystem staff and market representatives who provide input from the financial industry, consumers and merchants.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 22 Oct 2023 02:17

Guest Post by Mike Capuzzo

Google, Microsoft, Facebook, TikTok and the majority of medical and healthcare websites illegally harvest and sell private health information despite a federal crackdown on the practice, according to a new cybersecurity report by Feroot Security.

Google, Microsoft, Facebook, TikTok and the majority of medical and healthcare websites illegally harvest and sell private health information despite a federal crackdown on the practice, according to a new cybersecurity report.

The report, by Toronto-based cybersecurity firm Feroot Security, analyzed hundreds of healthcare websites and found that more than 86% are collecting private data and transferring it to advertisers, marketers and Big Tech social media companies without user consent and in violation of privacy laws.

As patients or consumers browse their favorite or trusted medical websites or sign in to hospital portals to access their private health records, invisible bits of HTML code '-- called ''tracking pixels'' '-- embedded on the websites harvest private information, such as whether patients have cancer, erectile dysfunction or are behind on their hospital bill.

The information is repackaged and sold for a variety of uses, including to companies that target individual users with internet ads, according to the report.

The risk of having personal data scraped is particularly high on log-in and registration pages where internet users supply troves of information, unaware it is being hijacked and sold. More than 73% of log-in and registration pages have invisible trackers that pirate personal health information, the study found.

Approximately 15% of the tracking pixels analyzed by Feroot record users' keystrokes, harvesting social security numbers, usernames and passwords, credit card and banking information, and an infinite variety of personal health data, including medical diagnosis and treatment.

The study showed that ''Google is the absolute dominant collector'' of data. Ninety-two percent of the websites loaded on the Google search engine contained data-harvesting technology across wide sectors of the U.S. economy including healthcare and telehealth, banking and financial services, airlines, e-commerce, and the federal and state governments.

The number two offender was Microsoft with 50.4% of websites on its platform hiding tracking tools, with Facebook next at 50.2% percent and TikTok at 7.41% percent and growing fast.

Google, as the driver of its parent Alphabet, the world's fourth largest company, is often called ''the most powerful company in the world.'' It counts on advertising, a lifeblood of the global digital economy, for 80% of its revenue.

Microsoft and Facebook ''round up the Top 3'' of companies that systematically breach data, the report said.

Representatives of Google, Microsoft, and Facebook denied their companies used tracking pixels to harvest personal data.

Website owners are responsible for controlling data collection, a Google spokesperson said. Google policy prohibits Google Analytics and advertising customers, including for example hospital or telehealth websites, from collecting health data in violation of the U.S. Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA). It's up to the websites to determine ''whether they are HIPAA-regulated entities and what their obligations are under HIPAA,'' Google policy says.

Personal health data collected by a tracker or third party without a user's consent is a violation of HIPAA, said Feroot CEO Ivan Tsarynny.

Big Tech companies ''do have policies that talk about protecting health info,'' Tsarynny said. But ''the real-world application of these policies is a different story.''

Feroot's study comes as ''concern grows regarding data mining companies using pixels/trackers that load into browsers from websites to collect privacy and sensitive user data,'' the report stated.

''Compliance regulators and government authorities are increasingly stepping in with bans, restrictions, and executive orders to curb them.''

Eighteen major hospital systems were sued this year for sharing patients' sensitive health data with Google, Facebook and other tech giants in violation of privacy laws, according to Becker's Hospital Review.

They include prominent academic medical centers such as the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, the University of Chicago Medical Center, the University of Iowa Medical Center, Chicago-based Northwestern Memorial Hospital and the University of California San Francisco Medical Center.

Prompted by growing concerns over data theft and the article, '''Out of Control': Dozens of Telehealth Startups Sent Sensitive Health Information to Big Tech Companies,'' Feroot launched an investigation ''to ascertain the exact magnitude and pervasiveness of social media pixels/trackers collecting and transferring personal, sensitive, and private data using pixels or trackers.''

The security platform Feroot sells to companies ''made it possible to get detailed facts regarding active client-side e-skimming,'' the company said.

Feroot collected data on pixels/trackers during an eight-week period in January and February.

The company said it examined more than 3,675 organizations with unique websites in seven economic sectors. It studied 108,836 unique web pages, including especially vulnerable login, registration and credit card processing pages, 227 trackers and 7 million data transfers.

Key findings from 'Beware of Pixels & Trackers':

Pixel trackers are ''common and abundant'' '-- an average of 13.16 pixels/trackers were found per website, ''with Google, Microsoft, Meta (owner of Facebook), ByteDance (owner of TikTok), and Adobe being some of the most common.''''Mission-critical'' webpages, such as log-in or registration pages, increase the risk of exposing private information. An average of 5.96% of websites had pixels/trackers on webpages reading user input forms containing privacy or sensitive data.Pixel trackers transfer data to foreign locations around the globe '-- ''about 5% of the data transferred by pixels/trackers loaded from US-based websites is sent outside the US.''Pixel trackers collect and transfer data without first obtaining the explicit consent of visitors.Pixels and trackers are loading from domains banned by the U.S. government and various U.S. states and even from some of those same governments, including Russia and China. Data obtained by Russian and Chinese websites is a security risk from surveillance and spying.Meta (owner of Facebook and Instagram) and TikTok, owned by Chinese company ByteDance, were ''particularly worrisome'' for privacy invasion and surveillance risks. Thirty-four U.S. states, both Republican and Democratic-controlled, have banned the use of TikTok on government devices. Montana in May banned the app on all personal devices.TikTok is often present whether or not the TikTok app is deleted. TikTok pixels/trackers can still ''load into webpages handling mission-critical user data and can collect and transfer it.''GoodRX case highlights corporate deceit around data-sharing

While corporations face losing profit and reputation from data breaches or fines for causing them, individuals face a potentially catastrophic loss of privacy when major health websites harvest and sell their information, according to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC).

In February, the FTC fined popular discount drug and telehealth site GoodRx for ''failing to report its unauthorized disclosure of consumer health data to Facebook, Google, and other companies.''

The action to ''bar GoodRx from sharing consumers' sensitive health information for advertising'' was the FTC's first enforcement action under its Health Breach Notification Rule.

''Digital health companies and mobile apps should not cash in on consumers' extremely sensitive and personally identifiable health information,'' FTC Bureau of Consumer Protection Director Samuel Levine said in a news release after the settlement. ''The FTC is serving notice that it will use all of its legal authority to protect American consumers' sensitive data from misuse and illegal exploitation.''

The FTC enforcement against GoodRx revealed a particularly egregious, yet not uncommon, example of how corporate health and medical websites betray patient trust and manipulate patient data, the FTC said.

According to the FTC's complaint, GoodRx violated the law by improperly sharing sensitive personal health information since at least 2017, though it promised otherwise.

The company ''deceptively promised its users that it would never share personal health information with advertisers or other third parties,'' the FTC charged, and deceptively displayed a seal at the bottom of its telehealth services homepage ''falsely suggesting to consumers that it complied with '... HIPAA.''

In reality, the FTC complaint said, GoodRx ''monetized its users' personal health information, and used data it shared with Facebook to target GoodRx's own users with personalized health- and medication-specific advertisements on Facebook and Instagram.''

For example, GoodRx in August 2019 made lists of its users ''who had purchased particular medications such as those used to treat heart disease and blood pressure, and uploaded their email addresses, phone numbers, and mobile advertising IDs to Facebook so it could identify their profiles,'' according to the complaint.

''GoodRx then used that information to target these users with health-related advertisements.''

People who accessed GoodRx coupons to purchase, for instance, Viagra would see ads for erectile dysfunction medication on their Facebook or Instagram page ads, the FTC says.

''Similarly, people who had used GoodRx's telehealth services to get treatment for sexually transmitted diseases would get ads for STD testing services.''

GoodRx disclosed to Facebook the medication purchase data it receives from pharmacy benefit managers and also used the data to target ads.

By using Facebook's ad targeting platform, the FTC said, ''GoodRx designed campaigns that targeted customers with ads based on their health information. For example, if a customer had revealed a possible erectile dysfunction issue to GoodRx, they might have seen an ad on Facebook like Exhibit A in the FTC complaint.''

Source: Federal Trade Commission complaintIn February, California-based GoodRx, a $2.1 billion company, paid a $1.5 million civil penalty to the FTC to settle the complaint and denied any wrongdoing.

Howard Danzig, founder and president of Employers Committed to Control Health Insurance Costs, said ''fining GoodRx just $1.5 million dollars is not even a slap on the wrist. While many employers are so vigilant about respecting the guidelines of the HIPAA privacy laws, large tech companies basically get a pass.''

''How about major penalties for Facebook, Google and any others who were the beneficiaries of this information?'' he wrote on his LinkedIn page with almost 9,000 followers.

''How about determining whether or not there were any criminal violations that should be pursued against the individuals who actually collaborated to do this? How about 'REPARATIONS' from the companies involved to the people and customers whose privacy was breached?''

The data breach occurred for ''advertising purposes,'' he noted. ''How far afield can this really be taken and how far afield has it been taken?''

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 22 Oct 2023 01:30

Mosab Hassan Yousef (Arabic: مصعب Ø­Ø"ن يÙØ"ف ; nicknamed "The Green Prince"; born 5 May 1978)[3] is a Palestinian who worked undercover for Israel's internal security service Shin Bet from 1997 to 2007.

Shin Bet considered him its most valuable source within the Hamas leadership. The information Yousef supplied prevented dozens of suicide attacks and assassinations of Israelis, exposed numerous Hamas cells, and assisted Israel in hunting down many militants, and incarcerating his own father, Hamas leader Sheikh Hassan Yousef.[1][4] In March 2010, he published his autobiography titled Son of Hamas.[5]

In 1999, Yousef converted to Christianity, and in 2007 he moved to the United States.[2] His request for political asylum in the United States was granted pending a routine background check in 2010.[6]

Biography Mosab Hassan Yousef (later Joseph)[2] was born in Ramallah, a city 10 kilometers (6.2 mi) north of Jerusalem. His father, Sheikh Hassan Yousef, was a Hamas leader who spent many years in Israeli prisons.[2][3][7] He is the oldest of five brothers and three sisters.[2][8]

When Yousef was growing up, he wanted to be a fighter because that was according to him what was expected of Palestinian children in the West Bank.[9] Yousef was first arrested when he was ten, during the First Intifada, for throwing rocks at Israeli settlers.[9] He was further arrested and jailed by Israel numerous times.[3] As his father's eldest son, he was seen as his heir apparent,[2] and became an important part of the Hamas organization.[3]

Yousef said he decided to collaborate with Israel against Palestinian liberation struggles after a stint with his dad's comrades in an Israeli jail during the mid-1990s. At Megiddo Prison, he witnessed Hamas inmates leading a brutal year-long campaign to weed out supposed Israeli collaborators. "During that time, Hamas tortured and killed hundreds of prisoners,'' he said, recalling vivid memories of needles being inserted under finger nails and bodies charred with burning plastics. Many, if not all, had nothing to do with Israeli intelligence. ''I will never forget their screams,'' he continued. ''I started asking myself a question. What if Hamas succeeded in destroying Israel and building a state. Will they destroy our people in this way?'' [10]

Yousef's doubts about Islam and Hamas began forming when he realized Hamas' brutality, and that he hated how Hamas used the lives of suffering civilians and children to achieve its goals.[2] Yousef was held by Shin Bet agents in 1996. While in prison he decided to accept a Shin Bet offer to become an informant.[11][12]

Espionage career Beginning with his release from prison in 1997, Yousef was considered the Shin Bet's most reliable source in the Hamas leadership, earning himself the nickname "The Green Prince" '' using the color of the Islamist group's flag, and "prince" because of his pedigree as the son of one of the movement's founders. The intelligence he supplied to Israel led to the exposure of many Hamas cells, as well as the prevention of dozens of suicide bombings and assassination attempts on Jews. He has said that he did not inform for money, but rather that his motivations were ideological and religious, and that he only wanted to save lives.[13] In order to thwart any suspicions of collaboration, the Shin Bet staged an arrest attempt, telling the Israel Defense Forces to launch an operation to arrest him, and then provided him intelligence allowing him to escape at the last minute, after which he went into hiding for the rest of his career.

Yousef says he supplied intelligence only on the condition that the "targets" would not be killed, but arrested. This led to the detention of several key Palestinian leaders, including Ibrahim Hamid, a Hamas commander in the West Bank, and Marwan Barghouti. Also, Yousef claims to have thwarted a 2001 plot to assassinate Shimon Peres, then foreign minister and later President of Israel. According to his former Shin Bet officer, "Many people owe him their lives and don't even know it."[13]

Conversion to Christianity According to his story, Yousef met a British missionary in 1999 who introduced him to Christianity.[2] Between the years 1999 and 2000, Yousef gradually embraced Christianity. In 2005, he was secretly baptized in Tel Aviv by an unidentified Christian tourist. He left the West Bank for the United States in 2007, and lived some time in San Diego, California, where he joined the Barabbas Road Church.[2]

In August 2008, Yousef publicly revealed his Christianity, and renounced Hamas and the Arab leadership, thereby endangering himself and exposing his family in Ramallah to persecution.[2] Yousef has also claimed that his aim was to bring peace to the Middle East; he hopes to return to his homeland when there is peace.[2]

Yousef has stated that despite his conversion to Christianity, he is "against religion", and does not adhere to any denomination of Christianity. He has stated, "Religion steals freedom, kills creativity, turns us into slaves and against one another. Yes, I am talking about Christianity as well as Islam. Most Christians I have seen, seem to have missed the point, that Jesus redeemed us from religion. Religion is nothing but man's attempts to get back to God. Whether it is Islam, Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism, Hinduism, animism, any ism. Religion can't save mankind. Only Jesus could save mankind through his death and resurrection. And Jesus is the only way to God."[14]

Autobiography Yousef's co-authored autobiography, Son of Hamas: A Gripping Account of Terror, Betrayal, Political Intrigue, and Unthinkable Choices, written with the assistance of Ron Brackin, was published in March 2010.[1][15]

Yousef's brother Ouwais denounced the report about his brother's activities, saying: "It was full of lies; it's all lies." Ouwais also revealed that the last contact between his family and Mosab took place more than a year before the news of his spying.[16] Sheikh Hassan Yousef, Mosab's father, while in an Israeli prison, disowned his son for spying for Israel.[4] The Haaretz report on Yousef was described by Hamas MP Mushir al-Masri as "psychological war being waged against the Palestinian people... [it] did not deserve a response".[16]

Deportation threats and political asylum For a time, Yousef was threatened with deportation from the U.S., after his request for political asylum was denied, since statements in his book about working for Hamas were interpreted as "providing material support to a U.S.-designated terrorist organization", despite Yousef's explanation that they were "intended to undermine the group". His case then proceeded to the deportation stage, despite Yousef's advocates' warning that he would likely be executed by the Palestinian Authority if deported to the West Bank.[17]

On 24 June 2010, Shin Bet handler Gonen Ben Itzhak, who for 10 years worked with Yousef under the cryptonym "Loai", revealed his own identity in order to testify on behalf of Yousef at an immigration hearing in San Diego. Ben Itzhak described Yousef as a "true friend", and said, "he risked his life every day in order to prevent violence".[18][19]

Partially as a result of this, Immigration Court Judge Richard J. Bartolomei, Jr., ruled on 30 June 2010, that Yousef would be allowed to remain in the United States after being fingerprinted and passing a routine background check.[6]

He is a frequent guest speaker on various American news channels, where he talks about the atrocities committed by Hamas.[20]

Films A documentary adaptation of Son of Hamas titled The Green Prince, directed and written by Nadav Schirman, premiered at the 2014 Sundance Film Festival,[21] where it won the Audience Award for World Cinema: Documentary. The Green Prince will be re-made into a live-action feature film.[22]

Yousef is collaborating with US-based actor and film producer Sam Feuer in the production of two films: a feature film adaptation of Yousef's book Son of Hamas and documentary The Green Prince, and a historical depiction of the life of the Muslim prophet Muhammad based on the accounts of eighth-century historian Ibn Ishaq.[23]

Views and controversies Some elements of Yousef's story have been questioned. Former Shin Bet Deputy Chief Gideon Ezra described Yousef's claims as "too good to be true", and stated that, "there are hundreds of collaborators like him. He is not unusual. He just decided to write a book about it."[24] The conversion to Christianity narrative promoted by Yousef and his book publishers remains unsubstantiated as well.[citation needed ] Critics have alleged that Yousef claimed he was a Christian (for a longer period of time) in order to help secure asylum in the United States. However, he has since become an active figure in evangelical non-denominational Christianity in America, and has appeared on programs such as The 700 Club. Interest in the book from Christian readers helped make it a New York Times best-seller. During an appearance on The 700 Club to promote his book "Son of Hamas", he was welcomed and interviewed by host Pat Robertson.[25]

At an "End Times Prophecy" conference in 2010, hosted by California-based evangelist Greg Laurie, Yousef told the crowd in attendance that Islam is "the biggest lie in human history."[26] He further suggested at the conference that he was "surprised" the Quran is legal in the United States ("30:06 "..[immigrants] come to America to improve their lives and make a better living...we're dealing with just other nations and..other human beings, they're wonderful people. We have to be tolerant [with immigrants] but what we can't be tolerant with -- at all -- and I am surprised that it's still this moment, that the Quran is a legal book in the United States. Just imagine that I go today and try to publish a book and say: 'if you don't believe in what I'm saying, I'll send my followers to kill you, and ask my followers to kill everybody that disbelieves in me' --will anybody publish this book? [I'd] go to prison because of that. And this not a freedom of opinion I think. And this is in the Quran. I want you to remember a chapter and two verses: Chapter 9, verse 5 [and] verse 29..").[26]

In May 2016, talking to a Jerusalem Post conference in New York, Yousef claimed that at one time he was working for, and being paid by, Israel, the United States, the Palestinian Authority, and Hamas, all at the same time. He went on to say that Islam as a whole is comparable to Nazism, and must be defeated.[27]

Published works Hassan Yousef, Mosab (2 March 2010). Son of Hamas: A Gripping Account of Terror, Betrayal, Political Intrigue, and Unthinkable Choices (First ed.). Carol Stream, Illinois: Tyndale Momentum. ISBN 978-1-4143-3307-6. References ^ a b c d e Issacharoff, Avi (24 February 2010). "Haaretz exclusive: Hamas founder's son worked for Shin Bet for years". Haaretz . Retrieved 28 July 2014 . ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o Elsworth, Catherine; Carolynne Wheeler (24 August 2008). "Mosab Hassan Yousef, son of Hamas leader, becomes a Christian". Daily Telegraph. London . Retrieved 7 March 2010 . ^ a b c d "Mosab Hassan Yousef Biography". Amazon.com . Retrieved 14 March 2010 . ^ a b "Hamas leader disowns son - World news - Mideast/N. Africa - Israel-Palestinians | NBC News". NBC News. 3 January 2010 . Retrieved 23 April 2013 . ^ Yousef, Mosab Hassan (2 March 2010). Son of Hamas: A Gripping Account of Terror, Betrayal, Political Intrigue ... - Mosab Hassan Yousef - Google Books. Tyndale House Publishers. ISBN 9781414340821 . Retrieved 23 April 2013 . ^ a b Darc(C), Keith (30 June 2010). " 'Son of Hamas' wins asylum fight". San Diego Union-Tribune . Retrieved 13 March 2011 . ^ Kaminski, Matthew (5 March 2010). "They Need to Be Liberated From Their God'; The 'Son of Hamas' author on his conversion to Christianity, spying for Israel, and shaming his family". The Wall Street Journal . Retrieved 7 March 2010 . ^ "Son of Hamas" . Retrieved 14 March 2010 . ^ a b "An Israeli-Hamas Double Agent Speaks about Career in Intelligence". CNN. 2 March 2010 . Retrieved 14 March 2010 . ^ "Hamas founder's son: Israel should kill leaders after ceasefire". 22 May 2021 . Retrieved 13 June 2023 . ^ Christiane Amanpour (2 March 2010). "An Israeli-Hamas Double Agent Speaks about Career in Intelligence". CNN . Retrieved 28 July 2010 . ^ Gonen ben Yitzhak; Mosab Hassan Yousef (30 June 2010). "Why Deport a Friend to Middle East Peace?". The Washington Post . Retrieved 28 July 2014 . ^ a b Sherwell, Philip; Nick Allen (27 February 2010). " 'I saved Shimon Peres from plot' says son of Hamas founder". Daily Telegraph. London . Retrieved 7 March 2010 . ^ Mosab Hassan Yousef (13 May 2011). "Let's get to know each other, let's talk . . ". Goodreads . Retrieved 28 July 2014 . ^ Harel, Amos (24 February 2010). "When Palestinians keep Israelis safe". Haaretz . Retrieved 28 July 2014 . ^ a b Flower, Kevin (3 March 2010). "Report: Hamas founder's son worked for Israel". CNN . Retrieved 7 March 2010 . ^ Leila, Hilary (25 June 2010). "Israel informant risks deportation". The Jerusalem Post . Retrieved 23 April 2013 . ^ Mosab Hassan Yousef (14 May 2010). "Shin Bet "handler" confirms Son of Hamas account!". Son of Hamas . Retrieved 23 April 2013 . ^ Issacharoff, Avi (24 February 2010). "Haaretz exclusive: Hamas founder's son worked for Shin Bet for years". Haaretz . Retrieved 23 April 2013 . ^ "Hamas founder's son speaks out against terrorist group". Fox News. 3 February 2017. ^ Tatiana Siegel (4 December 2013). "Sundance Film Festival Unveils 2014 Competition Lineup". The Hollywood Reporter . Retrieved 28 July 2014 . ^ Debra Kamin (13 April 2014). " 'The Green Prince' to Be Remade as Feature Film". Variety . Retrieved 28 July 2014 . ^ Melanie Lidman (21 June 2012). "Former Hamas man to 'tell truth' about Muhammad". The Jerusalem Post . Retrieved 28 July 2014 . ^ Strochlic, Nina (5 August 2014). "When the Son of Hamas Spied for Israel". The Daily Beast. ^ "Son of Hamas: Journey from Terror to Freedom". CBN.com - The Christian Broadcasting Network. 7 September 2014. ^ a b "- YouTube". www.youtube.com. Archived from the original on 30 November 2017. ^ 'Son of Hamas' tells Jerusalem Post conference: Islam is the problem Jerusalem Post. 22 May 2016. External links Palestine portal Biography portal Archived copy of defunct official website of the book (February 1, 2014)al-Qaida's reaction to Mosab's Apostasy (August 2008)Magazine article from Haaretz (Feb. 2010)Interview on CBN with Pat RobertsonInterview with BBC's Lyse Doucet and other reactions from Israel/PalestineMosab very outspoken on BBC Arabic (12 March 2010): arabic 30min; engl. subtitle 5minmore details : transcript of a teleconference Archived 24 February 2021 at the Wayback Machine with Christian journalists (18 March)Mosab wants to create a 'movement' in the Middle East Archived 31 July 2012 at the Wayback Machine23min HARDtalk on BBC [permanent dead link ] (14 May 2010)Long Interview in Haaretz with Captain Loai, Mosab's Shin Bet-Handler (14 May 2010); Similar to Newsweek Archived 21 May 2010 at the Wayback Machine (17 May 2010)Turner, Camilla (22 November 2014). "Palestinian state is a 'fantasy', says son of Hamas founder". Telegraph.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 22 Oct 2023 00:09

Colorado's Supreme Court this week had the opportunity to hand down a historic judgment on the constitutionality of '' reverse keyword search warrants ,'' a powerful new surveillance technique that grants law enforcement the ability to identify potential criminal suspects based on broad, far-reaching internet search results. Police say the creative warrants have helped them crack otherwise cold cases. Critics, which include more than a dozen rights organizations and major tech companies , argue the tool's immense scope tramples on innocent users' privacy and runs afoul of Fourth Amendment Protections against unreasonable searches by the government.

No Google AI Search, I Don't Need to Learn About the ''Benefits of Slavery''

With eager eyes watching them, Colorado's court ultimately opted to kick the can down the road.

Civil liberties and digital rights experts speaking with Gizmodo described the court's ''confusing'' decision to punt on the constitutionality of reverse keyword search this week as a major missed opportunity and one that could inevitably lead to more cops pursuing the controversial tactics, both in Colorado and beyond. Critics fear these broad warrants, which compel Google and other tech companies to sift through its vast cornucopia of search data to sniff out users who've searched for specific keywords, could be weaponized against abortion seekers, political protestors, or even everyday internet users who inadvertently type a result that could someday be used against them in court.

''These are situations where private industry has amalgamated these unbelievably huge databases of an uncountable number of people and the government, without a suspect, is able to go through everybody's information to try to pluck targets out,'' ACLU Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project Surveillance and Cybersecurity Counsel Jennifer Granick told Gizmodo.

What did the Colorado court say? In a 74-page, 5-2 opinion released Monday, Colorado's Supreme Court said Denver police officers were justified and acted ''in good faith'' when they served Google with a reverse keyword search warrant back in 2021 as part of an investigation into a deadly arson that claimed the lives of five Senegalese immigrants . The ruling came in response to a motion to suppress evidence from one of the suspects in the case, who argued the sweeping nature of the keyword search violated his Fourth Amendment protections.

''At every step, law enforcement acted reasonably to carry out a novel search in a constitutional manner,'' the court wrote in its majority opinion. ''Suppressing the evidence here wouldn't deter police misconduct.''

The court validated the police conduct but punted entirely on the constitutionality of the reverse keyword searches in question. Though police have increasingly deployed the technique and other tactics like it in recent years, courts still haven't settled on its actual legality. Despite pressure from the legal community to weigh in, the court threw up its hands and said it neither condoned nor condemned the practice. Future abuses of the warrant that may occur, they said, were a topic for another day.

''If dystopian problems emerge, as some fear, the courts stand ready to hear argument regarding how we should rein in law enforcement's use of rapidly advancing technology,'' the court ruled.

Not everyone on the court agreed. In a dissenting opinion, Colorado judge Monica Marquez warned the court's deflection of responsibility would be seen as a green light for cops around the country to pursue the suspect warrants with more frequency.

''At the risk of sounding alarmist, I fear that by upholding this practice, the majority's ruling today gives constitutional cover to law enforcement seeking unprecedented access to the private lives of individuals not just in Colorado, but across the globe,'' Marquez wrote . ''And I fear that today's decision invites courts nationwide to do the same.''

Experts speaking with Gizmodo agreed, saying the court's decision to side with the police using a ''good faith exception'' could give police an out to pursue cases using the warrants without actually clarifying the murky legal underbelly buried underneath.

If law enforcement doesn't have clear standards or rules, then their actions will be deemed in good faith,'' Jake Laperruque Deputy Director of the Center for Democracy & Technology's Security & Surveillance Project said in an interview with Gizmodo. ''Without any real clarity on what standards or rules are for them, I expect the next [reverse keyword warrant], even if it is deemed deficient, will be allowed into evidence.''

''What the good faith exception really does is it incentivizes police to push the envelope as opposed to what it was supposed to be for, which is to incentivize police to adhere to constitutional limitations,'' Granick of the ACLU added.

One group that definitely did appreciate the court's ruling was local law enforcement. In a statement sent to Gizmodo, Denver District Attorney Beth McCann said she was ''very pleased'' with the outcome.

''The Court recognized that police officers exercised good faith in obtaining the warrant that led to the identification of the suspects,'' McCann said. ''We agree with that part of the court's opinion and will now move forward with our cases. More on that case below.

What was the case and how did we get here?Surveillance footage obtained from Denver Police on August 5th, 2020 reportedly shows three young-looking individuals shrouded in masks carrying a canister of gasoline. Moments later, a home filled with a family of Senegalese immigrants began filling with smoke. All five of the people in the home, including a toddler and an infant, reportedly died of smoke inhalation and carbon monoxide poisoning just before the entire home was engulfed in violent flames. Police, according to the Denver Post, reportedly found six-month-old Hawa Baye still clasped in her mother's arms when they sifted through the smoldering rubble.

Over the next few weeks, law enforcement investigating the alleged arson reportedly obtained 23 different search warrants, including some targeting major cell phone companies. The phone providers eventually handed over 7,000 mobile numbers geo-located within a one-mile radius of the rubble. Still, despite two months of intense investigation, law enforcement couldn't come up with any suspects. Faced with a dead end, police in the case opted to pursue a more legally murky reverse keyword search.

Investigators were confident perpetrators of the alleged arson would have looked up the target's address ahead of time. Armed with that theory, they served Google a warrant calling on the tech giant to hand over a list of users who had searched for nine variations of ''5312 N. Truckee St,'' on Google services up to 15 days prior to the fire. Initially, investigators asked Google to provide them with the full names, addresses, birthdays, and physical addresses of anyone who had happened to search the address. At the time, Google reportedly received around 3.5 billion searches on its services every day.

Google initially recoiled at the warrant and said complying with such a broad request for private user data would violate its own privacy policies. DPD withdrew the first warrant and tried again, this time calling on Google to provide two days' worth of location data for each account determined to have searched for the address during the time window. Google refused once more, again citing its privacy policies.

Finally, on its third try, the DPD broke through. Google eventually complied with the order when DPD narrowed down the request to supposedly anonymous ISP information. Armed with that data, investigators were able to obtain a separate warrant ordering internet service providers to reveal the names of five people. Police eventually narrowed that down to three suspects: Then-16-year olds Kevin Bui and Gavin Seymour, and then-15-year-old Dillon Siebert.

Google acknowledged the Colorado court's ruling in a statement sent to Gizmodo following the publication of this article.

''It's important that the Colorado Supreme Court recognized the significant privacy and First Amendment interests implicated by keyword searches,'' a Google spokesperson said. ''With all law enforcement demands, including reverse warrants, we have a rigorous process designed to protect the privacy of our users while supporting the important work of law enforcement.''

Siebert, who's 17 now, was sentenced to 10 years in prison earlier this year after he pleaded guilty to second-degree murder as part of a plea deal late last year. '‹'‹Bui, according to a 2021 testimony provided by DPD Detective Neil Baker, reportedly told police he had been robbed of his phone and shoes in 2020 while he was trying to procure a gun. The teen claims he used an app to track his phone back to 5312 N. Truckee where he believed it was being held by thieves. Bui confessed to setting fire to the house, according to Baker, only realizing afterward that the family of immigrant victims weren't the ones who robbed him.

The third teen suspect, Gavin Seymour, took a different track. Rather than admit to the fire or strike a plea deal, an attorney representing Seymour filed a motion to suppress evidence police gathered from the reverse keyword search presented to Google. In his motion to dismiss, Seymour's attorneys argued the broad nature of the keyword request violated the Fourth Amendment rights protecting Americans from unreasonable searches and seizures by the government and amounted to a ''novel and uniquely destructive digital dragnet of immense proportions.''

Attorneys representing Seymour, and several experts speaking with Gizmodo, argue law enforcement engaged in a ''massive fishing expedition'' that was neither narrowly tailored nor specific, two things fundamental to traditional warrant requests. Google search results, Seymour's attorneys argued, are intimate and can reveal private insights a whole host of private insights people may not want out in the open.

Michael W. Price, an attorney with the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers representing Seymour, declined to comment.

''The idea that you could learn what someone was thinking'...it's like witchcraft''Seymour's attempt to throw out evidence resulting from the Google warrant ultimately worked its way up to Colorado's Supreme Court, making it the first major court given the opportunity to weigh in on the practice of the increasingly common practice. The ensuing case caught the attention of lawyers and civil liberties groups across the country which hoped the court would provide much-needed legal clarity.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation, a leading critic of the practice, filed multiple amicus briefs highlighting the dangers of normalizing reverse keyword searches. Google searches, the EFF argued, have become guarded places where internet users reveal deeply imitate information about themselves, some genuine and other ephemeral. A reverse search warrant for a cell carrier, for example, could reveal the IP address of a budding jihadist in training, but it could just as easily also reveal the identities of journalists, authors, or historians investigating the topic for their work. In other cases, disaffected youths or individuals anguishing through bouts of severe depression could, and do, search for ways to harm themselves and others even if they never actually commit a crime. A reverse keyword warrant could take those seemingly private clacks of a keyboard and turn them into potential evidence used against internet users in a criminal case.

''I have yet to see any sort of reasonable proposal that says, well, here's how we could allow keyword search warrants in a way that not only prevents us from looping extraneous private information but actually sometimes really sensitive private information that could be subject to abuse,'' Jake Laperruque of the Center for Democracy & Technology said in an interview.

Multiple experts speaking with Gizmodo warned of a potential nightmare scenario where law enforcement in mostly right-wing-led states could use the broader search warrants to find examples of users who had searched for the address of abortion providers or information about gender-affirming care which may violate local laws. In another dystopian twist, experts warn law enforcement could use the same reverse keyword searches to expose attendees of political protests or reveal members of vocal political opposition groups.

''The idea that you could learn what someone was thinking and looking for and what they were curious about and go back in time and do that, it's like witchcraft,'' Granick of the ACLU said.

Net Choice Vice President & General Counsel Carl Szabo, whose trade organization counts Google and Meta among its members, said he believed large tech firms like Google or Facebook could ''fight tooth and nail'' to oppose government requests for search results that could target abortion seekers or political protests. So far, most of those cases remain hypothetical, however, law enforcement has already used a woman's search results for the abortion pill . Misoprostol as evidence to charge her for ''killing her infant child.''

Though police in the Colorado case reportedly pursued nearly two dozen more precise warrants before resorting to a reverse search, critics like Granick warn that's not always the case. She warned of a type of ''mission creep'' setting in which law enforcement around the country where reverse searches, once reserved for extreme outlier cases, could become commonplace.

''You can always come up with a story about why you would need it, but that doesn't mean that the way it will actually be used is safe or legitimate or respectful of privacy rights.''

It's easy for search terms to quickly become overly broad and borderline ridiculous. In one case, Granick pointed to a warrant request where police had demanded information from all users who had searched for a kidnapping victim's name. But the high-profile nature of that case meant just about everyone in the neighborhood would have searched the name and wound up caught up in the search.

''I think the biggest worry is that there'll be added use of keyword searches to try to pull in people based on intent or just what they're thinking about'--what they're considering,'' Laperruque said.

The EFF echoed those concerns in a recent blog post and said law enforcement's current latitude to use reverse searches could even implicate search results partially generated by Google's autocomplete tool in search. Activists and attorneys fear these ''unintended searches' could lead to a dystopian and dysfunctional reality where anodyne or frivolous searches could be used against defendants.

What's next?Some experts like Szabo believe the legality of reverse keyword searches may eventually be answered by the US Supreme Court, but that's likely years away if it ever happens. In the meantime, states and local lawmakers have taken the initiative and begun crafting legislation that would set limits on the types of data police can request from keyword search warrants or, in some cases, essentially ban the practice altogether.

New York and California have both proposed legislation to place strict limitations on ''reverse search warrants'' which include reverse keyword search and the even more popular ''geofence warrants'' where law enforcement can request information on all devices located within a particular area of a period of time. Unlike traditional warrants, neither of those ''reverse search warrants'' requires police to have a particular suspect in mind when requesting massive amounts of data. In California, the number of geofence warrant requests alone jumped from 209 requests in 2018 to 1,909 requests in 2020, according to Wired . Data on the rise of reverse keyword search warrants is less common.

Szabo said we may be witnessing ''the next chapter'' of what's deemed reasonable for search warrants in real-time. In the past, Congress stepped in to place limits over the lengths law enforcement could go to request information about an individual's video rental history or their emails, whether it's your video rental history through laws like the Electronic Communications Privacy Act or the Video Privacy Protection Act. Granick of the ACLU largely agreed.

''I do think legislation is the thing that will protect people's rights more comprehensively and more quickly,'' Granick said. ''There's lots of rules that could be instantiated in legislation that litigation over the Fourth Amendment isn't necessarily going to make clear.''

Update 6:20 P.M. EST: Added statement from Google

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sat, 21 Oct 2023 20:21

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

American lawyer (born 1971)

Jessica Rosenworcel (born July 12, 1971) is an American attorney serving as a member and chairwoman of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC).[1] She originally served on the FCC from May 11, 2012, to January 3, 2017, and was confirmed by the Senate for an additional term on August 3, 2017. She was named to serve as acting chairwoman in January 2021 and designated permanent chairwoman in October 2021.[2] She was confirmed for another term by the Senate in December 2021.[3] Rosenworcel's current term runs for five years beginning July 1, 2020.[4]

Early life and education [ edit ] Rosenworcel was born to Willa (n(C)e Linoff)[5] and Elliot Rosenworcel,[6] grew up in West Hartford, Connecticut and in 1989,[6] was graduated from Hall High School.[7][8] She graduated from Wesleyan University in 1993 with a Bachelor of Arts degree in economics and English literature, then studied law at New York University School of Law, graduating with a Juris Doctor in 1997.[9][10]

Career [ edit ] After law school, Rosenworcel was an associate at the law firm Drinker Biddle & Reath (now Faegre Drinker), where she worked in communications law.[11][12] In 1999, she joined the Wireline Competition Bureau of the FCC, and in 2003 started working for then-FCC Commissioner Michael Copps.[11] Starting in 2007, she served as Senior Communications Counsel to the United States Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, under the leadership of Senator John D. Rockefeller IV (D''WV). She previously served in the same role on the Committee under the leadership of Senator Daniel Inouye (D''HI).[13] In 2013, Rockefeller led a push to have Rosenworcel named to be the first female chairwoman of the commission when former Chairman Julius Genachowski stepped down, although the position was ultimately given to Tom Wheeler.[14]

Federal Communications Commission [ edit ] Rosenworcel in 2014Rosenworcel was first nominated to the FCC by President Barack Obama in October 2011.[14] Her confirmation was delayed for months when Republican Senator Chuck Grassley refused to bring it up for a vote until the FCC released documents about a project he opposed.[14] She was confirmed unanimously by the United States Senate on May 7, 2012, and sworn into office on May 11, 2012, for a term ending June 30, 2015.[13]

On July 13, 2012, Politico designated Rosenworcel as one of 50 politicos to watch, describing her as "whip-smart and intensely serious".[15]

By law, commissioners may continue serving until the appointment of their replacements, but not beyond the end of the next session of Congress following term expiration.[16] In May 2015, President Obama renominated Rosenworcel for a second term,[17] but she was not reconfirmed by the Senate by the time she was required to leave her seat in January 2017.[18] In June 2017, Rosenworcel was nominated to an additional term by President Donald Trump. She was confirmed by the Senate on August 3, 2017.[19]

Following the election of Joe Biden as president, Biden named Rosenworcel as his choice to become chairperson of the FCC after the departure of prior chairman[20] Ajit Pai with the change in administration. Biden named Rosenworcel to serve as acting chairwoman in the interim, making her the second-ever woman to serve in this position.[21] Biden later named Rosenworcel to be the permanent FCC Chairwoman in October 2021,[22] making her the first female to hold the permanent chairperson position on the FCC, and she was confirmed by the Senate on December 7, 2021 for another term as commissioner.[4] Her new five-year term expires June 30, 2025.

Rosenworcel is the Chairwoman of the Federal-State Joint Conference on Advanced Telecommunications Services, a forum for dialogue among the FCC, state regulators, and local and regional entities about the deployment of advanced telecommunications capabilities.[23] In 2022, Rosenworcel announced new plans to create a space bureau within the FCC to address the increased number of satellite launches.[24]

Positions [ edit ] During her initial term as an FCC commissioner, Rosenworcel voted to enforce net neutrality by classifying Internet service providers as Title II common carriers,[25] overturn state laws that protect Internet service providers against competition from municipal broadband,[26] change the technical definition of "broadband" from 4 Mbit/s to 25 Mbit/s,[27] use the LifeLine program to subsidize Internet access for low-income individuals,[28] and expand consumer protection against robocalls.[29] On the latter topic, Rosenworcel in 2019 argued that the FCC should order telecommunications companies to provide free call-blocking services.[30] On March 17, 2021, she kicked off an anti-robocall agenda. This agenda includes issuing significant fines to companies, demanding cease-and-desist, and launching a Robocall Response Team.[31]

On net neutrality, Rosenworcel said, "We cannot have a two-tiered Internet with fast lanes that speed the traffic of the privileged and leave the rest of us lagging behind. We cannot have gatekeepers who tell us what we can and cannot do and where we can and cannot go online, and we do not need blocking, throttling, or paid prioritization schemes that undermine the Internet as we know it."[25]

Rosenworcel has been a champion of updating national education policy in order to connect the country's schools and libraries with high-speed Internet.[32] In addition, Rosenworcel is responsible for coining the term "homework gap", and has brought attention to the need of students to get online when they are outside of school.[33]

Rosenworcel supports proposals to improve communications infrastructure and location accuracy for 911 calls from cell phones,[14] and supports the expansion of FirstNet, a dedicated wireless network for emergency services workers.[14]

Personal life [ edit ] Rosenworcel lives in Washington, D.C., with her husband and two children.[34] She is the sister of Brian Rosenworcel, the drummer for the band Guster.[35]

Rosenworcel is Jewish.[7][36]

References [ edit ] ^ "Jessica Rosenworcel, Chairwoman". Federal Communications Commission . Retrieved August 18, 2023 . ^ Williamson, Elizabeth (October 26, 2021). "Biden Nominates Rosenworcel as F.C.C.'s First Female Leader". New York Times . Retrieved August 18, 2023 . President Biden on Tuesday nominated Jessica Rosenworcel, the acting chairwoman of the Federal Communications Commission, to the permanent job, putting her on track to become the first woman to lead the agency. ^ Brodkin, Jon (December 12, 2021). "Senate gives Rosenworcel new FCC term". Ars Technica . Retrieved May 12, 2022 . ^ a b "Congress.gov Jessica Rosenworcel '-- FCC". Congress.gov. U.S. Congress. December 7, 2021 . Retrieved May 12, 2022 . ^ "Elliott Rosenworcel Willa Linoff". Ancestry.com . Retrieved July 17, 2022 . ^ a b Newton, Ronni (January 27, 2021). "President Biden Names West Hartford Native Acting FCC Chairwoman". West Hartford News . Retrieved July 17, 2022 . ^ a b Kampeas, Ron (February 2, 2021). "West Hartford native Jessica Rosenworcel appointed acting FCC chair". Jewish Ledger. Jewish Telegraphic Agency . Retrieved July 17, 2022 . ^ Falcone, Amanda (May 7, 2012). "Hall Graduate Gets FCC Seat". Hartford Courant . Retrieved January 21, 2021 . ^ "Jessica Rosenworcel", Federal Communications Commission. Retrieved August 20, 2012. ^ "Nominations of Jessica Rosenworcel and Ajit Pai to The Federal Communications Commission". govinfo.gov. ^ a b Liebelson, Dana (May 6, 2015). "How Jessica Rosenworcel Is Shaping Our Digital Future". Huffington Post . Retrieved July 22, 2015 . ^ "Jessice Rosenworcel, Senate Commerce Committee Nomination Questionnaire" . Retrieved April 19, 2022 . ^ a b Meet the Commissioners Archived October 9, 2012, at the Wayback Machine", Future of Music, June 6, 2012. ^ a b c d e Wilson, Daniel (July 10, 2015). "Keeping FCC Commish Should Be 'Slam Dunk,' Colleagues Say". Law360 . Retrieved July 22, 2015 . ^ "50 politicos to watch", Politico. ^ 47 USC 154(c) ^ "President Obama Announces More Key Administration Posts". White House Office of the Press Secretary. May 20, 2015 . Retrieved July 22, 2015 . ^ "Senate Fails to Confirm Rosenworcel for Another Term". National Public Safety Telecommunications Council. December 12, 2016 . Retrieved January 31, 2017 . ^ Johnson, Ted (August 3, 2017). "Senate Confirms Jessica Rosenworcel, Brendan Carr to FCC". Variety . Retrieved August 9, 2017 . ^ "Biography of Former Chairman Ajit Pai". Federal Communications Commission. ^ "Biden picks Jessica Rosenworcel as acting FCC chief", NBC News. January 21, 2021. ^ "Biden expected to name 2 FCC picks in race to avert Republican majority". Politico. October 25, 2021 . Retrieved November 3, 2021 . ^ Membership of the Federal-State Joint Conference on Advanced Telecommunications Services, Retrieved on July 13, 2015. ^ Shepardson, David (November 3, 2022). "U.S. telecom regulator launching new space bureau". Reuters . Retrieved November 4, 2022 . ^ a b Jon Brodkin (February 26, 2015). "FCC votes for net neutrality, a ban on paid fast lanes, and Title II". Ars Technica . Retrieved June 26, 2015 . ^ Jon Brodkin (February 26, 2015). "FCC overturns state laws that protect ISPs from local competition". Ars Technica . Retrieved June 26, 2015 . ^ Jon Brodkin (January 29, 2015). "FCC chairman mocks industry claims that customers don't need faster Internet". Ars Technica . Retrieved June 26, 2015 . ^ Mark Wigfield (June 18, 2015). "FCC Takes Steps to Modernize and Reform Lifeline for Broadband" (PDF) . Federal Communications Commission . Retrieved June 26, 2015 . ^ Eggerton, John (June 18, 2015). "FCC Clarifies Robocall Rules" . Retrieved July 22, 2015 . ^ Romm, Tony (June 7, 2019). "The FCC allows AT&T, Verizon and other carriers to block more suspected robocalls". The Washington Post. Archived from the original on January 24, 2021 . Retrieved January 24, 2021 . ^ "Acting Chairwoman Rosenworcel kicks off anti-robocall agenda" (PDF) . Federal Communications Commission. March 17, 2021. ^ Tepe, Lindsey. "Another FCC Commissioner's Vision for Restructuring the Schools and Libraries Program". New America Foundation . Retrieved May 12, 2022 . ^ Rosenworcel, Jessica (June 15, 2015). "Bridging the Homework Gap". HuffPost . Retrieved April 17, 2018 . ^ "Jessica Rosenworcel set to become first woman to lead FCC permanently". Jewish Telegraphic Agency. October 27, 2021 . Retrieved July 17, 2022 . ^ "FCC requires Comcast to place Bloomberg alongside other news channels", The Hill's Hillicon Valley. ^ "Jews in the Biden Administration". Jewish Virtual Library. American-Israeli Cooperative Enterprise . Retrieved July 17, 2022 . External links [ edit ] Appearances on C-SPAN

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sat, 21 Oct 2023 17:21

Key points Weight loss medications like Ozempic and Wegovy can have side effects. Semaglutide medication for weight loss may be needed for an entire lifetime. 11 questions to ask your doctor before accepting a prescription. Source: John Diez/Pexels

During a regular visit to the doctor, a friend's pediatrician advised her 15-year-old to take semaglutide (e.g., Wegovy, Ozempic, GLP-1, or similar drugs). Let's call the teenager ''Leslie'' for privacy reasons.

Leslie trains for something analogous to gymnastics or competitive dance. They're active, doing cardio-fitness for three to five hours, three to four days a week. And the activity level has been like this for years.

Leslie's BMI category lands above the ''healthy/normal'' range. That alone seemed to trigger the doctor's recommendation to put Leslie on weight loss shots. (No laboratory blood work was performed, and no inquiry about how Leslie felt about their weight, whether it was a problem for Leslie, or even if Leslie wanted to change their weight.)

Whoa.

I have been hearing the same types of stories from friends and other clinicians, too. So, this aligns with experiences out there. To me, this is alarming.

Helpful questions if you or your child is interested in semaglutide for weight lossIt seems like the informed consent process for semaglutide medications may be individual for each physician. (Informed consent is a process of discussing risks and benefits along with what research does and doesn't know so far). If doctors aren't initiating detailed risk and benefit conversations about semaglutide, it will probably benefit you to ask some questions.

I'll stay with Leslie as my example. These risk/benefit questions popped up for their mother and me.

Once started for weight loss, the medication can be needed for the rest of an adult's lifetime. Is that the same for a child?Taking the shot should make Leslie eat less. Could that then lower their energy and ability to exercise? Leslie loves their movement and dance, and not doing those as much would negatively affect their mental health for certain.Wegovy and Ozempic warn of a risk of thyroid cancer. Pancreatitis, kidney issues, and gall bladder problems are rare but serious side effects these medications list. Leslie already has the genes for a genetic disease that will cause a transplant of a different major organ at some point in their life. How might the semaglutide medication interact with or affect that existing jeopardized organ?Genetics strongly influence eating disorders (Bulik, Blake, & Austin, 2019). Weight loss and dieting can push the metaphorical ''on button'' for susceptible people. There are eating disorders in Leslie's family, which could put Leslie at higher risk for a clinical eating disorder, too. Eating disorders are known for increased risk of death due to physical complications or suicide.In Europe, the medications are being investigated to ensure they don't compel suicidal ideation in some people (Constantino, 2023). How safe is the medicine to add to young, developing brains? When we under-eat, our thinking can get fuzzy (Franklin et al., 1948). Is there a chance this will affect Leslie's academic performance?Moods are affected by nutrition intake (Franklin et al., 1948). Will the moods, anger, and angst of teen years be the usual teen stuff, or is there a chance the medication and reduced nutrition will amplify it?Malnutrition can happen if we eat too little or in unbalanced ways. Though the shots would make Leslie eat less, will they eat enough and have enough balance for optimal health?What other effects have been shown to happen for teens? For instance, How does dating and eating with friends get affected as, for example, this young person socially develops?What are the benefits of weight loss'--not ''correlative'' but causal or proven positives'--sans lifestyle changes? For example, Leslie is already quite active. Shouldn't that already protect them from some of the disorders commonly correlated with ''obesity"? How does less adipose tissue provide more protection?Considering these risks/benefits, do the potential benefits outweigh (no pun intended) the risks?Wrapping This UpOf course, your risk and benefit questions would be specific to your child, family, and culture. But it seems that these medications are here to stay. In 2023, the Academy of American Pediatrics recommended prescribing weight-loss pharmaceuticals for children 12 years old or older who have ''obesity'' (Hampl et al., 2023). And studies are emerging. Recently, one concluded that "semaglutide represents an efficacious treatment option for adolescents with obesity.'' But long-term outcomes and more information will take time.

A power differential exists between medical doctors and their patients. Sometimes, it's hard to question what a doctor recommends. However, often, it's up to us'--you and me'--to bring up questions and concerns about recommendations. To do that well before the pharmacist consult at the drug store while receiving the medication? That can be a challenge.

After my friend and her teen met with the prescribing doctor, a cloud of shame landed on the precious kid. Shame is rarely a vehicle for inspiring lasting change. Further, if Leslie has any issues with binge eating, Leslie may find their head in the cupboard and mouth full. Research backs that experiencing weight stigma can amplify eating pathology (Puhl & Suh, 2015; Westby, Jones, & Loth, 2021).

References

This blog is for informational purposes and does not offer therapy or professional advice.

Bulik, C., Blake, L., & Austin, J. (2019). Genetics of eating disorders; What the clinician needs to know. Psychiatric Clinics. 42(1). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psc.2018.10.007

Constantino, A. K. (2023, July 26). UK investigates weight loss, diabetes drugs like Wegovy and Ozempic for suicide risks. https://www.cnbc.com/2023/07/26/wegovy-ozempic-uk-investigating-suicide-risks.html

Franklin, J. C., & Schiele, B. C. (1948). Observations on human behavior in experimental semi-starvation and rehabilitation. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 4(1), 28''45. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/1097-4679%28194801%294%3A1%3C28%3A%3AAID-JCLP2270040103%3E3.0.CO%3B2-F

Hampl, S. E., Hassink, S. G., Skinner, A. C., Armstrong, S. C., Barlow, S. E., Bolling, C. F., Avila Edwards, K. C., Eneli, I., Hamre, R., Joseph, M. M., Lunsford, D., Mendonca, E., Michalsky, M. P., Mirza, N., Ochoa, E. R., Sharifi, M., Staiano, A. E., Weedn, A. E., Flinn, S. K., Lindros, J., '... Okechukwu, K. (2023). Clinical practice guideline for the evaluation and treatment of children and adolescents with obesity. Pediatrics, 151(2), e2022060640. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2022-060640

Kelly, A. S., Arslanian, S., Hesse, D., Iversen, A. T., K¶rner , A., Schmidt, S., S¸rrig, R., Weghuber, D., & Jastreboff, A. M. (2023). Reducing BMI below the obesity threshold in adolescents treated with once-weekly subcutaneous semaglutide 2.4 mg. Obesity (Silver Spring), 31(8), 2139-2149. doi:10.1002/oby.23808

National Institute of Mental Health. ''Suicide.'' https://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/statistics/suicide

Puhl, R., & Suh, Y. (2015). Stigma and eating and weight disorders. Current psychiatry reports, 17(3), 552. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11920-015-0552-6

Westby, A., Jones, C. M., & Loth, K. A. (2021). The Role of Weight Stigma in the Development of Eating Disorders. American Family Physician, 104(1), 7''9.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sat, 21 Oct 2023 16:21

Nepnieuws. Desinformatie. Op hooghartige toon wordt ons de les gelezen, en op bezwerende toon doorverwezen: volg mainstream media, betrouwbare media. Redacties waar serieuze journalisten zitten, die het nieuws kunnen cureren. Deze week lieten gerenommeerde media vooral zien die verantwoordelijkheid helemaal niet aan te kunnen. Hoe het internet (weer) won.

Het feit dat iemand een fout maakt, zegt niets over een persoon of instelling. Waar mensen zijn, worden fouten gemaakt. Hoe mensen omgaan zodra ze met een fout worden geconfronteerd, dt zegt alles. De misstanden binnen de vele klokkenluiderszaken die de Nederlandse overheid rijk is, gaan grotendeels niet eens over de veiligheidssituatie of de misstand die de klokkenluider aan de kaak stelt. Nee, de reactie van zijn of haar leidinggevende - dt is wat het dossier vormt. In plaats van dank te betuigen voor het wijzen op een veiligheidsrisico, worden klokkenluiders (bijvoorbeeld bij Defensie) bedankt in de vorm van valse aangiftes, het antedateren van documenten, het plegen karaktermoord en het afleggen van valse verklaringen.

Mensen doen de gekste dingen om maar niet te hoeven toegeven dat ze er naast zaten. Wegpoetsen, afdekken en afhouden.

Gek genoeg moest ik daar ineens aan denken, toen ik Nederlandse (en buitenlandse) media eerder deze week klakkeloos de claims van Hamas zag Ctrl-C/Ctrl-V'en. Isral zou een ziekenhuis hebben gebombardeerd, waarbij 500 doden zouden zijn gevallen en nog eens honderden mensen onder het puin zouden liggen, aldus de Palestijnse autoriteit (en tevens EU- en VN-terreurlijstbezetter) Hamas. Deze claim werd overgenomen door Al-Jazeera (in handen van Hamas-brievenbusstaat Qatar) en dat is blijkbaar gerenommeerd genoeg om onverifieerbare claims (C)(C)n op (C)(C)n van over te nemen. De NOS repte over ''500 doden nog mogelijk honderden onder het puin'', RTL Nieuws en NRC over een ''Isralische raketaanval''. Pushmeldingen onderstreepten de gretigheid om het 'nieuws' als eerste te brengen.

Nu hoef je geen politicoloog te zijn om tot de conclusie te komen dat het klakkeloos overnemen van een claim van (C)(C)n van de strijdende partijen in een gewapend conflict, journalistiek gezien niet de meest solide keuze is. Als iemand zegt dat het regent, is het jouw taak als journalist om je kop uit het raam te steken - niet om oorlogspropaganda wit te wassen. Iets wat nu.nl, NOS, NRC en RTL Nieuws, NRC, Khalid & Sophie (BNN/VARA) doodleuk allemaal w(C)l deden - die laatste zelfs live in de uitzending, zonder enig voorbehoud of verificatie:

Je hoeft ook geen politicoloog te zijn om je achter de oren te krabben over de timing: waarom zou Isral een dag voor de komst van de Amerikaanse president, Joe Biden, en du moment dat de Duitse kanselier Scholz nog in the house is, zonder vooraf gegeven waarschuwing een ziekenhuis in Gaza bombarderen? Niet heel handig op het moment dat je internationale steun probeert te behouden, of aan het vergaren bent voor een mogelijke grondoorlog. Als het dus inderdaad een vergissing was of Isral helemaal niets ermee te maken had, zou je verwachten dat ze (naast een verklaring op de blauwe ogen) ondersteunend beeld- en geluidsmateriaal aanleveren om hun onschuld te aan te tonen. Het liefst ook nog even geverifieerd door het Pentagon en eventueel nog onafhankelijke experts van een internationale organisatie. Op moment van schrijven is dat - op dat laatste na - ook allemaal gebeurd.

Los daarvan kwam al vrij snel berichtgeving op gang die nog meer twijfel zaaide bij de ''Isralisch bombardement, 500 doden''-claim . Er waren namelijk geen beelden, alleen ''ooggetuigenverklaringen'' (waarvan ik mij serieus afvraag of NOS- of andere Nederlandse journalisten er daarvan op dat moment ook maar eentje hoogstpersoonlijk heeft gesproken). Hamas-dependance Gaza Health Ministry kwam zelfs met het opvallend specifieke dodenaantal van 471. Nu heb ik zelf tijdens mijn promotieonderzoek de kosten van militaire interventies door twaalf democratien in de periode tussen 1990-2013 in kaart gebracht door te kijken naar zowel militaire als burgerslachtoffers, en over die laatste kan ik u vertellen: die zijn in de praktijk vrijwel nooit zo snel, zo specifiek. Zeker in omstandigheden waarin de strijdende partijen geen staatslegers in herkenbaar uniform zijn, maar waar ''civiel'' en ''strijder'' een dynamisch Venn-diagram vormen. Er wordt daarom vrijwel altijd met schattingen gewerkt met een boven- en ondergrens. Zo liggen de Amerikaanse inschattingen van bij hun drone strikes omgekomen burgerslachtoffers altijd aanzienlijk lager dan de tellingen van NGO's en partijen aan de ontvangende zijde van deze aanvallen. Alle partijen hebben een belang om het aantal slachtoffers op een bepaalde hoogte (of laagte) te zetten en zijn derhalve op zichzelf beschouwd notoir onbetrouwbaar.

Wat deden enkele gevestigde media in dit geval bij gebrek aan beelden van het vermeende getroffen ziekenhuis? Nou gewoon, andere plaatjes er bij plakken om niet het nieuws te verslaan, maar Hun Beeld Van Het Nieuws te kunnen publiceren. Zo viel het schrijver Leon de Winter op dat Het Parool onder de berichtgeving ''Isralisch bombardement op ziekenhuis, honderden doden bij luchtaanval'' een foto had van iemand tussen puinstukken van een kapotgeschoten gebouw:

Na rondvragen en doorzeuren - zeg maar waar journalisten normaal gesproken voor worden betaald om te doen - werd De Winter teruggebeld door de fotoredactie van Het Parool: de foto was van maandag 16 oktober (eerder dus) in Khan Younes, zeker 20 kilometer ten zuiden van het ziekenhuis. Oftewel: totaal andere plek, totaal ander tijdstip. Niet alleen in Nederland gingen fotoredacties hun journalistieke boekjes te buiten. Zo had ook de New York Times bij gebrek aan beelden van de gebeurtenis 'zomaar' een foto van elders uit Gaza bij hun nieuwsbericht geplakt:

De omvang van deze journalistieke canard werd pas duidelijk toen er uiteindelijk w(C)l echte beelden naar buiten kwamen van het ziekenhuis: geen inslagkrater te zien, wel een enigszins verschroeide parkeerplaats die niet de indruk wekt dat er een verwoestende explosie was gebeurd.

Het was niet ondanks, maar juist dankzij het internet, met name dankzij dat vermaledijde Twitter (tegenwoordig X) dat experts maar ook journalisten die wel enig moreel besef in hun sodemieter hebben, in staat waren om zo goed mogelijk te reconstrueren wat er wel (of niet) was gebeurd. Bellingcat kon bijvoorbeeld op basis van openbare bronnen (tegenwoordig heet dat ''OSINT''), zoals social media posts van onder andere persbureau Reuters (dat als een van de eerste foto's van de locatie had) en Telegram-kanalen een reconstructie maken . Door het bronnenmateriaal kritisch te vergelijken kwamen deze onderzoekers - net als Isral - tot de conclusie dat de impact-krater niet overeen komt met die van een luchtaanval.

De internetspeurders zeggen (terecht) niets over de daders: hoewel het IDF namelijk geluidsmateriaal heeft vrijgegeven waarop strijders van Islamic Jihad te horen zouden zijn, moeten deze (net als het vrijgegeven beeldmateriaal) nog worden geverifieerd door een onafhankelijke expertgroep. Uiteraard moeten we de ondersteunende verklaring van het Pentagon over Israls lezing van zaken niet met een korreltje zout nemen, maar tegelijkertijd zal het laten meekijken van de Amerikaanse bondgenoot ook niet de gehele internationale gemeenschap overtuigen.

Toch waren er ook enkele lichtpuntjes. Hoewel gymnasiumlinkse media graag een beetje neerkijken op WNL (vaak door hun slogan ''vrolijk rechts'' tussen aanhalingstekens te zetten), bleek de omroep van hoofdredacteur Bert Huisjes wederom een nuchter Asterix- en Obelix-dorpje op het Mediapark. Oorlogsverslaggever Hans Jaap Melissen mocht inbellen (en later zijn betoog nogmaals in Op1 herhalen), en waarschuwen dat het vreselijk belangrijk is om eerst de feiten z(C)lf te checken en daarbij rekening te houden met kleuring van de berichtgeving door belanghebbenden in een conflict. Ook mocht hoogleraar aan de Defensieacademie Martijn Kitzen in Goedemorgen Nederland aanschuiven om enkele zeer terechte punten te maken over de rol van oorlogsnarratieven.

Bijzonder om te zien was het dat mensen - naast een ontbijtshow - vooral op het internet in het algemeen en bij GeenStijl in het bijzonder terecht konden voor nuance. Hier werden slagen om de arm werden gehouden. En niet oordelend, zoals in het NRC, dat op basis van ongeverifieerde beweringen doodleuk schreef dat ''Isral een nieuwe grens lijkt te hebben overschreden in een strijd waar het zich toch al weinig van het internationale recht aantrok.''

Het deed de wenkbrauwen fronsen. Die week daarvoor hebben diverse gevestigde media dagenlang zitten ouwetakkenbossen over het waarheidsgehalte van de verhalen over door Hamasterroristen onthoofde joodse baby's, maar pompten ze binnen een paar minuten de niet bewezen (en zoals later dus bleek: valse) claim over een Isralische luchtaanval op een ziekenhuis rond. De enige reden die ik kan bedenken, is zogeheten confirmation bias . Mensen hebben de onhebbelijke neiging om informatie te zoeken en op zodanige wijze te interpreteren dat ze daarmee hun reeds vaststaande ideen kunnen bevestigen. Als je bijvoorbeeld Googlet of honden beter zijn dan katten, krijg je inderdaad heel veel informatie over waarom honden beter zijn dan katten. Maar als je vraagt of katten beter zijn dan honden, gebeurt het tegenovergestelde. Het zorgt er ook voor dat we informatie die onze ideen bevestigen, onevenredig veel zwaarder wegen dan informatie die onze ideen uitdagen.

Precies dit is de reden waarom ik voormalig VVD-kamerlid en huidig HCSS denktanker Han ten Broeke groot gelijk moet geven in zijn constatering dat bij deze vorm van berichtgeving ''maskers afvallen''. Media zoals de NOS, NRC, NU en RTL Nieuws hebben in hun selectieve weging van feiten vooral laten zien waar ze zelf staan in dit conflict, terwijl ze een pretentie van objectiviteit uitstralen.

Je kunt op basis van zo weinig informatie alleen zo stellig iets rondpompen, als het je reeds vaststaande ideen bevestigt. In dit geval een wereldbeeld waarin Isral ''the bad guy'' in het conflict is. Daarom was het ook zo lastig te geloven dat er inderdaad baby's waren onthoofd, dat inderdaad de buik van een zwangere vrouw was opengesneden en haar foetus verwijderd, dat inderdaad granaten in schuilkelders werden gegooid. Zelfs bij gruwelijkheden live en niet zelden door de Hamasdaders zelf werden gebroadcast (en er dus volop beelden beschikbaar waren) werd er ge-ja-maard, wegkruipend achter het adagium van het belang van journalistieke objectiviteit en voorzichtigheid. Hamas die genocidaal antisemitisme in de praktijk bracht, kwam niet overeen met het wereldbeeld dat bestaat over onderdrukte Palestijnen. Met het bericht dat Isral als 'tegenzet' een ziekenhuis zou hebben gebombardeerd, werd dit wereldbeeld weer eventjes in balans gebracht: 'Ah! Eindelijk! Isral zoals wij het kennen: als onderdrukkers, kolonisten en plegers van oorlogsmisdaden!'

Wat deden diverse redacties, toen zij werden geconfronteerd met nieuwe feiten die dat wereldbeeld opnieuw deed wankelen? Negeren. Beeldmateriaal dat zorgde voor cognitieve dissonantie over de gebeurtenis, werd plotseling weer benaderd met honderd slagen om de arm. Alle berichtgeving werd vlugjes voorzien van een ''zou''. In de derde persoon geschreven mitsen en maren werden toegevoegd over dat er 'discussie is over de herkomst van het projectiel'. Wat moeten we nou geloven h¨? Lastig. Lastig. Als je alles gewoon lekker in twijfel gaat trekken wat je ziet, ben je zelf ook nergens ooit op aan te spreken - moet men ook bij Parool hebben gedacht:

Uiteraard in een keurig gebalanceerd both sides -jasje: ''Was het opzet of een afzwaaier?'', kopte NRC - nadat ze hun fake news over de ''Isralische luchtaanval'' niet hadden gerectificeerd, maar slechts hadden voorzien van een ''aanvulling''. Een aanvulling . Dat zegt maar (C)(C)n ding, namelijk dat je je nooit laat corrigeren. (''Op dat moment was nog niet duidelijk genoeg blahblahblah dus eigenlijk hebben we geen fouten gemaakt, blahblahblah''). Dat je nooit bereid bent iets terug te nemen. En dus ook niet in staat bent om fouten - die hoe dan ook gebeuren - toe te geven. Een krant die nooit corrigeert maar aanvult, heeft geen enkel lerend vermogen. Een krant die nooit corrigeert maar aanvult, stelt ego boven inhoud. Een krant die nooit corrigeert maar aanvult, is derhalve chronisch onbetrouwbaar.

Maar Giselle van Cann (Hoofd-Laroes van het NOS Nieuws) spande echt de kroon. Gevraagd naar de berichtgeving onder haar verantwoordelijkheid kwam ze op NPO Radio 1 met de volgende verklaring: ''Wat hier eehmmmm'....ehmmm'...ehmmm'...niet helemaal goed gaat hmm..is dat ehmmm'...we'...ehmmm'...onvoldoende duidelijk maken dat Hamas zegt dat dit een Isralische luchtaanval is''. NEE MUPPET. Het probleem is dat je het ¼berhaupt opschrijft en brengt als nieuws. ''Goedenavond. Dit is het Achtuurjournaal. Mark Rutte heeft tien peuters verkracht. Dat zegt Thierry Baudet. Mark Rutte zelf heeft nog niet op de aantijging gereageerd.''

Nou Mark, veel plezier met bewijzen dat je geen tien peuters hebt verkracht, en hou je taai h¨, tijdens de volgende boodschappenronde bij de Appie Heijn'...

Eenmaal ''out there'' is het lastig het beeld bij te sturen. Want net zoals bepaalde redacties besloten nepnieuws te publiceren omdat het zo lekker hun wereldbeeld bevestigde, zo zullen ook nieuwconsumenten op dit beeld handelen omdat zij ook hier een legitimatie van diezelfde denkbeelden aan ontlenen. Want ja, wordt ons niet altijd verteld dat je de NOS moet vertrouwen? De NOS niet vertrouwen, dat maakt je toch een populist?

De fallout van deze valse berichtgeving kwam dan ook niet neer op redacties, maar op de stoep van Isralische ambassades. Boze burgers kwamen demonstreren tegen een onbewezen - en naar alle waarschijnlijkheid nooit gebeurde - gebeurtenis. Diezelfde media die hun mond vol hadden over wat nepnieuws deed in de Verenigde Staten, toen boze QAnon-Sjamanen en Sietske Bergsma-moekes het Capitool bestormden tijdens de 'coup' op 6 januari 2021, dragen nu precies diezelfde verantwoordelijkheid voor de boze menigtes die zich verzamelden voor Isralische ambassades. It goes both ways, bitches.

Juist omdat de NOS, DPG-titels en Mediahuiskranten die nu zo nat gaan, doorgaans zooooo'n (*spreidt armen*) grote mond hebben over het belang van feiten, gecontroleerde en gebalanceerde berichtgeving, de fysieke gevolgen van nepnieuws in termen van mogelijke agressie - snap ik wel dat sommige Joodse burgers in Nederland hier (bijna) opzet in gaan zien. Juist als je waarschuwt voor de opruiende effecten van nepnieuws, hoe kun je zelf dan niet voorzien dat (in een periode van oplaaiend antisemitisme waar Jodensterren op appartementen verschijnen en Joodse kinderen van school worden gepest) dit soort onzorgvuldigheid Joodse medeburgers in gevaar brengt?

Iets hoeft niet waar te zijn om wel gevolgen te hebben. Het is immers niet de gebeurtenis die gevolgen heeft, maar de interpretatie van gebeurtenissen. In de wetenschap staat dit bekend als het Thomas Theorem: If men define situations as real, they are real in their consequences. Dus als mensen geloven dat Isral een luchtaanval op een ziekenhuis heeft uitgevoerd waarbij honderden Palestijnse burgerdoden zijn gevallen, dan gaan mensen (die dat zelf niet kunnen controleren en afgaan wat het 'betrouwbare' nieuws hen vertelt) daarop handelen. Degenen die naar buiten stappen en zich geroepen voelen om te handelen, zijn niet per se de meest frisse en sowieso niet de meest emotioneel terughoudende personen. Dat leidde tot het scanderen van de deze weken zo veel gehoorde antisemitische leuzen als ''From the river to the sea, Palestine shall be free'' - die letterlijk ge¯nterpreteerd kan worden als een oproep tot de vernietiging van Isralische staat. De uitspraak valt juridisch gezien - zo oordeelde de rechter deze zomer naar aanleiding van een specifiek voorgelegde gebeurtenis - onder de vrijheid van meningsuiting. Net als Allahu Akbar roepen onder een Taliban-vlag op zo'n zelfde demonstratie als reactie op de grootste pogrom sinds de Holocaust onder die vrijheid valt. En net zoals de hondenfluitjes van Thierry Baudet (van de antisemitische instapper ''Ik heb twijfels over de officile lezing van de gebeurtenissen op 9/11'' tot aan zijn getwitter over de bekende antisemitische theorien over de 'Protocollen van de Wijzen van Zion') juridisch wel door de beugel kunnen, heb ik weinig twijfel over achterliggende antisemitische wereldbeelden. Dat een uitspraak an sich juridisch niet antisemitisch is, maakt 'm in de context nog niet vrij van Jodenhaat. En net als mainstream media die bepaalde feiten van de ene zijde zwaarder laten wegen dan vergelijkbare feiten vanaf de andere kant, zien we ook eenzelfde ambivalentie richting context. Die context werd bij Thierry Baudet tot op de laatste komma uit zijn bizarre ''Uil van Minerva''-speech gedistilleerd (terecht!), maar die wordt even compleet over het hoofd gezien zodra het om evident genocidaal antisemitisme binnen radicaal islamitische politieke organisaties (zoals in de beginselverklaringen van Hamas duidelijk te lezen) en hun naargeestige fellow travelers gaat. Nee, dan is het ineens ''polariserend'' en moeten we de boel bij elkaar houden - zodanig zelfs, dat het hijsen van een Isralische vlag in Rotterdam eerder als een veroorzaker van ''maatschappelijke onrust'' kan worden gezien, dan het feit dat we net getuige waren van de grootste moordpartij op joden sinds de Holocaust.

Net zoals in klokkenluiderszaken - waar nooit de fout zelf maar altijd het toedekken van de fout de misstand is, of denk ook aan het Toeslagenschandaal - vermoedde ik ook hier aanvankelijk onbewuste incompetentie. Kwaadwillendheid kom je immers zelden zo openlijk tegen. Het is in 99% van de gevallen een litanie en opeenstapeling van fuckups , ego'tjes en/of onmetelijke domheid.

Tegelijkertijd is er ook een moment waarop je moet constateren dat het ''niet zien'' angstaanjagend dicht bij ''niet willen zien'' komt. En dus een actieve keuze wordt. Eentje die niet weg te poetsen is met je confirmation bias , je media-ego'tje en je politieke voorzichtigheid. Want als ik de afgelopen weken zo eens op een rijtje zet, wordt het steeds lastiger om ''onmetelijke incompetentie'' als verklarende variabel te zien:

Het is een keuze om niet oorspronkelijk fotomateriaal als nieuwsfoto te plaatsen bij een bericht met niet geverifieerde claims;

Het is een keuze om desinformatie en nepnieuws niet terug te trekken, en niet te rectificeren met net zoveel moeite (pushberichten, dikgedrukte mededelingen, verwijderde pagina's) als je deed om de valse informatie te verspreiden;

Het is een keuze om ergens onderin op pagina 17 een kleine ''aanvulling'' te publiceren #krantjemaken;

Het is een keuze om alles weg te wuiven en te bedekken onder een laffe '' fog of war , niets is zeker''-both sideism (in plaats van als journalist je werk te gaan doen en zo goed mogelijk die fog proberen weg te nemen voor je lezers);

Het is een keuze om in tijden van oplaaiend antisemitisme in verkiezingstijd als lijsttrekker je waffel te houden omdat je uitspreken tegen Jodenhaat campagnetechnisch niet zo lekker ligt;

Het is een keuze om als gesubsidieerde Nie Wieder-clubjes - die jaar in jaar uit bakken geld binnenharken voor hun jaarlijkse bukkake van na-oorlogs verzet - je smoel te houden op het moment dat er hakenkruizen en jodensterren op Nederlandse appartementen en studentenwoningen verschijnen;

Het is een keuze om de politiemacht hooguit descalerend op te laten treden en als samenleving de veiligheid van Joodse burgers en schoolgaande kinderen niet te garanderen (maar hoe snel en hoeveel geld vrij kan worden gemaakt zodra de politiek ergens w(C)l een prioriteit van maakt, hebben we mooi tijdens de coronacrisis kunnen zien);

Het is een keuze om als raadslid weg te lopen bij de stemming over een motie die zich uitspreekt tegen Jodenhaat, omdat het uitspreken tegen Jodenhaat ''te polariserend'' zou zijn;

Het is een keuze om het diepgewortelde antisemitisme binnen de islamitische geloofsgemeenschap te ontkennen of zelfs te doen alsof het niet bestaat;

Het is een keuze om uit te gaan van Westerse postmoderne morele equivalentie terwijl hier twee gewapende partijen totaal anderen waardensystemen hebben: eentje waar de beloning het garanderen van een aards leven voor geloofsgenoten is (Isral), een andere waar die beloning pas komt bij de dood (jihadisten en de extreme tak binnen Hamas).

Het is ironisch genoeg juist dankzij het ''open riool'' Twitter dat iedereen precies kan zien waar de antisemitische stank vandaan komt.

Nie wieder, is nu.

Bindende twee uur durende kijktip: Timon Dias (die ene bloggert van GeenStijl) in gesprek met Michiel Lieuwema (dat VPRO mannetje van de Snijtafel) waarin Dias volledig David Attenborough gaat. Observerend, zonder normatief of politiek-ideologisch oordeel, duidt hij met oprechte bezorgdheid Alfred J. Kwak moralisme: ''Nederlanders hebben een cartoonesk-infantiele beleving van goed en kwaad. Het kwaad is een Nazi in een leren Hugo Boss-jas die Anne Frank uit haar huis komt trekken.''

Link to Article

Archived Version

Fri, 20 Oct 2023 17:08

Hipgnosis Songs Fund, the company that played a huge role in the music-catalog gold rush of recent years, has abandoned plans to pay a dividend after drastically reducing the amount it expects to receive from royalty payments, according to the Guardian and other news reports.

The reduction stems from the U.S. Copyright Royalty Board's decision last year to recalculate its royalty payments '-- as a result, the influential U.K. music rights valuer Citrin Cooperman has dropped the amount Hipgnosis Songs Fund can expect to receive in royalties from tracks played between 2018 and 2022 from $21.7 million to $9.9 million.

Hipgnosis Songs Fund's shares dropped more than 10% in early trading after the news became public.

''The board now expects to receive significantly lower retroactive payments,'' Hipgnosis said. ''The board has decided to withdraw the proposed interim dividend.'' The company said it could not pay an interim dividend without breaching covenants connected with its lenders.

The company, founded in 2018, helped drive the price of music catalogs to new heights by paying top dollar to acquire catalogs from a large number of top producers and songwriters as well as Neil Young, Barry Manilow, the Red Hot Chili Peppers, Shakira and many others, pointing to the durable valuations of such catalogs.

However, the company has seemed overextended in recent years as interest rates have risen and the price of available catalogs grew untenably expensive; its share price on Monday dropping to 65p, half of its value last year.

Russ Mould, investment director at AJ Bell, told the Guardian, ''The investment company was set up to invest in music royalties, implying their regular cashflows would generate a growing stream of income for investors. Sadly, its 15 minutes of fame has gone up in smoke amid accusations of poor corporate governance, a disastrous attempt to sell some assets at a big discount to a private fund which its adviser also manages, and now a dividend crisis.''

In an effort to boost its cashflow, the company put forward a proposal to sell nearly a fifth of its catalogs for $440 million to a Blackstone fund run by Mercuriadis, at a significant discount.

The company is lookin at a continuation vote later this month that will determine whether it will continue with its existing management team. Its chairman, Andrew Sutch, has announced plans to retire.

Mould continued, ''Investors will decide the future of Hipgnosis Songs Fund at a continuation vote on 26 October. It's not looking good, given how the value of the company continues to decline and now it isn't even paying a dividend '' shocking given how income was meant to account for a key part of investment returns. It's hard to see how the board of directors can put up with this chaos '' perhaps it is time to oust the management team and bring in someone else.''

Link to Article

Archived Version

Fri, 20 Oct 2023 17:07

T he music mogul who acquired the back catalogues of stars from Beyonc(C) to Red Hot Chili Peppers and vowed to turn song royalties into an investment as dependable as gold faces eviction from his own company in a boardroom coup.

Merck Mercuriadis, a former manager of acts including Elton John, Iron Maiden, Guns N' Roses and Beyonc(C), set up London-listed Hipgnosis Songs Fund in 2018 with the pitch that the royalties of ''evergreen'' hits from famous artists were underexploited and ripe for canny investors to cash-in on amid the streaming revolution.

Mercuriadis has raised and spent about £1.5bn on dozens of music catalogues spanning tens of thousands of songs from artists including Blondie, Bon Jovi, Adele, Ed Sheeranand Neil Young.

But on Thursday, amid investor unrest over the halving of its share price and ahead of a crucial meeting next week, the fund said it had launched a ''strategic review'' and had considered serving notice on Mercuriadis' investment advisory agreement.

If he is deposed, it would prove an embarrassing latest chapter for Mercuriadis, who cut a brash figure on floating the fund a year after a failed first attempt to do so.

A presentation slide Hipgnosis meant to entice eager investors was titled the ''Livin' on a Prayer case study'' and charted a 153% increase in the revenue growth of Bon Jovi's 37-year-old hit between 2013 and 2020 as streaming grew rapidly.

''Gold is something that only a few can buy,''Mercuriadis told the Guardian in 2020. ''Whereas a £10 Spotify or a £10 Apple monthly subscription is something pretty much everyone can make.''

Beyonc(C) performs at the SoFi Stadium in California during her Renaissance world tour last month. Photograph: Kevin Mazur/WireImage for ParkwoodBut at the time he also warned that he needed to move quickly to buy catalogues before rocketing prices, partly driven by Hipgnosis, which some critics argued overpaid to strike quick fire deals, stymied growth in a music industry version of the Netflix-fuelled content arms race in film and TV.

The son of a Greek footballer, Mercuriadis was born in Schefferville, a former mining town in northern Quebec, Canada. After growing up in Nova Scotia, he moved to London.

Now 60, he has spent 40 years in the music industry positioning himself as a champion of artists, something he learned working for Sir Richard Branson at Virgin Records in his first job in the 1980s.

''I can't play the guitar, I can't sing a song, I can't write a song,'' he has said. ''What has given me a seat at the table is I take my responsibility of doing business very, very seriously. I make people believe in what I believe in.''

While this proved to be true while the going was good at Hipgnosis his prediction in 2020 that he might have just two years left to make a success proved prescient.

By mid-2021, as pandemic conditions supercharged music subscription, helping Hipgnosis to hit a peak market value of £1.3bn, the fund had run out of financial muscle to strike more deals.

Since then, returns on royalties have not matched lofty expectations, the cost of servicing its $600m (£494m) debt has increased as the low interest era ended, and Hipgnosis has been unable to raise funds because its share price has fallen.

Mercuriadis subsequently engineered a deal with the asset manager Blackstone, to potentially jointly fund new acquisitions, but none have been forthcoming.

Bon Jovi backstage at the Norwich Playhouse in the mid-1980s. Photograph: Ilpo Musto/REX/ShutterstockIn the summer, Sir Rod Stewart abandoned a lucrative deal to sell his song rights to Hipgnosis reportedly saying it was ''not the right company to manage my song catalogue, career, or legacy''.

Its share price hit a record low of 64p on Monday after the company that values Hipgnosis's portfolio ''materially reduced'' the expectation of the amount in royalties for tracks played between 2018 and 2022.

skip past newsletter promotionSign up to Business Today

Free daily newsletterGet set for the working day '' we'll point you to all the business news and analysis you need every morning

Privacy Notice: Newsletters may contain info about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. For more information see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.after newsletter promotion

A move to sell almost a fifth of its portfolio to pay down $250m in debt and launch a $180m share buyback also sparked a backlash.

Investors balked at the heavily discounted $440m deal with a Blackstone fund, which is also advised and run by Mercuriadis. They are expected to vote to block the deal at a shareholder meeting next Thursday.

The same meeting will see shareholders asked to approve a continuation of the investment trust behind Hipgnosis for a further five years. A number of investors are expected to vote against continuation as they believe opposing will give them more power to restructure the business.

However, some analysts have said such a vote could result in the fund being liquidated. Meanwhile, the strategic review could ultimately result in the sale of Hipgnosis, which is valued at more than £900m.

Its board said it had looked at trying to make changes to the investment advisory agreement with Mercuriadis, which allows him to buy Hipgnosis's entire portfolio of music rights if his contract is terminated, but he has refused.

Elton John performs at the Glastonbury festival in June. Photograph: Jason Cairnduff/ReutersThe company said it had considered serving notice on Mercuriadis to terminate the agreement, but without a new investment adviser ready to take over, Hipgnosis would breach the terms of its debt facility.

Analysts at the US investment bank Stifel estimate that to pay off Mercuriadis could cost the company about £17m.

Mercuriadis argues that his advisory company remains ''uniquely positioned'' to drive value for investors because of its ''deep relationship with the songwriters that make up the catalogue and our song management expertise''.

While his future, and that of the management team, hangs in the balance, the business still holds a portfolio of music valued at $2.8bn.

''Investors and management are fighting over the company, it is not that they don't want it,'' says Sachin Saggar, an analyst at Stifel. ''There is clearly interest in the assets, there is value. There are still elements of gold dust.''

Link to Article

Archived Version

Fri, 20 Oct 2023 16:15

Monday marks the official end of the federal government's net neutrality rules, the Obama-era regulations that said Internet providers can't block or slow down websites or prioritize their content over others'. It's a turning point for Internet policy and the Web as a whole, as broadband providers will enjoy additional freedom to seek new ways of making money in a rapidly changing market. With the rules coming off the books, how is your Internet experience likely to change? Here's what you need to know.

What's net neutrality, again?

Net neutrality is an idea about equal access to Internet content. Under its principles, Internet providers shouldn't interfere with your ability to reach the websites, apps or services of your choice. If you're a fan of Netflix, for example, net neutrality holds that you should be able to watch its shows without running into impediments your ISP, or Internet service provider, puts up that are designed to push you toward a competing service, such as Hulu.

Many supporters of net neutrality also interpret the concept to mean that broadband companies shouldn't offer online companies "fast lanes," or faster delivery to Internet users' devices, particularly if it involves extra fees the websites must pay for the special treatment. That tactic, which experts call "paid prioritization," runs the risk of creating an uneven playing field where big, dominant Internet companies can afford the fast lanes while start-ups or small businesses get left behind, net neutrality activists say.

Goodbye to net neutrality. Hello to an even-bigger AT&T?

What were the net neutrality rules?

In 2015, the Federal Communications Commission sought to codify these principles into formalized regulations. Led by its then-Democratic chairman, Tom Wheeler, the FCC approved rules that banned the blocking and slowing of Web content by Internet providers. A third rule banned the practice of paid prioritization, and a fourth provision, a "general conduct" standard, gave the FCC the ability to investigate broadband practices it believed could be problematic.

Why are the rules going away?

Last December, the FCC under Republican Chairman Ajit Pai voted to roll back the rules. Pai, who had been a commissioner when the rules were approved, is a longtime critic of the policy. He has argued that the regulations are too restrictive on businesses and discourage them from investing in network upgrades that could make your Internet service faster and better. Although the vote occurred months ago, it took time for the results to take effect. That's why the rules are only expiring now.

Pai Q&A: I don't think consumers are going to see any change at all

What's the impact of the repeal?

The end of the bans on blocking, slowing and paid prioritization means your Internet providers will be free to engage in that activity without legal repercussions, so long as they disclose it to the public on their own websites or to the FCC.

The repeal effectively narrows what the federal government would consider a net neutrality violation. Under the old policy, any blocking or slowing of websites would directly run afoul of the rules, inviting immediate enforcement. Under the new policy, a violation might occur when regulators find out that an Internet provider has been blocking websites without saying so. The new approach hands much of the responsibility for enforcing violations to the Federal Trade Commission, a sister agency. And in its repeal decision, the FCC explicitly rejects the idea that it has much authority to regulate Internet providers at all.

Is my Internet service about to slow to a crawl, as some activists claim?

Generally speaking, analysts say that specific scenario is pretty unlikely. Many Internet providers, such as AT&T and Verizon, have said they do not and will not block or slow content. Comcast has also said it does not block or slow content and has no plans to offer paid prioritization. Of course, these commitments could change in the future, and indeed, some close observers have noticed subtle shifts in Comcast's promises already. But the companies can't simply promise one thing and blatantly do another, at least not without risking FTC litigation.

The blocking and slowing of websites gets much of the attention in the net neutrality debate. But what's more likely to occur are subtle changes to your Internet experience that you may or may not notice. It's hard to say what specific changes you might experience; part of the whole point of undoing the net neutrality rules is that Internet providers will begin to experiment with business models we haven't seen before. One danger, according to consumer advocates, is that those new models could end up making it harder to discover innovative new services. Under this theory, you won't know what you're missing. But here are a few tactics that have been tried before that have drawn scrutiny under the old net neutrality rules.

Yes, finally! What's an example?

One is the offering of discounts on Internet service in exchange for letting your broadband provider mine your browsing history and other personal information.

Another might be getting unlimited wireless access to a mobile app that your Internet provider owns, while usage of other apps continues to count against your monthly data cap.

Isn't Congress trying to reverse the repeal?

Some members of Congress are trying to push through a resolution that, if successful, would overturn the FCC's repeal vote. The measure aims to restore the agency's net neutrality rules as if the repeal had never happened. It has already passed the Senate.

What are its chances in the House?

It's unclear. The House's Republican leadership has signaled its disinterest in putting the resolution to a vote. Supporters of the resolution could overcome that with a discharge petition that forces a floor vote on the resolution, but the petition still lacks the 218 necessary votes to proceed.

If the resolution gets a vote in the House, it may not succeed. Even if it succeeds, President Trump is not expected to sign it. That said, some supporters of the resolution say it could play a role in driving voters to the polls in this year's midterm elections.

What else can we expect?

More than 20 states have sued the FCC to stop the repeal. A federal appeals court in Washington is expected to hear that case in the coming months. We're also waiting to hear whether the Supreme Court will agree to hear a separate lawsuit on net neutrality.

A number of states have tried to get around the FCC's repeal either by developing legislation laying out their own net neutrality rules or by issuing gubernatorial executive orders that limit which Internet providers can do business with the state. If the only providers that can serve state governments are those that observe net neutrality, these states reason, then it could shape what services consumers are offered, too.

But both of these approaches are expected to lead to court challenges by the FCC, whose new policy on net neutrality contains explicit language that tries to preempt states from doing exactly what the legislation and executive orders are meant to do. The agency hasn't yet filed any lawsuits, though.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Fri, 20 Oct 2023 16:13

Net neutrality advocates rally in front of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) ahead of Thursday's expected FCC vote repealing so-called net neutrality rules in Washington, U.S., December 13, 2017. REUTERS/Yuri Gripas/File photo Acquire Licensing Rights

WASHINGTON, Oct 19 (Reuters) - The U.S. Federal Communications Commission voted on Thursday to advance a proposal to reinstate landmark net neutrality rules and assume new regulatory oversight of broadband internet that was rescinded under former President Donald Trump.

The commission voted 3-2 on a proposal to reinstate open internet rules adopted in 2015 and reestablish the commission's authority over broadband internet.

The FCC voted in 2017 under Trump to reverse the rules that barred internet service providers from blocking or throttling traffic, or offering paid fast lanes, also known as paid prioritization.

The FCC will take public comments before it is expected to vote next year to finalize the plan that is certain to face legal challenges.

The vote comes after Democrats took majority control of the five-member FCC in early October for the first time since President Joe Biden took office. Biden signed a July 2021 executive order encouraging the FCC to reinstate net neutrality rules adopted under Democratic President Barack Obama.

"There is no expert agency ensuring that the internet is fast, open, and fair, FCC Chair Jessica Rosenworcel said on Thursday. "Internet access needs to be more than just accessible and affordable. The internet needs to be open."

Republican FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr opposed the move, saying that since 2017 "broadband speeds in the U.S. have increased, prices are down (and) competition has intensified." He argued the plan would result in "government control of the internet."

Rosenworcel said the reclassification would give the FCC important new national security tools.

NCTA - The Internet & Television Association, representing major internet service providers, criticized the vote, saying "by introducing the most sweeping command and control framework ever imposed on broadband networks, the FCC's proposal is a monumental change in how the internet will be regulated."

Raza Panjwani, senior policy counsel of the Open Technology Institute, said the plan would empower the FCC "to address roadblocks to deploying broadband infrastructure, require reporting about network performance and resiliency (and) keep Americans connected during public emergencies."

Despite the 2017 repeal, a dozen states now have net neutrality laws or regulations in place. Industry groups abandoned legal challenges in May 2022.

Reporting by David Shepardson; Editing by Richard Chang

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Fri, 20 Oct 2023 15:23

Description

This is not a final, adopted action. This has been circulated for tentative consideration by the Commission at its Open Meeting. The issues referenced and the Commission's ultimate resolution of those issues are subject to change.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Fri, 20 Oct 2023 14:07

WASHINGTON (AP) '-- Declaring that U.S. leadership ''holds the world together,'' President Joe Biden told Americans on Thursday night the country must deepen its support of Ukraine and Israel in the middle of two vastly different, unpredictable and bloody wars.

Acknowledging that ''these conflicts can seem far away,'' Biden insisted in a rare Oval Office address that they remain ''vital for America's national security'' as he prepared to ask Congress for billions of dollars in military assistance for both countries.

''History has taught us when terrorists don't pay a price for their terror, when dictators don't pay a price for their aggression, they cause more chaos and death and more destruction,'' Biden said. ''They keep going. And the cost and the threat to America and the world keep rising.''

Biden's speech reflected an expansive view of U.S. obligations overseas at a time when he faces political resistance at home to additional funding. He's expected to ask for $105 billion on Friday, including $60 billion for Ukraine, much of which would replenish U.S. weapons stockpiles provided earlier.

There's also $14 billion for Israel, $10 billion for unspecified humanitarian efforts, $14 billion for managing the U.S.-Mexico border and fighting fentanyl trafficking and $7 billion for the Indo-Pacific region, which includes Taiwan. The proposal was described by three people familiar with the details who insisted on anonymity before the official announcement.

''It's a smart investment that's going to pay dividends for American security for generations,'' Biden said.

He hopes that combining all of these issues into one piece of legislation will create the necessary coalition for congressional approval. His speech came the day after his high-stakes trip to Israel , where he showed solidarity with the country after the Oct. 7 attack by Hamas and pushed for more humanitarian assistance to Palestinians.

With Israel continuing to bombard the Gaza Strip and preparing a ground invasion, Biden placed an increased emphasis on the deadly toll that the conflict has had on civilians there, saying he's ''heartbroken by the tragic loss of Palestinian life.''

''Israel and Palestinians equally deserve to live in safety, dignity and peace,'' Biden said. He also warned about a rising tide of antisemitism and Islamophobia in the U.S., noting the killing of Wadea Alfayoumi , a 6-year-old Palestinian-American boy.

''To all you hurting, I want you to know I see you. You belong,'' Biden said. ''And I want to say this to you. You're all Americans.''

The White House said that after his speech, the president and first lady Jill Biden spoke over the phone with Wadea's father and uncle to express their ''deepest condolences'' and share their prayers for the recovery of the boy's mother, who was also stabbed.

Biden included in his remarks a warning to Iran's leaders, who have supported Hamas in Gaza and Russia's invasion of Ukraine, and said the U.S. ''will continue to hold them accountable.''

As Biden seeks a second term in a campaign that will likely hinge on voters' feeling about the economy , he was careful to emphasize that the spending will create jobs for U.S. workers, referencing the construction of missiles in Arizona and artillery shells in Pennsylvania, Ohio and Texas.

And he worked in a nod to one of his political heroes, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, by saying that ''just as in World War II,'' the country is ''building the arsenal of democracy and serving the cause of freedom.''

Biden faces an array of steep challenges as he tries to secure the money. The House remains in chaos because the Republican majority has been unable to select a speaker to replace Rep. Kevin McCarthy, who was ousted more than two weeks ago.

In addition, conservative Republicans oppose money for sending more weapons to Ukraine as its battle against the Russian invasion approaches the two-year mark. Biden's previous request for funding, which included $24 billion to help with the next few months of fighting, was stripped out of budget legislation last month despite a personal plea from Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy.

There will be resistance from some on the other side of the political spectrum when it comes to military assistance for Israel, which has been bombarding the Gaza Strip in response to the Hamas attack on Oct. 7.

Critics have accused Israel of indiscriminately killing civilians and committing war crimes by cutting off essential supplies including food, water and fuel.

Bipartisan support for Israel has already eroded in recent years as progressive Democrats have become more outspoken in their opposition to the country's decades-long occupation of Palestinian territory, which is widely viewed as illegal by the international community.

There are rumbles of disagreement within Biden's administration as well. Josh Paul, a State Department official who oversaw the congressional liaison office dealing with foreign arms sales, resigned over U.S. policy on weapons transfers to Israel.

''I cannot work in support of a set of major policy decisions, including rushing more arms to one side of the conflict, that I believe to be short-sighted, destructive, unjust and contradictory to the very values that we publicly espouse,'' he wrote in a statement posted to his LinkedIn account.

A speech from the Oval Office is one of the most prestigious platforms that a president can command, an opportunity to try to seize the country's attention at a moment of crisis. The major television networks broke into regular programming to carry the address live.

Biden has delivered only one other such speech during his presidency, after Congress passed bipartisan budget legislation to avert a default on the country's debt.

The White House and other senior administration officials, including Office of Management and Budget Director Shalanda Young, have quietly briefed key lawmakers in recent days about the contours of the planned supplemental funding request.

The Democratic Senate plans to move quickly on Biden's proposal, hoping that it creates pressure on the Republican-controlled House to resolve its leadership drama and return to legislating.

However, there are disagreements within the Senate, too, on how to move forward. Eight Republicans, led by Kansas Sen. Roger Marshall, said they did not want to combine assistance for Ukraine and Israel in the same legislation.

''These are two separate and unrelated conflicts and it would be wrong to leverage support of aid to Israel in an attempt to get additional aid for Ukraine across the finish line,'' they wrote in a letter.

North Dakota Sen. Kevin Cramer said he was fine with the proposal as long as there was also a fresh effort to address border issues. But he said ''it's got to be designed to secure the border, not to facilitate travel through the border.''

Although there was a lull in migrant arrivals to the U.S. after the start of new asylum restrictions in May , illegal crossings topped a daily average of more than 8,000 last month.

Sen. Chris Murphy, a Connecticut Democrat who leads a Senate panel that oversees funding for the Department of Homeland Security, was wary of any effort to overhaul border policy during a debate over spending.

''How are we going to settle our differences over immigration in the next two weeks?'' Murphy said. ''This is a supplemental funding bill. The minute you start loading it up with policies, that sounds like a plan to fail.''

Biden's decision to include funding for the Indo-Pacific in his proposal is a nod toward the potential for another international conflict. China wants to reunify the self-governing island of Taiwan with its mainland, a goal that could be carried out through force.

Although wars in Europe and the Middle East have been the most immediate concerns for U.S. foreign policy, Biden views Asia as the key arena in the struggle for global influence.

The administration's national security strategy, released last year, describes China as ''America's most consequential geopolitical challenge.''

___Associated Press writers Matthew Lee, Mary Clare Jalonick, Kevin Freking and Darlene Superville and AP media writer David Bauder contributed to this report.

Megerian covers the White House for The Associated Press. He previously wrote about the Russia investigation, climate change, law enforcement and politics in California and New Jersey.

Seung Min is a White House reporter.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Fri, 20 Oct 2023 11:24

The social media platform X, formerly known as Twitter, has removed the gold ''verified'' badge from the New York Times' account amid ongoing complaints about the news organization from X owner Elon Musk.

The badge was the only symbol distinguishing the Times' 55-million-follower account from impostors amid two major global conflicts in Israel and Ukraine. X has hosted and helped amplify a flood of false information related to the Israel-Gaza war, some of which Musk has personally endorsed.

The badge was removed Tuesday without notice, a person familiar with the change said. The Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal, the Associated Press, CNN, Bloomberg, Vox and other news organizations still had their gold badges as of Thursday afternoon. Times accounts related to coverage of world news, health and other subjects still show ''verified'' badges.

The move further extends Musk's attempts to use the social media company he bought with claims of defending free speech to undercut news organizations he dislikes. It also suggests Musk has adopted the kinds of secretive social media tactics he and Twitter's conservative critics once loudly denounced.

Neither X nor Musk responded to requests for comment.

In April, after Musk bought the company for $44 billion, X ended its years-old system of giving badges to politicians, journalists and other public figures whose identity it had verified. Replacing it was a pay-for-play scheme extending blue badges to any individual who pays $8 a month and gold badges to any ''verified organization'' that pays at least $1,000 a month.

After the Times declined to pay the fee, Musk tweeted support for its badge to be immediately removed and the Times became the first major account to lose verification. Later in April, X reinstated the badge for the Times and other big accounts, including for those who declined to pay or said they didn't want it.

Neither the Times nor The Post has ever paid the fee, according to people familiar with both organizations.

The verification system change has made it more challenging for users to seek out official or authoritative information during major news events. A study released Thursday by the media-rating service NewsGuard found that 74 percent of the worst Israel-Gaza misinformation on X had been spread by paid-for blue ''verified'' accounts.

Musk has repeatedly attacked the Times, saying in August that the news organization supports ''calls for genocide'' and that ''if ever there was a time to cancel that publication, it is now.''

Within days of that post, X had implemented a five-second delay for clicks to the Times' website. After The Post reported on the delay, X removed it for the Times without explanation but kept it in place for other X competitors, including Facebook, Instagram, Substack and Bluesky, according to a technical analysis from the news outlet The Markup.

Even without the delay, traffic to the Times' website from X links has plunged roughly 50 percent since August, according to a person familiar with the change.

That steep drop outpaces an industry-wide slowdown in referrals to top news sites from X and Facebook this year, according to industry data from the analytics firm Similarweb first reported by Axios.

On Wednesday, Musk echoed a comment from the far-right influencer Ian Miles Cheong, who in March shared a fake manifesto falsely attributed to a Nashville school shooter, saying the Times had ''uncritically regurgitated propaganda'' and laughed off a criticism that Musk had removed features making it possible to tell real journalists from fakes. Musk replied, '''Real journalists' lmaooo.''

The Times runs the 25th most-followed account on X, according to data from the social media analytics firm Social Blade.

Earlier this month, X removed headlines from news articles and other links on the platform and demoted posts with links in its recommendation system '-- two moves that a Cardiff University professor told The Post were ''part of a larger trend toward making Twitter/X more difficult for news organizations to use.'' Musk said his goal was to maximize the time people spent on X and said ''there is less time spent if people click away.''

In the months since Musk bought X, the social media site has cut back on content moderation, suspended journalists, reinstated neo-Nazis and threatened to file defamation lawsuits against critics such as the Anti-Defamation League. The platform has also shed users and advertisers.

In April, NPR became the first major news organization to stop using the platform after its account was labeled as ''state-affiliated media.'' In the six months since, NPR's website traffic has dropped by only 1 percent, according to an internal memo first shared by the news journal Nieman Reports.

Joseph Menn contributed to this report.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Fri, 20 Oct 2023 04:24

Media | Jon Stewart's Show on Apple Is Ending https://www.nytimes.com/2023/10/19/business/media/jon-stewart-the-problem-ends.htmlMr. Stewart and Apple are parting ways because of creative differences over ''The Problem,'' people with knowledge of the decision said.

Jon Stewart at an event in November. His Apple show, ''The Problem With Jon Stewart,'' debuted to some fanfare two years ago. Credit... Monica Schipper/Getty Images Jon Stewart's show on Apple's streaming service is abruptly coming to an end, according to several people with knowledge of the decision, the result of creative differences between the tech giant and the former ''Daily Show'' host.

Mr. Stewart and Apple executives decided to part ways in recent days, two of the people said. Members of the show's staff were informed about its end on Thursday. Taping of episodes for the third season was scheduled to begin within a couple of weeks, one of the people said.

The Apple show, ''The Problem With Jon Stewart,'' debuted to some fanfare two years ago as Mr. Stewart's return to the talk show format after a six-year hiatus. As host of ''The Daily Show'' from 1999 to 2015, he turned a low-rated Comedy Central late-night series into a cultural force, becoming one of the nation's best-known media and political critics.

But Mr. Stewart and Apple executives had disagreements over some of the topics and guests on ''The Problem,'' two of the people said. Mr. Stewart told members of his staff on Thursday that potential show topics related to China and artificial intelligence were causing concern among Apple executives, a person with knowledge of the meeting said. As the 2024 presidential campaign begins to heat up, there was potential for further creative disagreements, one of the people said.

A representative for Apple declined to comment.

Apple's foray into entertainment has raised the risk of collateral damage to its brand or estrangement of the diverse customers who buy its pricey iPhones and iPads. As of September, Apple TV+ had more than 19.8 million U.S. subscribers, according to data from the analytics firm Antenna, excluding deals with some distributors.

Delving into current events, as Mr. Stewart did on ''The Problem,'' could have put Apple at the center of the kinds of political and geopolitical controversies that other major corporations have confronted, including the way conservatives turned on Disney or liberals protested Starbucks over gun safety concerns. Though Apple hadn't faced similar boycotts or criticism, the possibility was there with each episode '-- 20 in all.

In its two seasons, ''The Problem'' confronted several hot-button topics, including gun control and gender identity.

The show initially had difficulty gaining traction. By the second season, though, several interviews generated viral clips online, and the season was nominated for the outstanding talk series Emmy. (The prime-time Emmys ceremony is scheduled for Jan. 15.)

Now ''The Problem'' will join the many other talk shows that failed to survive in the streaming world, including ones hosted by Sarah Silverman, Norm Macdonald, Chelsea Handler and Joel McHale. Netflix, which made several attempts at a talk show, has moved on from the format.

Streaming shows usually depend on a significant shelf life, whereas cable and network talk shows lean on the urgency of a topical news cycle.

Liz Day contributed reporting.

Tripp Mickle reports on Apple and Silicon Valley for The Times and is based in San Francisco. His focus on Apple includes product launches, manufacturing issues and political challenges. He also writes about trends across the tech industry, including layoffs, generative A.I. and robot taxis. More about Tripp Mickle

A version of this article appears in print on

, Section

B

, Page

4

of the New York edition

with the headline:

Stewart's Show On Apple TV+ Comes to an End

. Order Reprints | Today's Paper | Subscribe

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 22 Oct 2023 03:49

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 22 Oct 2023 03:40

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 22 Oct 2023 03:18

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 22 Oct 2023 03:16

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 22 Oct 2023 03:06

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 22 Oct 2023 03:05

So what do we actually know about the hospital blast '' and the contradicting claims by Israel and Hamas, which is designated a terrorist organisation by the UK?

It's been impossible to carry out any independent verification '' but we've been examining the evidence presented by both sides so far.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 22 Oct 2023 03:00

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 22 Oct 2023 02:54

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 22 Oct 2023 02:31

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sat, 21 Oct 2023 21:21

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sat, 21 Oct 2023 21:13

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sat, 21 Oct 2023 20:52

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sat, 21 Oct 2023 20:48

Link to Article

Archived Version

Fri, 20 Oct 2023 15:21

Link to Article

Archived Version

Fri, 20 Oct 2023 14:12

''They all ran towards the grassy knoll, while the Mainstream Media attempted to cover for the conspirators by publishing pictures of the book depository building, in the opposite direction. This is how you control a conspiracy (They are controlled within). Ask the eyewitnesses who all testified to the contrary.''

Most recently, there has been a mass download of unseen eyewitness footage from the November 22, 1963 assassination of President John F. Kennedy. This comes after 60 years of propaganda by the Mockingbird CIA-controlled media and concealment by the United States government.

Polls have shown that up to 81% of Americans do not believe the Warren Commission (Foxes guarding the chicken coop; Jeremiah 11:9). Then again, how could it be otherwise, considering who was on this commission's investigative board?

President Johnson, who knew of the assassination 2 weeks prior (Both his wife and mistress avowed ''Oil people,'' and the ''CIA'' '' See video below), was the one responsible for overseeing the very commission to protect not only himself but also the conspirators as well (Proverbs 17:15).

Then again, how could it be otherwise when people allow this sort of criminal conduct to continue on while being told that they will not release the files of the assassination until 2025? How telling!

Robert F. Kennedy's assassination has all the same findings and obvious cover-ups as the John F. Kennedy Assassination.

So, without belaboring the point, I share with you a compilation release of eyewitnesses and their accounts (To those who were not murdered) that have been withheld from the public now these 60 years (Isaiah 59:14).

https://www.foxnews.com/media/rfk-jr-doubles-down-allegation-cia-involved-jfk-assassination-60-year-cover-up

The Murder of JD Tippits

Conclusion: Is justice a thing of the past, Americans (Proverbs 28:5)? Are these that are responsible for murdering the president of the United States above the law (Exodus 21:12)? If this is allowed to continue on, rest assured that this will continue on another day. In Jonah 2:8, Scripture tells us, ''they that observe lying vanities Forsake their own mercy.''

They must be brought to justice to deter this from ever happening again (Proverbs 16:6)'... Each and every one of them that still remains.

Article posted with permission from Sons of Liberty Media. Article by Bradlee Dean.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Fri, 20 Oct 2023 13:59

Link to Article

Archived Version

Fri, 20 Oct 2023 13:53

Link to Article

Archived Version

Fri, 20 Oct 2023 13:50