965: Yanking Mics

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sat, 16 Sep 2017 21:59

...The suspected Parsons Green bomber 'was in police custody two weeks before the attack.'

dailymail.

The 'suspect' may be the 'patsy'...Cressida Dick and friends. Cressida Dick is in charge of the London police.When agents of the UK government shot dead the innocent Brazilian Jean Charles de Menezes, in July 2005, the police claimed that they had shot a dangerous terrorist.Apparently the police wanted the public to believe that they had killed Osman Hussain (aka Hussain Osman or Hamdi Isaac) who was alleged to have placed a fake bomb at Shepherd's Bush tube station in 21 July 2005.(1)

Cressida Dick was the person in charge of the police operation that led to the murder in London of the innocent Jean Charles de Menezes.

Cressida Dick's appointment: more proof that the Met is utterly shameless.

On 15 September 2017, at 8.20 am, an explosion occurred on a District line train at Parsons Green tube station, in London, England.Above, we see the Parsons Green bomb, after the 'explosion'."We have a witness , RICHARD AYLMER-HALL, who is also involved in a company that creates disaster scenarios - that test the development of a communication gateway product that involves all the public safety services."Once again, we have BBC correspondents who just happen to be on the scene, plus Trump declaring that its the fault of the Internet.

"The supposed bomb has not even managed to melt the plastic bag that it is held in and there are NO signs of any damage in its vicinity."

...

Lady Margaret Hall schoolgirl Emanuella Mensah, 16, described the panic."I was right outside the corner shop when people started running from the station. "People were shouting 'run, run'. I saw old people, people with their kids. Then someone shouted 'terrorist!'. More people kept coming out of the station."dailymail.

Parsons Green station platform has plenty of room.

The witnesses look very relaxed.Above, we see emergency workers carrying out a drill .

Link to Article

Archived Version

Source: The Last Refuge

Sun, 17 Sep 2017 05:14

Yesterday President Trump took heat from U.S. and international media for calling the attempted London bomber a terrorist, identifying the ''loser'' and saying he was ''in the sights'' of law enforcement:

The media went bonzo: ['...] '' Mr. Trump's assertion that the assailants had been known to Scotland Yard angered Prime Minister Theresa May, who said it was not helpful for anyone to speculate while an investigation was underway.'' (New York Times)

Well, today:

(Via Daily Mail) The suspected Parsons Green bomber was a 'problematic foster child' who was allegedly arrested two weeks ago near to where the attack took place before being freed.

Police are searching a house in Sunbury-on-Thames after the 18-year-old, who could have been an asylum seeker, was detained in the port of Dover earlier today while apparently attempting to leave the country.

The lilac-painted house raided by police in connection with the attack, which injured 30, is owned by a kind-hearted couple who were both appointed MBEs for fostering hundreds of children.

Penelope Jones, 71, and her husband Ronald, 88, have raised 268 foster children in the house over three decades and the last eight have been refugees.

Officers stormed the house on Cavendish Road at 2pm around six hours after apprehending the suspect in the departure lounge of the Port of Dover.

Around 60 people were evacuated from near the house, while unconfirmed reports suggested 'explosives' were found in the garden and 'firearms' seen under the floorboards.

Neighbour Carrie Hill, 38, said: 'Police told me there was a bomb found in the garden and firearms hidden under the floorboards.'

There is no suggestion the Joneses had any knowledge of any alleged wrongdoing at the property and

Close friends of pensioners Penny and Ron Jones said the couple '' who are widely respected in the local area '' were at 'their end' with the teenager.

Serena Barber, 47, who has known the couple all her life and lives in a property backing on to theirs, said: 'They have two boys at the moment, both are foreign. One is very quiet and polite, the other who is 18 is awful.

'I know about two weeks ago he was arrested by police at Parsons Green, for what I don't know and returned back to Penny and Ron. After that Penny said she was going to have to stop caring for him, she couldn't handle him.'

The development comes as police revealed they are 'keeping an open mind' on whether there was more than one person responsible for the bombing. (read more)

Another attack in London by a loser terrorist.These are sick and demented people who were in the sights of Scotland Yard. Must be proactive!

'-- Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 15, 2017

Loser terrorists must be dealt with in a much tougher manner.The internet is their main recruitment tool which we must cut off & use better!

'-- Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 15, 2017

The travel ban into the United States should be far larger, tougher and more specific-but stupidly, that would not be politically correct!

'-- Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 15, 2017

We have made more progress in the last nine months against ISIS than the Obama Administration has made in 8 years.Must be proactive & nasty!

'-- Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 15, 2017

Hey there, Adam --

This is Becca with the Operations Team at the DNC. We're the people who make sure that things run smoothly here at headquarters, so, usually, my job is pretty behind-the-scenes. But today's a special day because I get to connect with great supporters like you about something really neat.

We're getting ready to buy plane tickets and book a hotel room for the winner of our contest to meet President Barack Obama in D.C. But before we do, I wanted to make sure you had the chance to throw your name in the hat. Pitch in $3 or more right now, and you'll be automatically entered for your chance to win.

If you've saved your payment information with ActBlue Express, your donation will go through immediately.

QUICK DONATE: $3

QUICK DONATE: $10

QUICK DONATE: $25

QUICK DONATE: $50

QUICK DONATE: $100

Or donate another amount.

If you win, my team will take care of all the little details to ensure that your experience is the best it can possibly be. All you have to think about is who you want to bring with you for this once-in-a-lifetime experience and what you'll wear in your photo with President Obama!

Thanks for supporting Democrats, and good luck!

Becca

Becca Sharp

Director of Operations

Democratic National Committee

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sat, 16 Sep 2017 10:47

US-POLITICS-CLINTON-BOOK-SIGNING

More "What Happened" isn't just the name of Hillary Rodham Clinton's new book -- it's probably the question she's asking herself after seeing the reaction to a "Game of Thrones" comparison she made in the memoir.

The section of the book in question technically only likens the shouts of Trump supporters at rallies to the cries of the religious zealots of "Game of Thrones" during Cersei Lannister's Season 5 walk of shame. However, most people realized that this would put Clinton in Cersei's place, which makes the comparison pretty counter-productive if her goal was to improve her public image. The topic got Twitter in a frenzy, for once aligning people who normally disagree over political issues.

While some Clinton opponents were only too happy to run with the Cersei comparison, the majority of people just couldn't believe she made it in the first place. As "Game of Thrones" fans know, Cersei Lannister isn't really a person you want to be likened to.

Let this be a lesson to future memoirists: Be careful with your pop culture references.

[via: Twitter]

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sat, 16 Sep 2017 11:14

1. James Comey: Una remember di tori about how Clinton get private email server when she be Secretary of State for Barack Obama government? Well, she say di way former FBI Director James Comey take dey announce di news up and down anyhow na one of di reasons why she no win. US President, Donald Trump, who win Clinton for di election, come later fire Comey because of wetin?...di way im handle di Clinton email palava.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Fri, 15 Sep 2017 04:22

The Global Engagement Center is struggling to keep up with its missions: countering ISIS recruitment and Russian disinformation.

The chief technology officer at theU.S. State Department's anti-propaganda center left last week, along with two other members of its analytics team, Defense One has learned. The departures raise new questions about the Global Engagement Center, the two-year-old office that remains leaderless nine months into the Trump administration.

The State Department would not say how many data analysts remain at the Center, but one former senior official described the three team members as ''the whole enchilada'' and added ''things are bad.''

The Center's CTO Nash Borges departed on Friday, leaving behind a goodbye email. ''Today is my last day and in sticking with recent [science and technology] efforts to share important ideas to keep the GEC marching forward to accomplish its important mission, I thought that I would begin with a review of bureaucratic politics theory,'' Borges wrote. (Defense One obtained a copy of the email.) ''What follow are excerpts from A Glossary of Political Economy Terms by Dr. Paul M. Johnson of Auburn University. Any familiarities that you observe are purely coincidental ;).''

In his email, Borges does not explicitly say why he quit. (Nor did he respond to requests for comments on the record.) But he cheekily quotes Johnson's writing on bureaucracy and ''bureaucratic politics'' at considerable length, and suggests that GEC managers read a book subtitled ''What the world's greatest managers do differently.''

Subscribe

Receive daily email updates:

Subscribe to the Defense One daily.

Be the first to receive updates.

One former State employee said Borges was burnt out by a commute of more than two hours from his home in Maryland.

Two other members of the analytics team quit at ''around the same time'' and departed on Friday, the former employee said. Neither analyst responded to requests for comment by press time.

The Obama administration established the GEC in 2016 to counter ISIS ' various online messaging efforts, directing the new office to use data and to work with international partners in a bid to undermine extremist propaganda more effectively than State's previous such unit, the Center for Strategic Counterterrorism Communications. GEC 's toolbox included various outreach efforts, including highly targeted ad buys on Facebook.

Last year, the 2017 National Defense Authorization Act gave the GEC an additional mission: fighting ''foreign propaganda and disinformation directed against United States national security interests and proactively advance fact-based narratives that support United States allies and interests.'' The Act, which became law in December, allowed the Global Engagement Center to ask the Pentagon for $40 million, bringing its total 2017 spending to about $80 million. About $60 million of that was to be used to counter Russian influence operations; about $19 million was aimed at ISIS .

The change of administrations left the GEC leaderless. A telephone directory dated Sept. 11, 2017, indicates that neither the director's job, which requires Senate confirmation, nor the acting director's job, which does not, have been filled. Defense One obtained a copy of the directory.

In August, Politico reported that Secretary of State Rex Tillerson was ''spurning'' the $80 million in funding, much to the chagrin of lawmakers. (GEC representatives said they were in the process of asking the Pentagon for the $40 million specified in the 2017 NDAA .)

''Congress has provided substantial resources to combat foreign propaganda, particularly from Russia. There is broad agreement that the U.S. Government is behind the curve on this threat,'' said Sen. Rob, Portman, R-Ohio, said in a statement. ''Countering foreign propaganda should be a top priority, and it is very concerning that progress on combatting this problem is being delayed because the State Department isn't tapping into these resources.''

Tillerson relented at the end of August, agreeing that the State Department would complete its Pentagon request and put the funds to work.

Kremlin vs. US Facebook Buys

Last week, the GEC 's anti-propaganda mission rose to national attention again when it was revealed that the Kremlin had purchased Facebook ads worth $100,000 in the runup to the 2016 election. The ads ''appeared to focus on amplifying divisive social and political messages across the ideological spectrum '-- touching on topics from LGBT matters to race issues to immigration to gun rights,'' Facebook chief security officer Alex Stamos wrote in a blog post.

Analysts are still trying to figure out the reach and impact of the Kremlin's ad buy effort. But with the right user data, $100,000 buys a lot of influence on Facebook. At the Defense One Summit last November, former GEC director Michael Lumpkin described how the Center was using the data it received as a Facebook advertiser to maximize the effectiveness of its own targeted appeals.

''Using Facebook ads, I can go within Facebook, I can go grab an audience, I can pick Country X, I need age group 13 to 34, I need people who have liked '-- whether it's Abu Bakr Al Baghdadi or any other set '-- I can shoot and hit them directly with messaging,'' Lumpkin said. He emphasized that with the right data, effective message targeting could be done for ''pennies a click.''

Facebook can't sell personally identifiable information directly to advertisers. But ad buyers can use the vast amount of data Facebook collects on its users to target their ads extremely precisely. In the FCC financial disclosures that the company filed before its 2013 IPO , company officials estimated that they had an average of 111 megabytes of information per user, which may have even been conservative at the time. Unless you log out of Facebook every time you navigate away or disable the app on your smartphone, the company continues to collect information about the pages you visit as you move about the web. That's one reason why the ads that people see in their Facebook feed reflect other activity or sites they visited on the Internet.

Recent research from Christoph Aymanns, Jakob Foerster, and Co-Pierre Georg shows that a troll farm or influence operator '-- they call such actors ''adversaries'' '-- can use just a small amount of personal information about a person's belief system and their social structure to greatly increase the likelihood that an individual will accept what they are being told.

As Aymann's, Foerster's and Georg's work shows, an ad-buyer can easily use that sort of precision to target messages to individuals more likely to believe them.

In his talk at the Defense One Summit, Lumpkin said that more information for better targeting was key to Center's endeavors. ''If I had more ability to work with that [personally identifiable information] and had access'...I could do more targeting, more definitively, to make sure I could hit the right message to the right audience at the right time.''

The 2017 NDAA allows the GEC some leeway around privacy restrictions, so long as there is clear oversight in place in how the Center uses the personal information that it obtains. The law also specifies what the GEC can do with that personal information '-- it can, for example, use it to improve targeted campaigns. ''Research and data analysis of foreign state and non-state propaganda and disinformation efforts and communications related to public diplomacy efforts intended for foreign audiences. Such research and data analysis shall be reasonably tailored to meet the purposes of this paragraph and shall be carried out with due regard for privacy and civil liberties guidance and oversight,'' according to the NDAA .

But State Department is not currently taking advantage of this, according to several former State employees, which could be one reason why the analytics team was in such disarray. State Department officials declined to provide an on-the-record response.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sat, 16 Sep 2017 21:39

Google, the world's biggest advertising platform, allows advertisers to specifically target ads to people typing racist and bigoted terms into its search bar, BuzzFeed News has discovered. Not only that, Google will suggest additional racist and bigoted terms once you type some into its ad-buying tool.

Type "White people ruin," as a potential advertising keyword into Google's ad platform, and Google will suggest you run ads next to searches including "black people ruin neighborhoods." Type "Why do Jews ruin everything," and Google will suggest you run ads next to searches including "the evil jew" and "jewish control of banks."

BuzzFeed News ran an ad campaign targeted to all these keywords and others this week. The ads went live and were visible when we searched for the keywords we'd selected. Google's ad buying platform tracked the ad views. The issue is not unique to Google. On Thursday, ProPublica reported a similar issue with Facebook's ad targeting system.

Following our inquiry, Google disabled every keyword in this ad campaign save one '-- an exact match for "blacks destroy everything," is still eligible. Google told BuzzFeed News that just because a phrase is eligible does not guarantee an ad campaign will run against it. A total of 17 ad impressions were served before the keywords were disabled.

"This violates our policies against derogatory speech and we have removed it," a Google spokesperson told BuzzFeed News after being sent a screenshot of live ad campaign targeted to the search terms "Zionists control the world."

Friday morning, following publication of this story, Google provided a second statement to BuzzFeed News from Senior Vice President of Advertising Sridhar Ramaswamy. "Our goal is to prevent our keyword suggestions tool from making offensive suggestions, and to stop any offensive ads appearing. We have language that informs advertisers when their ads are offensive and therefore rejected. In this instance, ads didn't run against the vast majority of these keywords, but we didn't catch all these offensive suggestions. That's not good enough and we're not making excuses. We've already turned off these suggestions, and any ads that made it through, and will work harder to stop this from happening again."

This revelation comes as Facebook is scrambling to adjust its advertising platform which allowed marketers to target "Jew haters." Facebook blamed the issue, first reported by ProPublica, on its software algorithms. The company said these targeting criteria emerged when people listed the terms under their education and employer fields of their profiles. Facebook Thursday night said it would temporarily stop offering advertisers the option to target by these self-reported targeting fields.

In our Google ad buy, BuzzFeed News used a news story as the destination URL that included relevant language that would be accepted by Google's advertising system.

There are major differences between Facebook's and Google's ad systems that make Google's system harder to police. On Facebook, you essentially pick targeting criteria from Facebook's catalogue of information about people '-- their gender, location, interests, and more. On Google, you target ads to terms you anticipate will be typed in the search box. So Google's universe of potential ad-targeting contains many more unknowns.

Google removed 1.7 billion ads that violated its ad policies in 2016, according to its bad ad report.

Still, BuzzFeed News' campaign was largely made up of keywords suggested by Google's ad buying platform, which seemed to go the extra mile to make sure all angles of certain racist or bigoted ad buys got covered.

Here's a quick breakdown of how the campaign was built. Typing an exact match for "why do jews ruin everything" into Google's ad-buying tool generated 77 additional keyword suggestions, from "jews ruin the world" to "jewish parasites." The keyword tool generates suggestions from the text on the destination website copy, and also pulls from search trends. Google is looking into the way the tool works, and making updates to it, the company told BuzzFeed News.

BuzzFeed News selected a few of these terms and targeted a campaign to them. Google's sole warning, at first, seemed to be that "zionist Jews run the world" wasn't searched all that often.

BuzzFeed News then tried other terms including "white people ruin." Google suggested 14 additional keywords here, too, among them: "black people destroy everything" and "black people ruin neighborhoods."

BuzzFeed News targeted these terms, too. Google disabled most of them after BuzzFeed News provided the company with details about the campaign, but an exact match for "black people destroy everything" is still eligible.

On Thursday, Slate found an additional number of hateful categories inside Facebook's ad platform. BuzzFeed News tried these categories as keywords inside Google too.

Google's ad buying platform would not allow three of them.

With those keywords removed, the campaign was deemed eligible by Google's ad buying tool, though it again had concerns about low search volume.

When Google disapproved some of the campaign's targeting, its system sent the following message: "We value diversity and respect for others, so we strive to avoid offending users with ads or promoted content that's inappropriate for our ad network. Please remove any content that promotes hatred, intolerance, harassment, intimidation, exploitation, violence, or self-harm."

Outside Your Bubble is a BuzzFeed News effort to bring you a diversity of thought and opinion from around the internet. If you don't see your viewpoint represented, contact the curator at bubble@buzzfeed.com. Click here for more on Outside Your Bubble.

Alex Kantrowitz is a senior technology reporter for BuzzFeed News and is based in San Francisco. He reports on social and communications.

Contact Alex Kantrowitz at alex.kantrowitz@buzzfeed.com.

Got a confidential tip? Submit it here.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sat, 16 Sep 2017 13:46

Video of a man incorrectly interpreting a message from Florida evacuation officials in sign language has prompted harsh criticism from the deaf community.

Officials for the Manatee County Emergency Operations Center delivered an evacuation briefing to residents on Friday at 12 p.m. ET as a man standing next to the podium attempted to sign the message for deaf viewers, but misinterpreted officials' words.

Manatee County Marine Rescue Chief Joe Westerman confirmed to ABC News that Marshall Greene, a current lifeguard for the county, was the man who attempted to interpret Friday's briefing.

VisCom, a professional sign language interpreting service that serves southwest and central Florida, told ABC News that Manatee County is a regular vendor of theirs for a variety of services with the sheriff's department and the courts. However, VisCom owner Charlene McCarthy told ABC News that no one from Manatee County reached out to request an interpreter ahead of that Friday briefing.

Additionally, McCarthy said she called the Manatee County Emergency Management team to express her disappointment after watching the video, adding that her company was available to accommodate them up for future press conferences as early as the next morning, but said the office never followed up to book an official interpreter.

VisCom said the man in question is not fluent in American Sign Language (ASL), alleging that, "[He] definitely doesn't have the skill set to function in the role of an interpreter," McCarthy said.

The Daily Moth, a deaf news agency that delivers videos using ASL, reported on the video, criticizing officials for not using a certified interpreter.

Alex Abenchuchan, The Daily Moth's deaf host, confirmed in his own report that Greene's interpretations were incorrect, writing in a response to the incident on Facebook that allegedly Greene only knows "some signs because of a deaf sibling."

The Manatee County Facebook page showed other press conferences after Friday's noon briefing that no longer included an interpreter.

Manatee County Emergency Operations did not immediately respond to ABC News's request for comment as they continue working on hurricane efforts. Greene did not respond to ABC News' request for comment.

In 2013, a "fake" sign language interpreter stood next to former President Barack Obama on stage during Nelson Mandela's memorial service, later raising questions over Secret Service security concerns.

The South African government and the interpreter himself, Thamsanqa Jantjie, claimed he had a schizophrenic break down that caused him to see illusions during the event, impacting his attempted signing.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sat, 16 Sep 2017 11:18

There was a time when I thought no rule of grammar could possibly inspire more ardent debate than the Oxford comma. But California once again proves me wrong.

State representatives elected by the special, especially tan snowflakes of the Golden State have just passed the nation's first state laws governing pronoun usage.

SB 219, which passed the State Assembly on September 12 and has already passed the Senate, proposes to fine or jail employees of long-term or intermediate care facilities who repeatedly and willfully refuse to use a preferred gender pronoun:

This bill would enact the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Long-Term-Care Facility Resident's Bill of Rights. Among other things, the bill would make it unlawful, except as specified, for any long-term care facility to take specified actions wholly or partially on the basis of a person's actual or perceived sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, or human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) status, including, among others, willfully and repeatedly failing to use a resident's preferred name or pronouns after being clearly informed of the preferred name or pronouns. [Emphasis added.]

There Are No Religious Exemptions In SB 219Although this technically wouldn't criminalize using the wrong pronoun, violating this item in the patient's ''bill of rights'' for Residential Care Facilities for the Elderly would carry a fine of up to $1000 or a year in jail. As Amy Swearer noted in the Daily Signal, in true California style, SB 219 carries no religious exemptions'--not for nursing homes run by religious institutions, nor even individual doctors. The only exception it makes is for ''professionally reasonable clinical judgment.''

Additionally, facility staff may not ''Prohibit a resident from using, or harass a resident who seeks to use or does use, a restroom available to other persons of the same gender identity, regardless of whether the resident is making a gender transition or appears to be gender-nonconforming. Harassment includes, but is not limited to, requiring a resident to show identity documents in order to gain entrance to a restroom available to other persons of the same gender identity [emphasis added].''

In other words, a provider concerned about protecting vulnerable residents could be fined for stopping a man, who may very well fit ''stereotypical expectations of how a man'... should appear or act'' from entering the women's restroom. The bill also would make it unlawful to refuse to move a person who identifies as a woman into a room with other women, or vice versa.

California Likes Subjective, Confusing RegulationsThe bill also would make it unlawful for care providers in such care facilities to ''deny or restrict medical or nonmedical care'' pertaining to the particular needs of transgender residents, or provide care ''in a manner that, to a similarly situated reasonable person, unduly demeans the resident's dignity'' [emphasis added].

You might wondering how busy clinical staff are going to deal with such a subjective, emotionally oriented requirement. In normal, non-transgender related clinical circumstances (particularly outside California) this rule may have been clear, but what constitutes an ''unduly demeaning'' manner in this context? What is a ''reasonable person'' to a government that would censor and compel people to deny basic biological realities? The LGBTQ+ agenda and other rules included in the bill obfuscate rather than clarify'--or at the very least beg an extremely broad, politically correct interpretation.

But as someone who has read quite a few pages of California code, I can say this law is quite typical of California statutes. Really, unless you have a lawyer on speed dial, you're on your own when it comes to determining how you're going to abide by California's many, many burdensomely vague and subjective regulations. You organize yet another training session. Then you print out the poster (the ''bill of rights'' needs to be readily visible to all the residents, you know), add it to the wallpaper composed of about a dozen other posters required by state and federal law, push off that small, helpless feeling you used to get when you were given an overwhelming and complicated homework assignment in high school, and move on with your usual duties'... until the California decides to drop you another little regulatory present, and then you repeat the process. Woe unto the HR departments at intermediate and long-term care facilities.

For Progressives, Forced Speech Reigns SupremeBut at least this only applies to a specific type of facility, right? It's not like everyone in the state will be required to use preferred pronouns? Yes, the bill would only apply to skilled nursing, long-term and intermediate care facilities right now, but you know that's how progressives prop the door open to a more radical agenda down the road. (Don't believe me? Read this article on how gay marriage has triggered an avalanche of totalitarianism in the UK). SB 219 passed the Assembly and will be ratified by the governor not because every elected representative is a diehard totalitarian but because, really, how many transgender people are in those facilities anyway?

Leftist activists in California, and particularly its major cities, have been perversely interested in obscuring and stifling reality across the economic and social spectrum of issues: from minimum wage laws to transgender bathroom laws, radical abortion laws (insurance companies are mandated to cover abortion in the Golden State), or how the marriage protection amendment in '08 was vociferously attacked legally and personally. A proposed law that would create a new ''right'' to censor private employees in the name of protecting their ''inner sense of being male or female'' (as phrased in the proposed law) is par for the course. For many progressives, especially of the sexual variety, reality is not a value. Acceptance and affirmation are their values. Personal truth is the rule of the day.

Like the rest of the country, the government of California values protecting workers and patients. But the reigning philosophy for its regulatory schemes of the past decade or so isn't preventing actual harm from coming to the people of their state, as in the case of informed consent or stiff penalties for elder abuse. Such protections do not go far enough. Feelings, particularly the feelings of one's ''inner self,'' must be protected.

Our Culture Is Embracing 'Sola Feels'I've written about sola feels on other occasions, from abortion to ''embryo jewelry'' to the LGBTQ+ sexual revolution. The sacralization of emotion is inextricably bound up with denying reality, and it is quickly moving from the orthodoxy of the far left to the orthopraxy of all Democratic governments. It demands conformity and obedience to the narrative; a thousand knees bow for pronouns today, ten thousand more for baking cakes and arranging flowers tomorrow'--all in the name of ''dignity'' and ''equality.''

Observers shouldn't be shocked at this bill. California is merely adapting to the orthodoxy of the left a little faster than the rest of the country. Here, as with the case of Arlene's Flowers in Washington and the mandate for abortion coverage in Oregon, we witness the rise of coercive rights. These aren't the rights endowed by our Creator, since we have no Creator in this fiction we've contrived for ourselves. These are the rights we grant ourselves, that only exist in the context of another individual being forced to do something for us. In this case, it is forcing someone to either use pronouns that do not correspond to their intrinsic organic identity as male or female, or contrive their communication so as to refrain from using pronouns at all.

Legal eagles may debate whether this rule constitutes ''compelled speech,'' but that shouldn't be the hang up. This rule is plainly censorship, and it falls in line with other coercive rights in that it attempts to force conformity with sola feels. It is an attack not just on freedom of speech, but on freedom of conscience and reality itself'--and that is something every American should be zealous to protect.

Georgi is a Senior Contributor at The Federalist. Follow her on Twitter, @georgi_boorman.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sat, 16 Sep 2017 11:25

SEC. 3. Chapter 2.45 (commencing with Section 1439.50) is added to Division 2 of the Health and Safety Code, to read:

CHAPTER 2.45. Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Long-Term Care Facility Residents' Bill of Rights

1439.50. For the purposes of this chapter, the following definitions shall apply:

(a) ''Gender expression'' has the same meaning as defined in Section 51 of the Civil Code.

(b) ''Gender identity'' means a person's identity based on the individual's stated gender identity, without regard to whether the self-identified gender accords with the individual's physical appearance, surgical history, genitalia, legal sex, sex assigned at birth, or name and sex, as it appears in medical records, and without regard to any contrary statement by any other person, including a family member, conservator, or legal representative. An individual who lacks the present ability to communicate his or her gender identity shall retain the gender identity most recently expressed by that individual.

(c) ''Gender-nonconforming'' means a person whose gender expression does not conform to stereotypical expectations of how a man or woman should appear or act.

(d) ''LGBT'' means lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender.

(e) ''Long-term care facility'' or ''facility'' includes facilities listed in Section 1418 of this code and subdivision (b) of Section 9701 of the Welfare and Institutions Code.

(f) ''Long-term care facility staff'' or ''facility staff'' means all individuals employed by or contracted directly with the facility.

(g) ''Resident'' means a resident or patient of a long-term care facility.

(h) ''Transgender'' means a person whose gender identity differs from the person's assigned or presumed sex at birth.

(i) ''Transition'' means to undergo a process by which a person changes physical sex characteristics or gender expression to match the person's inner sense of being male or female. This process may include, among other things, a name change, a change in preferred pronouns, and a change in social gender expression, as indicated by hairstyle, clothing, and restroom use. Transition may or may not include hormone use and surgery.

1439.51. (a) Except as provided in subdivision (b), it shall be unlawful for a long-term care facility or facility staff to take any of the following actions wholly or partially on the basis of a person's actual or perceived sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, or human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) status:

(1) Deny admission to a long-term care facility, transfer or refuse to transfer a resident within a facility or to another facility, or discharge or evict a resident from a facility.

(2) Deny a request by residents to share a room.

(3) Where rooms are assigned by gender, assigning, reassigning, or refusing to assign a room to a transgender resident other than in accordance with the transgender resident's gender identity, unless at the transgender resident's request.

(4) Prohibit a resident from using, or harass a resident who seeks to use or does use, a restroom available to other persons of the same gender identity, regardless of whether the resident is making a gender transition or appears to be gender-nonconforming. Harassment includes, but is not limited to, requiring a resident to show identity documents in order to gain entrance to a restroom available to other persons of the same gender identity.

(5) Willfully and repeatedly fail to use a resident's preferred name or pronouns after being clearly informed of the preferred name or pronouns.

(6) Deny a resident the right to wear or be dressed in clothing, accessories, or cosmetics that are permitted for any other resident.

(7) Restrict a resident's right to associate with other residents or with visitors, including the right to consensual sexual relations, unless the restriction is uniformly applied to all residents in a nondiscriminatory manner. This section does not preclude a facility from banning or restricting sexual relations, as long as the ban or restriction is applied uniformly and in a nondiscriminatory manner.

(8) Deny or restrict medical or nonmedical care that is appropriate to a resident's organs and bodily needs, or provide medical or nonmedical care in a manner that, to a similarly situated reasonable person, unduly demeans the resident's dignity or causes avoidable discomfort.

(b) This section shall not apply to the extent that it is incompatible with any professionally reasonable clinical judgment.

(c) Each facility shall post the following notice alongside its current nondiscrimination policy in all places and on all materials where that policy is posted:

''[Name of facility] does not discriminate and does not permit discrimination, including, but not limited to, bullying, abuse, or harassment, on the basis of actual or perceived sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, or HIV status, or based on association with another individual on account of that individual's actual or perceived sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, or HIV status. You may file a complaint with the Office of the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman [provide contact information] if you believe that you have experienced this kind of discrimination.''

1439.52. A facility shall employ procedures for recordkeeping, including, but not limited to, records generated at the time of admission, that include the gender identity, correct name, as indicated by the resident, and pronoun of each resident, as indicated by the resident.

1439.53. (a) Long-term care facilities shall protect personally identifiable information regarding residents' sexual orientation, whether a resident is transgender, a resident's transition history, and HIV status from unauthorized disclosure, as required by the federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (42 U.S.C. Sec. 300gg), if applicable, the Confidentiality of Medical Information Act (Part 2.6 (commencing with Section 56) of Division 1 of the Civil Code), if applicable, regulations promulgated thereunder, if applicable, and any other applicable provision of federal or state law. A facility shall take any steps reasonably necessary to minimize the likelihood of inadvertent or incidental disclosure of that information to other residents, visitors, or facility staff, except to the minimum extent necessary for facility staff to perform their duties.

(b) Long-term care facility staff not directly involved in providing direct care to a resident, including, but not limited to, a transgender or gender-nonconforming resident, shall not be present during physical examination or the provision of personal care to that resident if the resident is partially or fully unclothed without the express permission of that resident, or his or her legally authorized representative or responsible party. A facility shall use doors, curtains, screens, or other effective visual barriers to provide bodily privacy for all residents, including, but not limited to, transgender or gender-nonconforming residents, whenever they are partially or fully unclothed. In addition, all residents, including, but not limited to, LGBT residents, shall be informed of and have the right to refuse to be examined, observed, or treated by any facility staff when the primary purpose is educational or informational rather than therapeutic, or for resident appraisal or reappraisal, and that refusal shall not diminish the resident's access to care for the primary purpose of diagnosis or treatment.

1439.54. A violation of this chapter shall be treated as a violation under Chapter 2 (commencing with Section 1250), Chapter 2.4 (commencing with Section 1417), or Chapter 3.2 (commencing with Section 1569).

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sat, 16 Sep 2017 11:26

Four years ago, amid much uncertainty, 400 British members of parliament voted to redefine marriage in the United Kingdom.

Then prime minister David Cameron announced that, despite having made no mention of the issue in his party's pre-election manifesto, it would be MP's who decided the fate of marriage.

Now, it's Australia's turn to choose. There's one key difference. Unlike in Britain, it will be the people who decide.

Everyone agrees, whether they admit it or not. This is a decision of enormous significance.

Therefore, it seems sensible to analyse the consequences of the potential change, within nations in which redefinition has previously been carried out.

In the United Kingdom, it has become abundantly clear that redefinition has affected many people, across many spheres. At first glance, these spheres appeared distinct from marriage redefinition. However, subsequent changes, have proved that they are entirely intertwined.

Gender: Current Conservative Prime Minister, Theresa May, has revealed proposals to abolish the need for any medical consultation before gender reassignment. Simply filling out an official form will be sufficient. A 'Ministry of Equalities' press release, explicitly announced, that the proposals were designed to: 'build on the progress' of same-sex marriage. Guardian journalist Roz Kaveney boasted that changing your gender is now: 'Almost as simple as changing your name by statutory declaration'.

Manifestations of the 'British gender revolution' are not difficult to find. Transport for London, have prohibited the use of the 'heteronormative' words, such as ladies and gentlemen. Meanwhile, universities across the nation are threatening to 'mark down' students, who continue to use the words 'he' and 'she'. Instead, 'gender neutral pronouns' such as 'ze', must be uniformly applied.

Such gender-theory radicalism has delighted Stonewall, the UK's largest LGBT lobby. Their Orwellian tagline: 'Acceptance without exception', can be seen plastered on posters and adverts. Politicians, attempt to 'out-radical' one another, in the race to be an original champion, in the next emancipatory front of 'Trans-rights'.

Freedom of religion: Much was made in the UK, about supposed exemptions, designed to ensure that believers would always be allowed to stay true to their convictions.

Four years later, the very same people who made 'heartfelt promises', now work tirelessly to undermine them.

Equalities minister Justine Greening, has insisted that churches must be made to: 'Keep up with modern attitudes'. Likewise, the Speaker of the House of Commons, a position supposedly defined by its political neutrality, had this to say: I feel we'll only have proper equal marriage when you can bloody well get married in a church if you want to do so, without having to fight the church for the equality that should be your right'.

It became clear, during this year's general election, just how militant the LGBT lobby have become, following marriage redefinition. The primary target was Tim Farron, leader of England's third largest political party, the Liberal Democrats. High-profile journalists had heard that Farron was a practising Christian. In every single interview thereafter, they demanded to know. Did he personally believe homosexual sex to be a sin? He practically begged the commentariat, to allow him to keep his personal faith and legislative convictions separate. For decades, he pointed out, he had out vocally and legislatively supported the LGBT Lobby. Likewise, he had long backed same-sex marriage, voting for it enthusiastically. This simply was no longer enough.

Shortly after the election campaign, Farron resigned. He stated that it was now impossible, for a believing Christian to hold a prominent position in British politics.

In a heartbreaking development and in spite of Britain's 'foster crisis', aspiring foster parents who identify as religious, face interrogation. Those who are deemed unlikely to 'celebrate' homosexuality, have had their dreams of parenthood scuppered. This month, Britain's High Court, ruled that a Pentecostal couple were ineligible parents. While the court recognised their successful and loving record of adoption, they decreed that above all else: 'The equality provisions concerning sexual orientation should take precedence'. How has Great Britain become so twisted? Practicing Jews, Muslims, Christians and Sikhs, who want to stay true to their religious teachings, can no longer adopt children.

Freedom of speech: In the lead-up to the Parliamentary vote, we witnessed almost incomprehensible bullying. David Burrows MP, a mild-mannered supporter of the 'Coalition for Marriage', had excrement thrown at his house. His children received death threats and their school address was published online. Similarly, 'Conservative' broadcaster Iain Dale promised to, 'publicly out' gay MP's, who did not vote for redefinition.

Many hardworking Brits have lost their jobs. Consider Adrian Smith, sacked by a Manchester Housing Trust, for suggesting that the state: 'shouldn't impose its rules on places of faith and conscience'. Or Richard Page, fired for gross misconduct after articulating, that children might enjoy better outcomes, were they to be adopted by heterosexual couples.

Simultaneously, contrary to 'steadfast' government assurances, small businesses have been consistently targeted. Courts in Northern Ireland ruled that the Asher's Family bakery had acted unlawfully. What crime committed by this tiny business? Politely declining to decorate a cake with a political message in support of same-sex marriage. The courts maintained that business owners must be compelled to promote the LGBT cause, irrespective of personal convictions.

Even the National Trust, a British institution with over 4.2 million members, has decided to join the bullying LGBT crusade. A message went out. Each of the Trust's 62,000 volunteers, would be required to wear a compulsory same-sex rainbow badge. Those who said they'd rather not were told they would be 'moved out of sight'until they were prepared to publicly demonstrate inclusive tolerance.

In retrospect, the silent majority in Britain remained silent for too long. Reflecting on redefinition, Ben Harris-Quinney, Chairman of the Bow Group think tank pondered that:'Same-sex marriage was promoted in the UK, as an issue of supposed tolerance and equality. What we have seen, is the most unequal and intolerant outcomes of any political issue in recent history'.

Children: Across the UK, 'sex education' has been transformed and disfigured. TV programmes, aimed at children as young as three, promote 'gender fluidity', as an enabler of thoughtfulness and individuality.

At the same time, Ministers have denied worried parents the right to withdraw their children from primary school classes. Meanwhile, 'outside educators' teach children about sex positions, 'satisfying' pornography consumption and how to masturbate. Concerns regarding STI's and Promiscuity, are derided as 'old-fashioned'.

Independent religious schools are under intense scrutiny. Dame Louise Casey, a senior government advisor, recently insisted that it is now: 'Not Ok for Catholic schools to be homophobic and anti-gay marriage'.

Ofsted, the body responsible for school-assessment, has been wildly politicised. In 2013, Prior to the redefinition of marriage, Ofsted visited Vishnitz Jewish Girls School. They passed the school with flying colours. In fact, they went out of their way to highlight the committed and attentive approach to student welfare and development. Four years later, Ofsted returned. This time, they failed the school on one issue alone. While again, noting that students were 'confident in thinking for themselves', their report, pointed to the inadequate promotion of homosexuality and gender reassignment. As such, it was failing to ensure: 'a full understanding of fundamental British values'. It is one of an initial seven faith schools that face closure.

I mentioned that I was writing this article to a good friend in the Conservative Party, back at home. He expressed his genuine concern. Had I not considered the consequences? Did I not realise that what I said in Australia could be found when I returned to the UK? 'LGBT progress is an unstoppable tide'. He assured me, that it was ok for me to 'privately' believe that marriage was between one man and one woman. He even privately agreed, that the stuff being taught in primary schools was too much.

But to say it out loud? To actually have it in print? It would blight my career and my personal relationships.

Good God. How much more important the institution of marriage and freedom of thought, religion and speech. How much more important the future of our children, than any na¯ve career ambitions I might harbour.

I urge every Aussie to examine the evidence, analysis the results and be clear about what you're voting for. If it was solely marriage, it would worth preserving.

It's infinitely more.

Got something to add? Join the discussion and comment below.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Fri, 15 Sep 2017 21:07

Comedian Sarah Silverman was forced to apologize after she was caught exaggerating a story about being paid less than a man for a gig - to highlight the gender pay gap.

The comic and feminist campaigner recalled an incident at the New York Comedy Club when she claimed she was paid less than her male counterpart, for a piece she recorded a wage-discrimination-activism video for Levo League.

But Silverman has been forced to apologize after New York Comedy Club owner Al Martin revealed the story was false, because Silverman had been paid less purely because she appeared as a guest on the show and wasn't meant to receive anything - her male counterpart Todd Barry was booked for the slot.

Scroll down for video

Comedian and campaigner Sarah Silverman has been forced to apologize after she used a fake story about getting paid less than her male friend to do a job, as she tried to emphasize the issue of the gender pay gap

Silverman has since publicly apologized to Martin and revealed she fabricated the story.

But she stressed that critics should not use the story as a way to undermine the gender pay gap campaign.

'To the maniacs who want to use this as a chit against women's issues, I ask that you please don't. Because that would be super s****y,' she said in a statement, according to National Review.

In the video, released on April 6, Silverman accused Martin of paying her $50 less than Barry to perform.

She claimed while both did 15 minute back-to-back sets she was paid $10, while Barry went home with $60.

'So I went back inside and I asked the owner Al Martin and I said, "Al, why did you pay me $10 and you paid Todd Barry $60?"' she said.

Silverman appeared in the video and was later forced to apologise for fabricating the pay gap story S

'And he, it was so perfect. He goes, "Oh, did you want a $60 spot?" It was symbolic, I didn't need $60, but, you know it was pretty s****y.'

She added: 'If you work a job and a man is working the same job, then you should be getting paid the same.'

However Martin revealed what really happened in a Facebook post - prompting Silverman's apology.

She said: 'When I was interviewed by Levo, they asked me "Do you remember a time you were paid less for the same job" and this story, being just that, popped into my head.'

The comic said she regretted mentioning Martin by name, who had always been 'so lovely' to her. She also admitted her anecdote had not been a good example of the gender pay gap.

Silverman apologized for naming club owner Al Martin in the fabricated story but said the issue around her incorrectly recounting the anecdote should not be used to undermine the campaign for wage equality

Silverman is dating Welsh actor Michael Sheen (left) Before that, she was with Jimmy Kimmel (right)

In a Facebook post Martin said he fully accepted Silverman's apology and invited her back to perform.

He wrote: 'It takes a big person to apologize and and today Sarah proved she is that kind of person.'

Silverman came under criticism last month after she posted a list of ten 'rape prevention tips' on Twitter.

Critics blasted the comic for offering 'tips' to potential rapists while dozens of men responded by branding her sexist for suggesting that all men desire to rape women.

The sarcastic set of rules, which focus on the perpetrator of the crime rather than the victim, also include 'if you are in an elevator and a woman gets in, don't rape her', as well as 'when you encounter a woman who is asleep, the safest course of action is not to rape her'.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sat, 16 Sep 2017 12:04

Uxbridge SJW Accuses Local Businesses With ''Locally Owned And Operated'' Signs Of Being Racist Code For ''Make Blackstone Valley White Again''

Want to advertise with Turtleboy? Email us at [email protected] for more information.

Did you know that it's racist when store owners hang signs that say things like, ''locally owned and operated''? If you answered yes to that question, then congratulations because you are officially woke. If you answered no, then you're a bigot who is in desperate need of diversity training. At least according to this white chick from Uxbridge, who is none too pleased about the racism she's been seeing in the Whitinsville/Uxbridge area.

It started when a local man posted about the closing of another local business:

That somehow turned into this:

Amazing. I honestly don't know how they come up with this stuff sometimes. I mean, you gotta really, really try to find racism in that. And even then it's the greatest stretch I've ever seen.

Yea, ''locally owned and operated'' is racist. Didn't you know that? Local business is code for ''no brown people allowed.'' Might as well put up a cross and start burning it. No difference.

And don't you dare tell her that you're proud to be an American either. That's a great way to lose her business. She has no interest in any racists who have pride in their country:

Oh I see, it's not racism anymore, it's just nationalism. And nationalism is a bad thing. Because being proud of where you come from is racist. Unless you're a foreigner who comes to America and wants to continue to practice your culture here. Then we should embrace you and resist the urge to assimilate into our society. Stupid Americans!!

And don't even get her started with Hellen's!! Them and their ''veiled racism'' that she can see right through. They sure thought they were being slick with their whole, ''locally owned and operated'' sign. But she knows exactly what that means '' you're trying to make the Blackstone Valley white again! Busted!!

Of course in reality ''locally owned and operated'' means that locals own the business and thus they pay local taxes which fund the local schools and local roads. Without local businesses towns and cities have to increase property taxes to pick up the slack. These signs basically are put up to let people know that you're supporting someone in your community, instead of dumping cash into a billion dollar corporation that manufactures it's products in overseas sweatshops.

But that's not what it means any longer. Now that Donald Trump is President, SJWs have finally unmasked these phrases for what they really are '' nationalist racism!! And thanks to this local woman, who purposely chose to live in a community that is primarily white, everyone knows just how bigoted these businesses really are.

I've said it before and I'll say it again '' white people are the worst. They really are. There's nothing more sad and pathetic than a white guilt consumed, ''I'm still with her'' middle aged woman from the white suburbs. We're talking about people who intentionally moved far away from minorities, and now pretend to champion them by calling other white people racist. And they get 99.9% of their news from the perfectly sane people who run the Occupy Democrats Facebook page.

Anyway, this woman might seem harmless, but people like her are not harmless. They're the primary reason we have racial problems in America today. By creating the illusion that racism is everywhere it increase tensions between people who would normally get along. Calling someone a racist is one of the worst accusations you could make about a person. And when it's not true it can cause a lot of long term damage to an innocent person. People like Michelle Borrusso should be mocked and ridiculed when they stupid, divisive shit like this, because THEY are the real racists. And they are the ones who cause 99% of the problems in our country today.

P.S. Michelle '' better take this one down. The last thing you wanna do is be seen supporting the cops. That's like, the most racist thing you can possibly do.

We urge you to support the following local businesses. They provide terrific services for the community!

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sat, 16 Sep 2017 12:35

Enlarge/ Employees and visitors walk through the Googleplex in Mountain View.Three women who worked for Google filed a lawsuit today alleging the company discriminates against female employees "by systematically paying them lower compensation."

The lawsuit (PDF), which was filed in San Francisco Superior Court and seeks class-action status, says Google has violated the California Equal Pay Act and other sections of the state labor code.

Much of the allegations mirror claims made earlier this year by the US Department of Labor, which has an ongoing litigation against Google over alleged gender pay disparities. A statistical regression analysis performed by the government found "systemic compensation disparities against women pretty much across the entire workforce." Google has disputed those claims.The lawsuit alleges that Google "has channeled and segregated" women into career paths and "job ladders" that have lower compensation, compared with men with equal or lesser qualifications.

There are three named plaintiffs in the case. The first is Kelly Ellis, who was hired by Google in 2010 as a front-end software engineer on the Google Photos team. Although Ellis had four years of experience in software engineering, she was placed into Level 3 on her compensation "ladder," a level that is typically assigned to new college graduates, according to the complaint.

"There is a false and gendered perception at Google that backend engineering is more technically rigorous, and therefore more prestigious, than frontend software engineering," the complaint states. On Ellis' teams, "almost all backend software engineers were men... Almost all female software engineers, however, were frontend engineers."Ellis resigned in July 2014 "because of the sexist culture at Google."

The second plaintiff, Holly Pease, was a corporate network manager hired in 2005. She managed engineering teams but was never placed on a "technical" ladder, which would have offered improved salary, bonuses, pay raises, and company equity.

Pease even coached her employees in how to pass technical interviews in order to get themselves onto the technical ladder, but she was denied "a fair opportunity to be paid at the same rate as similar employees," according to the complaint.

After she returned from a medical leave, Pease says her career stalled, and she resigned from the company in February 2016.

The final plaintiff, Kelli Wisuri, joined Google in 2012 and worked in Sales Enablement. That job is less lucrative than working in Sales, which is paid on commission. Wisuri says that about 50 percent of employees she encountered with Sales Enablement jobs were women, whereas nearly all of the Sales workers were men.

The complaint says Wisuri left the company in January 2015 "due to the lack of opportunities for advancement for women at Google."

A Google spokesperson said in an e-mailed statement that the company has "extensive systems in place to ensure that we pay fairly." She continued:

We work really hard to create a great workplace for everyone and to give everyone the chance to thrive here. In relation to this particular lawsuit, we'll review it in detail, but we disagree with the central allegations. Job levels and promotions are determined through rigorous hiring and promotion committees and must pass multiple levels of review, including checks to make sure there is no gender bias in these decisions.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sat, 16 Sep 2017 20:00

To the affluent commuters passing by, Vishnitz Girls School looks like any other well-maintained North London townhouse.

Were it not for a glimpse of white-shirted backs hunched over desks in the front room, you would not even suspect it was a school.

Unlike most primary schools, there's no brightly-coloured sign advertising its presence. Indeed, a black-clad security guard in his sentry hut seems to be there mainly to keep unwanted visitors away.

Students at a Jewish school in North London celebrate Hanukkah. Haredi Jewish tradition insists on separation of genders during schooling

With good reason. As one of a handful of Orthodox Jewish schools in Britain, it's a prime target for terror attacks. Just across the Channel in France, similar schools have suffered unthinkable atrocities.

Yet the threat facing Vishnitz Girls School today does not come from Islamic extremists. Instead it is under attack from a force far closer to home; a force which wants to see it, and other faith schools like it, conform to a different ideology or be summarily closed down.

The unlikely battleground for this is LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender) rights. Last month, Vishnitz Girls School '-- where the teaching of Jewish and religious studies was singled out for praise by inspectors in its first Ofsted report of July 2013 '-- was presented with an ultimatum: teach your children about homosexuality and gender reassignment, or we will close you down.

In the space of four years, Ofsted inspectors have now graded it as a failing school, based on this sole issue.

To those who run Ofsted it is a noble cause. But to the Haredi Jewish families who send their daughters '-- aged three to ten '-- to the school, it represents an impossible dilemma.

Members of this conservative community '-- 30,000 of whom are centred on Stamford Hill, North London '-- are instantly recognisable by their black hats, ringlets and frock coats.

In their tradition, which, like Islam, involves segregation of the genders, the issue of sex education falls to parents rather than schools. The notion of teaching a seven-year-old Haredi girl about gender reassignment is anathema. Yet as far as Ofsted is concerned, Haredi schools face a simple choice: abandon a key religious principle or be closed down.

This is no isolated curiosity, affecting only the 45,000 or so British Haredi Jews. To people of faith, it is a familiar tale of the Left launching a sustained attack on religion.

Now those involved in Christian schools are linking arms with Orthodox Jews to challenge what they see as the Department for Education (DfE) pushing a secularist agenda.

As Gill Robins, of Christians In Education, puts it, the DfE has launched 'an all-out assault on faith values, sanctity of family and parental rights'.

Orthodox Jews outside a synagogue in north London (file picture). In their tradition the issue of sex education falls to parents rather than schools

Ofsted stands accused of 'targeted attacks' on faith schools, turning up without warning for inspections aimed at forcing them into closure.

In 2014, when Nicky Morgan succeeded Michael Gove as Secretary of State for Education, she made the significant step of hiring Luke Tryl, who campaigned against homophobic bullying as head of education at the gay rights group Stonewall, as a special adviser.

His close ties to the Cabinet minister gave him huge influence and his appointment in 2014 coincided with a marked change in the approach to teaching LGBT issues in Britain's schools.

The following year the charity Educate & Celebrate was handed £214,000 from a Government budget of £2 million to tackle homophobic, biphobic and transphobic (HBT) bullying in schools. Part of this money was used to circulate books which taught children as young as seven to stop saying 'girl' and 'boy' so they did not offend transgender pupils.

Mr Tryl, a former president of the Oxford Union, is a seasoned lobbyist who says homophobic bullying is 'endemic' in schools.

Yet there is a growing sense among teachers who do not subscribe to this mantra that this has hijacked the wider issue of bullying.

'We have gone from anti-bullying campaigns to the specific issue of homophobic bullying, which is by its very nature more of a niche concern,' says Gill Robins.

'But anyone who raises an eyebrow is attacked as a bigot. We have this liberal elite who feel everything in education has to be rainbow-coloured. It is getting out of hand.'

When Theresa May sacked Nicky Morgan last summer, Luke Tryl was appointed Director of Corporate Strategy at Ofsted, and the campaign appeared to step up a gear.

Take Ofsted's inspection of Beis Yaakov High School, a Jewish academy school in Salford, where the all-female pupils have lived sheltered lives with gender segregation and for whom social media and smartphones are unknown entities.

Not a life to everyone's tastes, but Britain has a proud tradition of tolerance, allowing others to pursue their religion without interference.

Clearly nobody had told the Ofsted inspectors. During the inspection, the girls were asked questions such as: 'Do you have a boyfriend?'; 'What do you know about men being married to each other?'; and 'What do you think about Facebook?'

Nicky Morgan (pictured) hired Luke Tryl, who campaigned against homophobic bullying as head of education at the gay rights group Stonewall, as a special adviser

While a number of Islamic faith schools have been closed down following similar inspections, there is a crucial difference. In the case of Islamic schools, there have been genuine fears about extremism, with teachers actively instructing pupils that it is acceptable for a man to beat his wife and that gay people should be put to death. Some were even found to be providing access to banned extremist textbooks.

None of this is true of the Jewish schools, especially Beis Yaakov.

All indicators showed that the Greater Manchester school was outstanding, with a varied curriculum, supportive staff, happy parents, 'positive and enthusiastic' students who are 'impeccably polite', 'enjoy taking responsibility' and behave so well that 'exclusions are non-existent'.

Yet because of the pupils' bemused responses to those insensitive, inappropriate questions, the school was put into special measures. This meant it was graded as failing and was subject to inspections every three months until changes were made.

Beis Yaakov returned to a grading of 'good' within a year. This involved the school amending its PSHE (Personal, Social, Health and Economic education) classes to include discussions of homosexuality and transgender issues. The distress suffered by students as a result of the continued inspections was such that the school made a formal complaint.

There was a similar disconnect between the quality of education and Ofsted's mark at Vishnitz Girls School.

The school's first Ofsted report in July 2013 found the school 'good' in all areas, saying: 'The girls make good progress in their Kodesh (Jewish/religious studies).' It continued: 'Teachers know the girls well so that the needs of the girls are met well and they are eager to learn.'

Three years later, in February 2016, the school was subjected to its first unannounced inspection. Ofsted found that supervision was good, but it did not have up-to-date policies on safeguarding and the buildings required maintenance work.

While the report contained no criticism of the school's teaching standards, a line at the end of the report states: 'The aims and ethos of the school are governed by the codes of the Torah and are based on the three tenets of Judaism: Torah, Prayer and acts of loving kindness.'

By the time of the second inspection in October 2016, Ofsted noted that while progress was being made in the areas highlighted by the February report, 'the school's policy to exclude from the curriculum reference to certain of the protected characteristics in the Equality Act 2010' meant it had again failed.

By the third visit, in May, every issue in the first failed report '-- down to peeling paint on a wall '-- had been resolved. Pupils were also deemed to be 'well-motivated, have positive attitudes to learning and are confident in thinking for themselves'.

However, it also found that: 'Pupils are not taught explicitly about issues such as sexual orientation. This restricts spiritual, moral, social and cultural development and does not take account of differing lifestyles.

'As a result, pupils are not able to gain a full understanding of fundamental British values. [Teachers] do not teach pupils about all the protected characteristics, particularly those relating to gender re-assignment and sexual orientation. This means that pupils have a limited understanding of the different lifestyles and partnerships that individuals may choose in present-day society.'

Through Ofsted's rainbow-coloured lens, schools either pass or fail, and in hindsight this tiny Jewish private school, with annual fees of £5,500 and just 212 pupils, never stood a chance.

The injustice of it all has provoked fury in the Haredi community. Rabbi Abraham Pinter is scathing in his criticism of Ofsted. The rabbi, who is principal of Yesodey Hatorah Senior Girls' School in Stamford Hill, made a Freedom of Information request to ascertain how many schools had been subjected to unannounced inspections in the latter half of 2014, when they were introduced.

Ofsted papers revealed that 13 schools were subjected to full unannounced inspections (which are only meant to be carried out in cases of 'serious concern'), of which three were Orthodox Jewish.

Two were Roman Catholic, one Church of England and the rest standard secular secondary schools. In terms of the proportion of schools targeted, the Jewish examples were vastly more likely to be picked on, despite being routinely among the best performers.

'There are only ten Orthodox Jewish schools in Britain, so effectively one in three were singled out for the heavy treatment,' says Rabbi Pinter. 'This is social engineering at work and nothing to do with safeguarding our children.'

Referring to the Vishnitz case, he condemns the 'obsession' with fighting 'non-existent issues for our community'.

'I suggest Ofsted go down to the local police station and ask them about the history of homophobic abuse around here,' he says. 'There is none whatsoever. We are decent, tolerant people and we do not bully anybody. So why should we be forced to teach girls about issues which have nothing to do with their lives? Our community promotes tolerance of all . . . But tolerance works both ways; Ofsted shows none to people of faith.'

Several Christian faith schools were among the 40 subjected to unannounced Ofsted inspections in late 2014 and on numerous occasions since then.

All were found to be failing 'British values' because although their pupils are respectful and tolerant of difference, the schools all teach that marriage is defined in the Bible as being between a man and a woman. All, because of this point, were downgraded from good to inadequate.

It is worth pausing to consider the terminology. 'British values', according to Ofsted, appear to be defined as placing the rights of people with 'protected characteristics' (in this case specifically the LGBT community) above the right to religious freedom.

When Parliament's Secondary Legislation Scrutiny Committee considered this term, it described the DfE as merging 'statutory provision with political declaration'.

In other words, the DfE and Ofsted have been politicising the curriculum, breaching both human rights and education law.

As Gill Robins puts it: 'Under the guise of a Trojan Horse, the DfE is seizing an opportunity to bring all schools firmly into line in promoting its views on creation, sexuality and relationships.'

So where do the schools go from here? The problem with appealing an Ofsted decision is that complaints are dealt with by the quango itself. Worse still for beleaguered faith schools, all unannounced inspections are carried out by Her Majesty's Inspectorate, Ofsted's elite unit. So for the faith schools to win, these HMIs would be required to overturn their own decisions.

A spokesman for Ofsted says the rules were set by the DfE, adding: 'The standards require all independent schools to actively promote fundamental British values and equalities, including respect for those with different faiths and beliefs.

'These standards are enshrined in law. Schools cannot choose which parts of the legislation they comply with.'

The DfE issued a statement reiterating its stance that 'all schools must prepare pupils for the opportunities and responsibilities of life in British society': 'Any school that fails to meet these standards will be subject to regulatory action to ensure every child is getting the excellent education they deserve.'

And so the war goes on. Shimon Cohen, speaking on behalf of Vishnitz Girls School, tells me: 'We are deeply disappointed that Ofsted feels our school has not met the Independent School Standards, particularly when its decision is focused on one complicated issue that is contrary to our beliefs.

'We would like to thank the many people who have shown their support and we are heartened that there are still people who hold to true British values of tolerance to all religions and beliefs.'

A strongly worded, yet admirably restrained response, it barely hints at the fury felt by parents of children at the school.

But if Ofsted's ideologues think this community will be cowed into submission, they can think again.

'This is a line in the sand and we will not cross it,' one parent told me this week. 'The mistake Ofsted has made is in thinking we have a choice in the matter, but religion is our lives, and we will not budge.'

Link to Article

Archived Version

Source: Western Journalism

Sun, 17 Sep 2017 05:24

Advertisement - story continues below

State lawmakers acted Saturday to clear the last legislative hurdles to make California a ''sanctuary state.''

The California Senate passed the bill early Saturday. Democrat Gov. Jerry Brown has indicated he will sign it.

Assemblyman Steven Choi, R-Irvine, who is also a first-generation immigrant from South Korea, said he came to the U.S. legally and the bill created ''chaos'' for a country built on law and order.

Advertisement - story continues below

Republicans in the California Legislature remained opposed to the measure on Friday, saying it would tie the hands of law enforcement and compromise public safety.

''A lot of people talk about building a wall. This bill builds a wall between the federal government and our local partners and makes our communities less safe,'' said James Gallagher, a Republican state assemblyman.

Some in law enforcement also opposed the new law.

Advertisement - story continues below

''Our overarching concern remains that limiting local law enforcement's ability to communicate and cooperate with federal law enforcement officers endangers public safety,'' the California State Sheriffs' Association said in a statement.

The California Values Act would forbid state and local law enforcement agencies from providing information to or acting as the deputies for federal immigration authorities. The bill also prohibits police and sheriffs' officers from inquiring about a person's immigration status.

The bill went through an intense amending process. The final version allows jail and prison officials to notify the federal government if they have arrested an illegal immigrant with a felony record and allows federal immigration officers to interview people in custody.

However, the law bans any local jail holding a detainee for additional jail time that would then allow federal authorities to take an illegal immigrant into custody.

Advertisement - story continues below

The bill does include some exceptions, including suspects accused of the most violent or serious crimes.

''This bill here today helps some of us to believe that California is a safe place for immigrants, that we are a Golden State,'' said Democrat Assemblyman Joaquin Arambula.

California is home to an estimated 2.3 million illegal immigrants.

What do you think? Scroll down to comment below.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sat, 16 Sep 2017 12:07

The bottom line: Other scientists at the conference said back-propagation still has a core role in AI's future. But Hinton said that, to push materially ahead, entirely new methods will probably have to be invented. "Max Planck said, 'Science progresses one funeral at a time.' The future depends on some graduate student who is deeply suspicious of everything I have said."

How it works: In back propagation, labels or "weights" are used to represent a photo or voice within a brain-like neural layer. The weights are then adjusted and readjusted, layer by layer, until the network can perform an intelligent function with the fewest possible errors.

But Hinton suggested that, to get to where neural networks are able to become intelligent on their own, what is known as "unsupervised learning," "I suspect that means getting rid of back-propagation."

"I don't think it's how the brain works," he said. "We clearly don't need all the labeled data."

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 17 Sep 2017 11:56

Why was the East StratCom Task Force created?

The Task Force was set up to address Russia's ongoing disinformation campaigns. In March 2015, the European Council tasked the High Representative in cooperation with EU institutions and Member States to submit an action plan on strategic communication.

European Council conclusions, 19 and 20 March 2015

What are the EU's objectives concerning strategic communications?

The Action Plan on Strategic Communication, presented in June 2015, has three main objectives:

Effective communication and promotion of EU policies towards the Eastern Neighbourhood Strengthening the overall media environment in the Eastern Neighbourhood and in EU Member States, including support for media freedom and strengthening independent mediaImproved EU capacity to forecast, address and respond to disinformation activities by external actorsWhat does the East StratCom Task Force do?

The team is engaged in developing communication products and campaigns focused on explaining EU policies in the Eastern Partnership region:

proactive strategic communications campaigns, based on focused analysis that explains key policy areas and creates a positive EU narrative;ad-hoc communication on topical and relevant EU policy issues;analysing disinformation trends, explaining disinformation narratives and myth-busting.At the same time, the task force supports wider EU efforts aimed at strengthening the media environment in the Eastern Partnership region, in close collaboration with other EU actors.

How is the team composed?

The team, operational since September 2015, brings together ten full-time communication experts from the EU institutions or seconded by EU Member States. Team members have a variety of backgrounds and speak several languages, including Russian.

Does the team have a budget?

The East StratCom Task Force draws on existing resources within the EU institutions and the Member States, including staff from institutions and seconded national experts from Member States. The Task Force works within the existing budget for EU Strategic Communication '' both at headquarters and delegation level. It also collaborates closely with the Commission to ensure a coordinated approach in support of the EU's overall objectives in the neighbourhood.

Does the team cooperate with other international organisations?

The Task Force works closely with the EU institutions, EU Delegations, Member States, and a wide range of other partners, both governmental and non-governmental, within the EU and in the Eastern Neighbourhood. The aim of this wide international cooperation is to share best practices in strategic communications and access to objective information in the Eastern Partnership region, and to ensure support for independent media in the region.

Does the team engage in counter-propaganda?

No - the team's main task is to proactively promote the European Union's policy towards the Eastern Neighbourhood. When appropriate, it also identifies and seeks to correct disinformation.

Are you planning to set up a Russian-language TV station?

No - the East StratCom Task Force aims at improving EU strategic communication with regard to the Eastern Neighbourhood and providing products in the Russian language which can be used by Russian speaking media.

Why did you create a Russian-language website? Where can I find it?

Russian is spoken and understood by millions of people all over the world, including in EU Member States. The EEAS Russian-language website communicates primarily about the EU's foreign policy by publishing information about EU activities, EU statements and press releases with relevance to the Eastern Neighbourhood in particular. In addition, the mandate of the East Stratcom Task Force underlines the importance of ensuring high-quality EU communication in the Russian language.

What is the disinformation/myth-busting network? How can I join?

The network is comprised of more than 400 experts, journalists, officials, NGOs and Think Tanks in over 30 countries reporting disinformation articles to the task force. To join the network, please contact the Disinformation Review team.

What is the Disinformation Review? Does it represent official EU positions?

The Disinformation Review is intended to raise awareness of disinformation. It contains a compilation of reports received from members of the myth-busting network. It can provide valuable data for analysts, journalists and officials dealing with this issue. At the same time, the Disinformation Review brings you the latest news and analysis on pro-Kremlin disinformation. The content of the Disinformation Review cannot be considered an official EU position as it is based on the contributions of the myth-busting network and the analysis of the East StratCom Task Force.

How can I receive the Disinformation Review?

To receive our newsletters in English by email, please sign up here. Please subscribe here to receive the Russian version of the Disinformation Review.

Follow us on Twitter @EUvsDisinfo and like our Facebook page "EU vs Disinformation" to stay in touch with the latest on pro-Kremlin disinformation.

Does the Task Force compile lists of "propagandists"?

No, the Task Force does not compile any lists of persons involved in disinformation activities. But the Disinformation Review, published weekly by the East StratCom Task Force, is a collection of disinformation stories that have been reported to the Task Force by its network.

Do you target anti-EU opinions?

The East StratCom Task Force does not target opinions at all. It is solely concerned with checking facts and information.

Media enquiries:

For all media enquiries, please contact the EEAS press team.

Contact details for the EEAS press team

Link to Article

Archived Version

Fri, 15 Sep 2017 04:36

By Alex Stamos, Chief Security Officer

There have been a lot of questions since the 2016 US election about Russian interference in the electoral process. In April we published a white paper that outlined our understanding of organized attempts to misuse our platform. One question that has emerged is whether there's a connection between the Russian efforts and ads purchased on Facebook. These are serious claims and we've been reviewing a range of activity on our platform to help understand what happened.

In reviewing the ads buys, we have found approximately $100,000 in ad spending from June of 2015 to May of 2017 '-- associated with roughly 3,000 ads '-- that was connected to about 470 inauthentic accounts and Pages in violation of our policies. Our analysis suggests these accounts and Pages were affiliated with one another and likely operated out of Russia.

We don't allow inauthentic accounts on Facebook, and as a result, we have since shut down the accounts and Pages we identified that were still active.

The vast majority of ads run by these accounts didn't specifically reference the US presidential election, voting or a particular candidate.Rather, the ads and accounts appeared to focus on amplifying divisive social and political messages across the ideological spectrum '-- touching on topics from LGBT matters to race issues to immigration to gun rights.About one-quarter of these ads were geographically targeted, and of those, more ran in 2015 than 2016.The behavior displayed by these accounts to amplify divisive messages was consistent with the techniques mentioned in the white paper we released in April about information operations.In this latest review, we also looked for ads that might have originated in Russia '-- even those with very weak signals of a connection and not associated with any known organized effort. This was a broad search, including, for instance, ads bought from accounts with US IP addresses but with the language set to Russian '-- even though they didn't necessarily violate any policy or law. In this part of our review, we found approximately $50,000 in potentially politically related ad spending on roughly 2,200 ads.

We have shared our findings with US authorities investigating these issues, and we will continue to work with them as necessary.

Authentic Activity Matters

We know we have to stay vigilant to keep ahead of people who try to misuse our platform. We believe in protecting the integrity of civic discourse, and require advertisers on our platform to follow both our policies and all applicable laws. We also care deeply about the authenticity of the connections people make on our platform.

Earlier this year, as part of this effort, we announced technology improvements for detecting fake accounts and a series of actions to reduce misinformation and false news. Over the past few months, we have taken action against fake accounts in France, Germany, and other countries, and we recently stated that we will no longer allow Pages that repeatedly share false news to advertise on Facebook.

Along with these actions, we are exploring several new improvements to our systems for keeping inauthentic accounts and activity off our platform. For example, we are looking at how we can apply the techniques we developed for detecting fake accounts to better detect inauthentic Pages and the ads they may run. We are also experimenting with changes to help us more efficiently detect and stop inauthentic accounts at the time they are being created.

Our ongoing work on these automated systems will complement other planned projects to help keep activity on Facebook authentic. We're constantly updating our efforts in this area, and have introduced a number of improvements, including:

We will continue to invest in our people and technology to help provide a safe place for civic discourse and meaningful connections on Facebook.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 17 Sep 2017 04:42

In late August Russia handed over decoded radar data to the Netherlands from the aerial zone where Malaysian Airlines Flight MH17 was shot down on July 17, 2014. These materials had initially been provided in their original, i.e., non-decoded form, along with the software needed to decode them.

However, the Dutch investigators, despite being armed with the latest in modern technology as well as the assistance of their British colleagues, were not able to decode the recordings, and in the end they asked Russian experts to do it. In three years this has been the only time they have asked to collaborate. Never before had the commission accepted any Russian offers of assistance.

The decoded recordings clearly showed that the missile had been fired from the zone controlled by the Ukrainian military. And this is not some fabricated story concocted by journalists, but documented, technical information.

Estimated distance to Flight MH-17 from the Ukrainian-controlled BUK launcher in Zaroshchenskoe at the moment of attack (less than 30km) lies within the operational range, unlike one, presumably operated by the Donbass militia.

However, every sign seems to indicate that the decoded information obtained from Russia will not be included in the case file, but will instead face the fate of so much other data that does not fit neatly into the preferred version of the investigation. It will probably just fall into a black hole, which is what happened to the photos of the tragedy that were taken by American spy satellites.

In the meantime however, it will not be easy for the investigators to stick to their prescribed approach to the investigation. Independent experts are conscientiously suggesting new avenues of inquiry that could help move the process along.

For example, since all of the Ukrainian army's existing launch sites for its Buk-M1 missile-defense system can be accounted for and examined by the commission, it would be a simple enough matter to establish whether at least one of them was used to fire the missile. An inspection of the 60 existing launch sites within this system is both physically possible and could provide some surprising information. The launch of a Buk-M1 missile leaves indelible ''burns'' on the ramp that cannot be concealed, even under a new coat of paint. Although that would seem to be a very simple suggestion, it's a significant one.

Kees van der Pijl

Kees van der Pijl , a Dutch professor in the Department of International Relations at the University of Sussex and the president of the NGO The Committee of Vigilance Against Resurgent Fascism, recently finished writing a book titled ''The Launch: Flight MH17, Ukraine and New Cold War'' (Der Abschuss: Flug MH17, die Ukraine und der neue Kalte Krieg ). The German-language version of the book will go on sale later this month, and the English original and Portuguese translation will be available by the end of the year.

Professor van der Pijl examines the tragedy from a geopolitical perspective and asks: who benefited most from this disaster? And he answers: the US, which subsequently imposed sanctions against Russia, undermining its gas industry and checking its growing role on the international stage.

Specifically, the professor cites the following arguments:

One day before the tragedy, the BRICS nations signed an agreement to establish their own bank, which the US saw as a rival to the IMF and World Bank.Vladimir Putin and Angela Merkel had settled on a new conceptual framework for resolving the crisis in Ukraine '' without US input '' and real progress was being made. In addition, once the Boeing 777 was downed, American gas companies were suddenly able to find the traction to kick-start their work in Europe and force Russia out of the EU market. Moscow was forced to abandon the construction of the South Stream gas pipeline, and relations with the government in Kiev, which subsequently became a pawn in the games played by the West, definitively soured. Not a single European or American media outlet has reacted to the announcement of the book's publication and its path onto the shelves of bookstores is unlikely to be an easy one. However, times are changing, and many people are taking an interest in and flocking to Professor van der Pijl's blog, Der Abschuss Flug MH17, which provides information about the publication of the book as well as links to his sources.

Using the materials available to them, the authors of the blog intend to shed light on the absurd inconsistencies evident during the investigation, as well as the investigators' stubborn reluctance to answer awkward questions. Some known examples are:

How could Ukrainian President Poroshenko, who announced the tragedy 15 minutes after it occurred, have known that the Boeing 777 had been shot down by a Russian Buk missile? Why does the investigative commission not take into account the results of the experimental destruction of a retired passenger airliner by the company Almaz Antey, while also refusing to take part in a second experiment? What prompted Ukrainian dispatchers to alter MH17's flight path right before tragedy struck? We shall soon see whether officials will block the distribution of the book and what the consequences of that might be. But events could take an interesting turn. As a result of Professor van der Pijl's efforts, we will learn the price of not only the work of the Dutch commission investigating the tragic fate of flight MH17, but the European democracy and European justice as well'...

The publication is based on Dmitry Sedov's article by Strategic Culture Foundation (in Russian), adapted and translated by Oriental Review.

All images in this article are from Oriental Review.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 17 Sep 2017 14:42

CIA Director Mike Pompeo scrapped his appearance Thursday at Harvard University over the school's decision to make Chelsea Manning, who was convicted of leaking classified information, a visiting fellow.

Pompeo called Manning an "American traitor." He said he agreed with military and intelligence officials who believe Manning's leak endangered the lives of CIA personnel.

Pompeo was scheduled to appear at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government to discuss allegations of Russian involvement in last year's presidential election, the nuclear standoff with North Korea and other global security concerns.

Minutes after the event was to begin, Douglas Elmendorf, dean of the John F. Kennedy School of Government, took the stage and told the audience Pompeo was not there and would not speak.

"We will try to reschedule it as soon as we can, but the CIA director, is obviously, in charge of his schedule," Elmendorf said. "We are not in charge of his schedule and he gets to decide when and where he speaks, of course."

Several hours later, the CIA released a letter that Pompeo wrote to a Harvard official.

Pompeo, who has a law degree from Harvard, said he didn't make the decision lightly. He wrote that he would betray the trust of CIA employees if he appeared.

Manning was released from a military prison in Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, on May 17 after serving seven years of a 35-year sentence, which was commuted by former President Barack Obama in his final days in office. Obama said in January he felt justice had been served.

Manning, a 29-year-old transgender woman, formerly known as Bradley Manning, told ABC's "Good Morning America" in a recent interview that she was prompted to give the 700,000 military and State Department documents to WikiLeaks because of the human toll of the "death, destruction and mayhem" she saw as an Army intelligence analyst in Iraq.

In his letter, Pompeo reiterated his earlier claim that WikiLeaks is a U.S. adversary "akin to a hostile foreign intelligence service." He stressed that his decision had nothing to do with Manning's transgender identity.

"It has everything to do with her identity as a traitor to the United States of America and my loyalty to the officers of the CIA," Pompeo said.

"Harvard's actions implicitly tell its students that you too can be a fellow at Harvard and a felon under United States law," he wrote.

Earlier in the day, Mike Morell, former deputy director and acting director of the CIA, sent a resignation letter to Elmendorf. Morell told Elmendorf he was resigning immediately over the school's decision to invite Manning to be a visiting fellow at the Kennedy School's Institute of Politics.

Morell said he could not be part of an organization that "honors a convicted felon and leaker of classified information." Pompeo said Morell's exit was "Harvard's loss."

Harvard also has invited former White House press secretary Sean Spicer, former Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski and MSNBC hosts Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski. Harvard says Manning will be among fellows who will visit the campus for a "limited" number of events meant to spark campus discussion.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Thu, 14 Sep 2017 22:17

Scores of accounts on Equifax's website in Argentina allegedly were protected by the same generic username and password: "admin."

Researchers at Hold Security, a Milwaukee-based cybersecurity firm, found that after some guesswork, they were able to uncover personal employee information housed on Equifax's South American site, including names, emails, and Social Security equivalents of over 100 individuals.

The researchers easily acquired administrative access and quickly discovered consumer complaint records, complete with the Argentine equivalent of Social Security numbers, known as Documento Nacional de Identidad (National Identity Document).

"You don't expect anything like that," said Alex Holden, Hold Security's chief information security officer. "An ability to lookup cases for individuals based on a single numeric ID and gender drew our attention."

The research came as Equifax sank deeper into a controversy over its handling of a data breach that could affect 143 million people.

The credit reporting company is now facing multiple investigations. In a rare public acknowledgement, the Federal Trade Commission announced Thursday that it has opened a probe into Equifax's breach in the United States.

What Hold Security found is not related to the breach in the U.S., which Equifax disclosed last week. But Equifax promptly shut down the website after the research was made public by a security blogger named Brian Krebs.

In a statement to CNBC on Thursday, Equifax said:

"We learned of a potential vulnerability in an internal portal in Argentina which was not in any way connected to the cybersecurity event that occurred in the United States last week. We immediately acted to remediate the situation, which affected a limited amount of public information strictly related to consumers who contacted our customer service center and the employees who managed those interactions."

"What I can tell you is that we fixed the vulnerability immediately upon learning of it, and that this internal portal has not been in use since 2013. The Argentine consumer dispute information that was mentioned in the Krebs article is all publicly available, searchable and not confidential. Additionally, our consumer credit and commercial databases were not accessed or affected."

Since it announced the U.S. data breach last Thursday, Equifax shares have fallen more than 30 percent through Wednesday's close. But that's just the beginning of Equifax's woes.

The FTC's spokesman, Peter Kaplan, said Thursday, "In light of the intense public interest and the potential impact of this matter, I can confirm that FTC staff is investigating the Equifax data breach."

In addition, Massachusetts announced plans Wednesday to file a lawsuit, which will maintain that the company failed to adopt appropriate safeguards to protect the sensitive data. New York, Illinois, Pennsylvania and Connecticut and other states are also investigating, while nearly two dozen class-action lawsuits have already been filed.

Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey said Tuesday the Equifax breach "may be the most brazen failure to protect consumer data" her office has seen. Eric Schneiderman, New York's attorney general, warned people to be vigilant about hacking, email and other online attacks.

The disclosure of the U.S. data breach prompted Holden to take a look at Equifax's web security outside the U.S., he said. After first exploring the Argentine website, which initially required a national identification number, the researchers arrived at a different login interface after shortening the site's URL.

"We put in admin, admin [as credentials] and to our surprise we were in," he continued.

"We obviously did not state that there was a breach. We highlighted a horrendous security practice which, perhaps, was indicative of the overall data care that led to the breach in the US. But in my professional opinion, if any hacker would look at this part of the website, it would be breached," Holden told CNBC.

After making the initial discovery, Holden turned to security researcher Brian Krebs to assess his findings.

"Worse still," Krebs said, "each employee's username appears to be nothing more than their last name, or a combination of their first initial and last name. In other words, if you knew an Equifax Argentina employee's last name, you also could work out their password for this credit dispute portal quite easily."

Krebs is a widely followed blogger on security issues. "I don't have much advice for Argentinians whose data may have been exposed by sloppy security at Equifax," he said in a blog post on Tuesday. "But I have urged my fellow Americans to assume their SSN and other personal data was compromised."

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 17 Sep 2017 13:33

If you're concerned about identity theft, those reported mega-data breaches, or someone gaining access to your credit report without your permission, you might consider placing a credit freeze on your report.

What is a credit freeze?Also known as a security freeze, this tool lets you restrict access to your credit report, which in turn makes it more difficult for identity thieves to open new accounts in your name. That's because most creditors need to see your credit report before they approve a new account. If they can't see your file, they may not extend the credit.

Does a credit freeze affect my credit score?No. A credit freeze does not affect your credit score.

A credit freeze also does not:

prevent you from getting your free annual credit reportkeep you from opening a new account, applying for a job, renting an apartment, or buying insurance. But if you're doing any of these, you'll need to lift the freeze temporarily, either for a specific time or for a specific party, say, a potential landlord or employer. The cost and lead times to lift a freeze vary, so it's best to check with the credit reporting company in advance.prevent a thief from making charges to your existing accounts. You still need to monitor all bank, credit card and insurance statements for fraudulent transactions.Does a credit freeze stop prescreened credit offers?No. If you want to stop getting prescreened offers of credit, call 888-5OPTOUT (888-567-8688) or go online. The phone number and website are operated by the nationwide credit reporting companies. You can opt out for five years or permanently. However, some companies send offers that are not based on prescreening, and your federal opt-out right will not stop those kinds of solicitations.

As you consider opting out, you should know that prescreened offers can provide many benefits, especially if you are in the market for a credit card or insurance. Prescreened offers can help you learn about what's available, compare costs, and find the best product for your needs. Because you are pre-selected to receive the offer, you can be turned down only under limited circumstances. The terms of prescreened offers also may be more favorable than those that are available to the general public. In fact, some credit card or insurance products may be available only through prescreened offers.

Can anyone see my credit report if it is frozen?Certain entities still will have access to it.

your report can be released to your existing creditors or to debt collectors acting on their behalf.government agencies may have access in response to a court or administrative order, a subpoena, or a search warrant.How do I place a freeze on my credit reports?Contact each of the nationwide credit reporting companies:

You'll need to supply your name, address, date of birth, Social Security number and other personal information. Fees vary based on where you live, but commonly range from $5 to $10.

After receiving your freeze request, each credit reporting company will send you a confirmation letter containing a unique PIN (personal identification number) or password. Keep the PIN or password in a safe place. You will need it if you choose to lift the freeze.

How do I lift a freeze?In a few states, credit freezes expire after seven years. In the vast majority of states, a freeze remains in place until you ask the credit reporting company to temporarily lift it or remove it altogether. A credit reporting company must lift a freeze no later than three business days after getting your request. The cost to lift a freeze varies by state.

If you opt for a temporary lift because you are applying for credit or a job, and you can find out which credit reporting company the business will contact for your file, you can save some money by lifting the freeze only at that particular company.

What's the difference between a credit freeze and a fraud alert?A credit freeze locks down your credit. A fraud alert allows creditors to get a copy of your credit report as long as they take steps to verify your identity. For example, if you provide a telephone number, the business must call you to verify whether you are the person making the credit request. Fraud alerts may be effective at stopping someone from opening new credit accounts in your name, but they may not prevent the misuse of your existing accounts. You still need to monitor all bank, credit card and insurance statements for fraudulent transactions.

Three types of fraud alerts are available:

Initial Fraud Alert. If you're concerned about identity theft, but haven't yet become a victim, this fraud alert will protect your credit from unverified access for at least 90 days. You may want to place a fraud alert on your file if your wallet, Social Security card, or other personal, financial or account information are lost or stolen.Extended Fraud Alert. For victims of identity theft, an extended fraud alert will protect your credit for seven years.Active Duty Military Alert. For those in the military who want to protect their credit while deployed, this fraud alert lasts for one year.To place a fraud alert on your credit reports, contact one of the nationwide credit reporting companies. A fraud alert is free. The company you call must tell the other credit reporting companies; they, in turn, will place an alert on their versions of your report.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Fri, 15 Sep 2017 22:39

At least five Canadian diplomatic families were affected by mysterious "sonic attacks" in Cuba that left them with symptoms including hearing loss, headaches and dizziness.

That is a larger number of people than previously reported and suggests the Canadian diplomats were targeted intentionally and were not merely victims of mistaken identity in a wave of attacks that affected a larger number of U.S. diplomats.

But a Canadian source with knowledge of the affair told CBC News that unlike some of those U.S. diplomats, all affected Canadians have recovered from their initial symptoms, which in some cases required hospital treatment.

The source, speaking on condition of anonymity, said more than five '-- but fewer than 10 '-- Canadian families were affected by the attacks.

Staff at the U.S. and Canadian embassies in Havana gradually became aware that something strange was occurring toward the end of last year, when a number of diplomats reported feeling unnatural sensations inside their homes.

In some cases, they heard loud grinding or ringing noises, or felt vibrations in their bodies. Some were in bed when the sensations began. Some reported the sounds and sensations could only be felt in certain parts of the house, and that they could walk in and out of the affected area, feeling the effects shut off as they moved away from it, and resume as they moved back in.

The U.S. State Department has disclosed that some of the 21 U.S. diplomats and family members affected have since been diagnosed with mild traumatic brain injuries affecting speech and memory. Others have suffered permanent hearing loss.

FBI and RCMP investigators have travelled to Cuba, but the investigation has thus far failed to find a culprit, government sources told CBC News.

The Associated Press spoke with current and former U.S. officials who said they are baffled as to what technology could be involved.

"None of this has a reasonable explanation," said Fulton Armstrong, a former CIA official who served in Havana. "It's just mystery after mystery after mystery."

Cubans co-operatingCanadian officials are not ruling out any suspects, but say the Cuban government has been adamant it has no knowledge of the attacks. The Cubans have also been unfailingly co-operative with the investigation, they say.

A senior Canadian diplomat who served in the embassy in Havana said the Cubans have an active and sometimes ruthless intelligence apparatus, and certainly engage in espionage of foreign diplomatic missions. But he said they have no record of targeting diplomats for attacks and generally respect diplomatic conventions.

Canada maintains friendly relations with Cuba. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau met with Cuban President Raul Castro at Revolution Palace in Havana during a visit last November. Cuba has co-operated with the investigation into the attacks and is not thought to be responsible. (Sean Kilpatrick/Canadian Press)

Many Cuba analysts have said the United States also appears to believe the Cubans are innocent of involvement, or at least that the operation may not have been sanctioned at the highest levels.

Although Washington did expel two Cuban diplomats for failing to protect its diplomatic staff as required by the Vienna Convention, experts say the response would have been far harsher if the U.S. believed the Cuban government had targeted and injured U.S. diplomats.

The fact that both U.S. and Canadian diplomats were targeted is suggestive, since Cuba's relationship with the two countries is very different. Moreover, the attacks occurred under the Obama administration during a period in which U.S. relations with the island nation were improving.

Another suspectAnother nation that has often been mentioned in connection with this case is Russia, which has a large diplomatic presence in Cuba, poor relations with both the U.S. and Canada, and an alleged track record of dirty tricks and harassment of foreign diplomats.

The U.S. State Department has accused the Russians of targeting staff at its Moscow Embassy with home break-ins designed to intimidate them, and even the killing of pets.

The recent U.S.-Russian diplomatic relationship has been marked by a pattern of tit-for-tat expulsions and property seizures. In June 2016, a Russian police officer with the Federal Security Service beat a U.S. diplomat trying to enter the U.S. Embassy at night, breaking his shoulder.

The fact the Havana attacks seem to use an unknown (and therefore presumably advanced) technology also lends support to the Russian hypothesis.

But so far, sources told CBC News, investigators remain unable to point the finger of blame at any particular culprit.

Definition from Nolo’s Plain-English Law Dictionary

Although the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment protects freedom of speech, any speech that poses a "clear and present danger" to the public or government loses this protection. The classic example is that shouting "Fire!" in a crowded theater is not protected speech.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Fri, 15 Sep 2017 22:46

Joseph "Violent J" Bruce (left) and Joseph "Shaggy 2 Dope" Utsler are members of the Insane Clown Posse. Fans of the band call themselves Juggalos. Carlos Osorio/APhide caption

toggle captionCarlos Osorio/AP Joseph "Violent J" Bruce (left) and Joseph "Shaggy 2 Dope" Utsler are members of the Insane Clown Posse. Fans of the band call themselves Juggalos.

Carlos Osorio/AP This weekend is expected to be a busy one for protesting in the nation's capital, with the Mother of All Rallies, a pro-Trump group that says it wants to preserve American culture; the March to Protect American Democracy, a group that wants the Trump administration to "defend our democracy from Russian interference" and "protect America from future attacks on our elections"; and the Juggalo March.

Not sure who the Juggalos are or why they're protesting? Here's what you should know:

1.Who are they?

The Juggalos are fans of Insane Clown Posse, a rap group that calls itself "the most hated band in the world." The name stems from a 1992 ICP song, "The Juggla," and, according to journalist Patrick Flanary, is a "term of endearment among the fans."

"In fact, it was a rallying call from the stage by the frontman, Violent J, several years ago," Flanary told NPR's Rachel Martin in 2014.

2.Are they like the Beyhive or the Beliebers?

Well, yes and no. A 2010 Wired magazine piece about the band and its fans described Juggalos as such:

"Despite a sizable population of female fans (dubbed Juggalettes), ICP's following is made up mostly of young white men from working-class backgrounds. They tend to feel that they've been misunderstood outsiders their whole lives, whether for being overweight, looking weird, being poor, or even for just liking ICP in the first place. It's a world where man boobs are on proud display, where long-hairs and pink-hairs mingle, where nobody makes fun of the fat kid toweling off."

Juggalos often paint their faces to look like clowns, and some sport tattoos of "hatchetman," the logo for Psychopathic Records, ICP's recording label. There is an annual festival called the Gathering of the Juggalos, sponsored by Psychopathic and featuring its artists as well as other musicians. This was the 18th year for the Gathering.

There's even a book about their fandom, You Don't Know Me But You Don't Like Me. The author, Nathan Rabin, told NPR back in 2013 that "for 360 days, being a Juggalo makes them an outcast and makes them reviled and makes them a pariah. But four or five days of the year, being a Juggalo makes them the king of the world and everybody loves them and Insane Clown Posse is the most popular group in the world. It's this alternate universe they can escape into from the dreariness and the mundanity of everyday life."

3.Are they a political group?

No, just fans of Insane Clown Posse. But back in 2011, the Justice Department's National Gang Intelligence Center decided the Juggalos were a "loosely organized hybrid gang," like the Crips, Bloods and MS-13. The annual Gang Threat Assessment report said they engaged in criminal activity and violence.

"Crimes committed by Juggalos are sporadic, disorganized, individualistic, and often involve simple assault, personal drug use and possession, petty theft, and vandalism. However, open source reporting suggests that a small number of Juggalos are forming more organized subsets and engaging in more gang-like criminal activity, such as felony assaults, thefts, robberies, and drug sales. Social networking websites are a popular conveyance for Juggalo sub-culture to communicate and expand."

And, there have been at least two instances where Juggalos have been violent. Earlier this year, a Wisconsin man was sentenced to 3 1/2 years in prison for using a machete to cut off a woman's pinky finger and drinking her blood. This was all to honor a Juggalo who had died. In 2014, two men tried to carve and burn a tattoo from their housemate's arm because they thought he had disrespected the fan group.

4. What does Insane Clown Posse think about all of this?

The band sued the Justice Department and FBI over the gang classification in January 2014, saying it had adversely affected Juggalos. The lawsuit demands that the Juggalos be removed from the Gang Threat Assessment list.

As Patrick Flanary explained to NPR, "there were only two crimes that were cited by the FBI study back in 2011. One had to do with a violent home invasion, where a Juggalo was suspected and later convicted; and there was another violent crime associated in 2012. But as lawyers pointed out, this doesn't apply to every person who claims he or she is a Juggalo. It isn't fair just because this group depicts violent images, talks about very crude murder scenarios."

Correction Sept. 15, 2017 A previous version of this story referred to a 2011 Wired article. The article actually came out in 2010.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Fri, 15 Sep 2017 22:38

Issei Kato | Reuters

Passersby are reflected in a TV screen reporting news about North Korea's leader Kim Jong Un and their missile launch, in Tokyo, Japan, September 15, 2017.

North Korea's rapidly advancing nuclear program and potential capacity to strike the U.S. mainland with a nuclear weapon have captured much of the international community's attention in recent weeks. In less than six weeks, North Korea has launched two missiles over Japan and conducted its sixth nuclear test. In response, the United Nations Security Council has passed tworesolutions banning much of North Korea's international trade. However, too little attention has been paid to one tool North Korea already uses to intimidate its neighbors and evade sanctions '' its growing cyber operations.

Cyber is particularly appealing for North Korea. While Pyongyang has poured significant resources into its nuclear weapons and missile programs at the expense of its conventional forces, the relatively inexpensive nature of cyber development has provided North Korea with the means to level the playing field against more powerful states. By growing its cyber operations, Pyongyang is able to exploit its asymmetrical advantage against more wired states such as South Korea and the United States, as the limited nature of North Korea's own domestic networks leaves it significantly less vulnerable to retaliatory cyberattacks.

With speculation that the United States could at some point use preventative strikes to preclude North Korea from being able to use its nuclear weapons against the United States, South Korea, or Japan, much of the conjecture on North Korea's potential response has been premised on the idea that Seoul's proximity to North Korean artillery mean it would bear the brunt of any North Korean retaliation. Any conflict, some have said, would be over there rather than over here. In fact, that logic is faulty.

In the case of a conflict, North Korea's leader, Kim Jong Un, could very well calculate that attacking South Korea or Japan might escalate into a war that it could not win, especially if the United States successfully eliminated most of Pyongyang's nuclear weapons and delivery systems. For a regime that has spent decades working to ensure its own survival, responding with force would be a grave risk, especially given other options that would continue to ensure the regime's survival '' such as cyber operations against the United States. Cyber attacks against U.S. financial institutions or critical infrastructure would not only cause significant financial damage to the United States, it could be seen as a proportional, if not restrained, response on the part of Pyongyang. This would also potentially limit the United States' ability to continue to respond.

How successful might North Korea be if it chooses to utilize cyber attacks against the United States? North Korea has spent years honing its team of cyber warriors through attacks against South Korean government, financial, and media outlets -- they are perhaps most well-known for the attack against Sony Pictures in response to The Interview. And while no one has suggested that North Korea was responsible for the recent Equifax hack, the attack highlights the United States' potential vulnerability.

Even in the absence of military action by the United States against North Korea, cyber attacks by Pyongyang are likely to become more common. In recent years, North Korea has demonstrated a willingness to use a combination of cyber attacks on banks and ransomware to obtain hard currency, especially as U.S. financial sanctions and UN sanctions have limited North Korea's ability to earn and move hard currency.

North Korea is believed to have been behind the theft of $81 million from the Bangladesh central bank, attacks on banks in 17 other countries, and recent attacks on Bitcoin exchanges in South Korea. The regime is also suspected in the WannaCry ransomware attacks earlier this year.

As new UN sanctions limit North Korea's ability earn hard currency, cyber attacks similar to the one on Bitcoin will become increasingly attractive to decision makers in Pyongyang as they search for ways to fund further weapons development.

While North Korea will likely continue to target financial institutions in countries with lax standards in an effort to evade sanctions and avoid stronger responses by the United States, we shouldn't assume that the United States would be safe from a harsh response to a preventative action on North Korea's weapons programs. The attack may just be from cyberspace rather than missiles.

Commentary by Troy Stangarone, the senior director for Congressional Affairs and Trade at the Korea Economic Institute of America. The views expressed here are the author's alone.

For more insight from CNBC contributors, follow@CNBCopinionon Twitter.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 17 Sep 2017 12:20

The highest-ranking Canadian officer at Norad has demolished a long-held political assumption by telling a parliamentary committee that the U.S. is under no obligation to defend Canada in the event of a ballistic missile attack.

Lt.-Gen. Pierre St-Amand laid out on Thursday '-- in stark terms '-- where the military lines of each nation begin and end in the event the North Korean crisis erupts into a shooting war.

"The extent of the U.S. policy is not to defend Canada," said St-Amand, who is the deputy commander of the North American Aerospace Defence Command, which is responsible for defending the skies and maritime approaches to North America. "That's the fact I can bring to the table."

The debate over whether Canada should join the U.S. ballistic missile defence program re-emerged this summer following a series of successful intercontinental missile tests by North Korea, including another missile launch from that country's capital Pyongyang on Friday.

The missile flew over Japan before landing in the northern Pacific Ocean. South Korea's Joint Chiefs of Staff said it travelled about 3,700 kilometres, reaching a maximum height of 770 kilometres.

The Liberal government in its recent defence policy review chose to uphold a 2005 decision by former prime minister Paul Martin to remain outside of the U.S. missile shield.

The often-cited political narrative has been that the U.S. would shoot down a missile if it was headed toward Toronto, Vancouver or Montreal.

St-Amand made clear that is not guaranteed and it would be a decision made "in the heat of the moment" by U.S. political and military leaders.

No direct threat?The Commons defence committee held a marathon session Thursday about the escalating threat from North Korea, taking in the views of not only military commanders, but also senior diplomatic and intelligence officials, as well as academic experts.

The regime of Kim Jong-un doesn't have Canada in its crosshairs, but the rogue regime does represent a significant threat to global peace, said Mark Gwozdecky, assistant deputy minister for international security at Global Affairs Canada.

He tried to strike an optimistic tone.

"There's been no direct threat to Canada," said Gwozdecky. "In fact, on the contrary, in recent contacts with the North Korean government, including in August when our national security adviser was in Pyongyang, the indications were they perceived Canada as a peaceful and indeed a friendly country."

North Korean leader Kim Jong-un reacts with scientists and technicians of the DPRK Academy of Defence Science after the test launch of the intercontinental ballistic missile Hwasong-14 in this undated photo released by North Korea's Korean Central News Agency. (KCNA/Reuters)

But he said the regime's "actions represent a grave threat to regional security, our friends and allies, South Korea and Japan."

There are signs North Korea is willing to talk if there are no preconditions, Gwozdecky added.

The assistant chief of defence intelligence at National Defence, Stephen Burt, downplayed the notion of a missile attack on North America, calling it a "hypothetical scenario" that could be spun in a number of directions.

"If you go back to the fact the regime in North Korea is primarily motivated by its desire to survive and sustain its rule ... While their rhetoric is colourful and their behaviour occasionally strikes us as peculiar, they're no fools, and they understand the consequences of that kind of an action," Burt said.

A missile is launched during a long and medium-range ballistic rocket launch drill in this undated photo released by North Korea's Korean Central News Agency in Pyongyang. (KCNA/Reuters)

Conservative defence critic James Bezan said he was shocked to hear that North Korea doesn't consider Canada a potential enemy, particularly in light of the country's participation in the Korean War between 1950-53.

He wasn't, however, prepared to say that his party advocates joining ballistic missile defence, saying he will take all of the testimony back to caucus for consideration.

The Conservatives were in favour of joining the U.S. missile shield in 2005 but chose not to follow up during their nine years in power.

Pump up diplomacyNew Democrat MP Randall Garrison said the testimony only reinforces his feeling that there is no military solution to the crisis and that diplomacy is the only way forward.

Experts were divided when they had their chance to testify.

"It's not even clear the Americans want us in missile defence," said Michael Byers, a University of British Columbia defence policy expert, who argued Washington would prefer to see Canada spend more on its conventional defences.

Joining ballistic missile defence would be "purely symbolic," he said, while acknowledging the situation with North Korea is extremely dangerous.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Thu, 14 Sep 2017 20:41

The introduction of the new iPhone X '-- which features wireless charging, facial recognition and a price tag of $999 '-- appears to be a minor event in the advance of technology. But it's an excellent illustration of something that has long gone unrecognized: The Unabomber had a point.

Not about blowing people up in an effort to advance his social goals. Ted Kaczynski's campaign to kill and maim chosen victims with explosives was horrific in the extreme and beyond forgiveness. But his 35,000-word manifesto, published in 1995, provided a glimpse of the future we inhabit, and his foresight is a bit unsettling.

''The Industrial Revolution and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race,'' it begins. Among the ills he attributes to advances in technology are that they promise to improve our lives but end up imposing burdens we would not have chosen.

He cites the automobile, which offered every person the freedom to travel farther and faster than before. But as cars became more numerous, they became a necessity, requiring great expense, bigger roads and more regulations. Cities were designed for the convenience of drivers, not pedestrians. For most people, driving is no longer optional.

Smartphones have followed the same pattern. When cellphones first appeared, they gave people one more means of communication, which they could accept or reject. But before long, most of us began to feel naked and panicky anytime we left home without one.

To do without a cellphone '-- and soon, if not already, a smartphone '-- means estranging oneself from normal society. We went from ''you can have a portable communication device'' to ''you must have a portable communication device'' practically overnight.

Not that long ago, you could escape the phone by leaving the house. Today most people are expected to be instantly reachable at all times. These devices have gone from servants to masters.

Kaczynski cannot be surprised. ''Once a technical innovation has been introduced,'' he noted, ''people usually become dependent on it, so that they can never again do without it, unless it is replaced by some still more advanced innovation. Not only do people become dependent as individuals on a new item of technology, but, even more, the system as a whole becomes dependent on it. (Imagine what would happen to the system today if computers, for example, were eliminated.)''

The problem is hardly a new one. In his book ''Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind,'' Yuval Noah Harari argues that the agricultural revolution that took place 10,000 years ago was ''history's biggest fraud.''

In the preceding 2.5 million years, when our ancestors lived as hunter-gatherers they worked less, ''spent their time in more stimulating and varied ways, and were less in danger of starvation and disease'' than afterward.

Farming boosted the population but chained humans to the land and demanded ceaseless drudgery to plant, tend, harvest and process food '-- while making us more vulnerable to famine, disease and war. People who had evolved over eons for one mode of life were pushed into a different mode at odds with many of their natural instincts.

But it didn't matter. Eventually, those who preferred to live as foragers '-- such as the American Indians '-- no longer had a choice. In the 21st century, such a life is almost impossible. Kaczynski retreated to a remote cabin, off the grid, but 325 million Americans couldn't do likewise even if they wanted to.

Computers and smartphones are also a Faustian bargain, in Harari's view. Instead of saving time, inventions like email ''revved up the treadmill of life to ten times its former speed and made our days more anxious and agitated.''

It's easy to romanticize the lives of ancient people while ignoring the perils and hardships they faced. And neither Kaczynski nor anyone else has a way to reverse history. Few of us would be willing to give up modern shelter, food, clothing, medicine, entertainment or transportation. Most of us would say the trade-offs are more than worth it.

But they happen whether they are worth it or not, and the individual has little power to resist. Technological innovation is a one-way street. Once you enter it, you are obligated to proceed, even if it leads someplace you would not have chosen to go.

Once the latest iPhone is in stores, some consumers will decide they simply can't live without it. The rest of us may eventually find that whatever our preferences, neither can we.

Steve Chapman, a member of the Tribune Editorial Board, blogs at www.chicagotribune.com/chapman.

Download "Recalculating: Steve Chapman on a New Century" in the free Printers Row app at www.printersrowapp.com.

schapman@chicagotribune.com

Twitter @SteveChapman13

Join the discussion on Twitter @Trib_Ed_Board and on Facebook.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 17 Sep 2017 12:09

BALTIMORE (WJZ) '-- Do you really bleed purple and black? Time to find out!

The Baltimore Ravens have been cutting edge this 2017 season. The team installed brand new technology in the stadium, released a new facial recognition app and made some upgrades to the field. But now, the organization is stepping out onto the field of genetics.

As the game day giveaway at the home opener, all fans will receive a free DNA test as they enter the stadium.

Fans who choose to participate can learn more about their genetic makeup thanks to Orig3n, the Boston-based biotech firm sponsoring the event. Fans will swab the inside of their cheek, drop the sample into a stadium bin and register with the company online.

The ''test'' offers ''insight into your mind, body and health,'' a company spokeswoman said. ''This is the first time that DNA tests are being distributed to fans at a football stadium and we believe this is an incredible opportunity to reach many people at once. Ravens DNA Day is the perfect way to kick off the season and our unique partnership,'' said Robin Y. Smith, CEO of Orig3n.

Orig3n also has a sponsorship with one other NFL team, the San Francisco 49ers, but the Ravens' DNA test giveaway is a first.

Follow @1057TheFan on Twitter and like 105.7 The Fan on Facebook

Link to Article

Archived Version

Fri, 15 Sep 2017 05:06

The release of an investigation into Aspro Park Dolfinarium Harderwijk'--an aquatic park in the Netherlands that's similar to SeaWorld'--by a Dutch TV show called RamBam has sparked ire amongst animal activists. Footage from the show's undercover documentary, which aimed to expose the living conditions for dolphins at Europe's largest marine mammal park, shows a male trainer using his hand to masturbate a male dolphin and rewarding him with fish afterwards. The clip that shows the dolphin masturbation has over 200,000 views.

One woman who viewed the the video, Leonie Vestering, filed a criminal complaint earlier this month that alleged the dolphinarium routinely sexually abused its animals. The marine park, meanwhile, insists that jerking off dolphins is a "de-stressing" technique. The dolphinarium also claims that they're training the dolphins so that they might collect the sperm for a future artificial insemination program, according to the Netherland Times.

Dutch prosecutors, who reviewed Vestering's complaint within 48 hours, affirmed the practice. "The sexual act with the dolphin is performed in the context of training the dolphin for the release of sperm as part of a breeding program," they said in a statement provided to Metro.

Vestering, who is a politician associated with the Party for the Animals but filed the complaint independently, adamantly claims that there is "no way" this is a part of a training program. She believes that the marine park masturbates the dolphins so that the animals can perform more tricks; the Dutch dolphinarium is classified as a zoo, but Vestering claims it's more comparable to a circus. The documentary for Rambam also took this angle, and they have a point: Much like SeaWorld'--where animals are kept in captivity for amusement as much as conservation'--the marine park heavily advertises dolphin, walrus, and sea lion shows on its website.

"The dolphinarium is not a part of an artificial insemination program," Vestering told Broadly. "But they now claim that they are training the dolphins to give sperm so that they can possibly can join an artificial insemination program in the future. Jerking off animals purely for releasing sexual tension in my opinion is sexual. It's not proper training, and it is violating the animals. This is the wrong solution for the problem of having 14 sexual frustrated males in a small fish tank."

Screenshot

To back up her claims, Vestering had Dr. Ingrid Visser, a New Zealand''based researcher who specializes in whales and dolphins, analyze the situation in a report. Dr. Visser viewed RamBam's documentary and also visited the dolphinarium multiple times independently.

"There is graphic video starting at 15:34 running until 15:59 (25 seconds) showing a male trainer masturbating a male dolphin. The trainer is seen to give the dolphin food afterwards, reinforcing the behavior. At no time during this video footage is a receptacle present for the semen to be collected (which would be the case, if the animal was being used for an AI program)," she writes. "Even if this was a training session, it would be appropriate to have the receptacle at least present as this 'desensitizes' the animal to it (that is, it won't be afraid of the receptacle if it suddenly appears)." While SeaWorld recently announced that they will stop breeding killer whales in captivity due to criticism fueled by the documentary Blackfish, Visser also notes a video from the American amusement park in which the proper method she describes is shown.

This is the wrong solution for the problem of having 14 sexual frustrated males in a small fish tank.

Thanks to Vestering and a Dutch animal welfare organization called Wilde Dieren de Tent Uit, wild animals have already been banned from circuses in the Netherlands due to the poor and unnatural conditions that put stressors on their health. She hopes to accomplish the same thing for the dolphins at the marine park, which, according to Dr. Visser's report, are kept in shallow tanks in unusual all-male groupings that exacerbate the dolphins' aggressive tendencies.

"I believe the right solution would be to close down the show part of the dolphinarium and to give the dolphins a big tank that suits their natural needs," Vestering said. "That way, the dolphinarium can educate audiences about the natural behavior [of dolphins] instead of [about] this sick, unnatural circus behavior."

After prosecutors sided with the dophinarium, Vestering submitted an extended complaint and plans to go to court if the same decision is returned.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Fri, 15 Sep 2017 05:07

By Janene Pieters on March 3, 2016 - 11:18 A dolphin in the Dolphinarium in Hardewijk (Photo: @Dolfinarium/Twitter). A dolphin in the Dolphinarium in Hardewijk (Photo: @Dolfinarium/Twitter)

Television program Rambam is accusing the Dolphinarium in Hardewijk of animal abuse after an employee went undercover as an intern at the institution. According to the employee, the animals are kept too long in small basins, caregivers help the animals masturbate and the chlorine in the water is harmful for them, AD reports.

"A place where people on a stand in a semicircle watch wild animals do tricks in exchange for food", is how Rambam describes the Dolphinarium. For them it is quite obvious: Dolphinarium is a circus and not a zoo, and therefore does not qualify for a license to keep wild animals.

The Dolphinarium responded in a statement on their website. They deny the allegation that they are a circus instead of a zoo, saying that it "lacks any real basis". "The training of animals does not equal a circus approach. Just as equestrian dressage is not a circus activity. The interplay between man and dolphin fits well in all respects within all laws that the Dolphinariam comply with, like all zoos should."

The zoo also denies the allegation that the dolphins are kept in small basins. "The suggestion that the Rambam employee gives that the animals are continuously in three of the seven areas, is absolutely incorrect. By far the larges portion of the day all animals are in the basin DolfijndoMijn, which has about 3 million liters of water over the whole habitat." They are only sometimes kept in the smaller basins for observation. The accusation of harmful chlorine is also unfounded. "A specialized team tests the water habitats in the Dolphinarium daily so that it meets the legal standards."

Emotions ran high on social media after the Rambam broadcast. Many people call for the "underwater circus" to close immediately. Most are disgusted by the caregiver helping a dolphin masturbate, as can be seen in the video below.

Vanavond in de veelbesproken uitzending over het Dolfinarium. Zie wat er hier precies gaande is op NPO 3 iets voor tienen!

Geplaatst door op woensdag 2 maart 2016

This is the second report of sea mammal abuse this week. The carcass of a was found in Sexbierum, Friesland on Tuesday.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 17 Sep 2017 04:30

Five New Yorkers in wheelchairs are behind nearly 400 lawsuits brought against small businesses for lacking handicap access.

Such legal claims have been criticized as part of a ''cottage industry'' of ''serial plaintiffs'' who target mom-and-pop establishments for quick cash settlements. But others see the suits as helping enforce the American with Disabilities Act.

Zoltan Hirsch J.C. Rice Wheelchair ramps and bathroom doors are not the only battleground. Two blind New Yorkers have taken the fight online, filing a combined 23 suits against business Web sites that didn't have screen-reading software for the visually impaired. And a woman cited seven businesses for not allowing her service dog inside.

Zoltan Hirsch, 37, a double amputee from Brooklyn, is hell on wheels for those who fail to make their establishments wheelchair accessible. Since 2010, he has filed suit against 195 businesses ranging from a Soho eyeglass shop to Brooklyn bodegas to a Hell's Kitchen restaurant.

Four other New Yorkers have filed 200 suits over wheelchair access: Luigi Girotto (70 suits), Pedro Fontanes (55), Jerry Cankat (52) and Nauqone Taylor (23).

Fontanes, 69, of Queens, has filed 13 suits against businesses along Fifth Avenue in Park Slope between Ninth and Bergen streets.

He claims to have suffered ''harm'' and ''injury'' at cafes including Le Pain Quotidien, Pizza Town, Uncle Barry's, SkyIce Sweet & Savory, Dizzy's Diner and Konditori Swedish Espresso Bar.

At Konditori, he also griped that the bathroom mirror was too high.

Mark Caserta, director of the Park Slope Fifth Avenue Business Improvement District committee, blasted the suits, saying: ''This shouldn't be happening. Small business are already struggling to stay afloat, and these lawsuits could put them over the edge.''

Dennis Kearney, an attorney who defended Uncle Barry's craft beer bar against Fontanes this year, noted most defendants settle to escape the cost of litigation.

Cheryl Krist with her service dog Bocce. Matthew McDermott ''Why would somebody pay $100,000 in legal fees to go to trial when they can pay a fraction of that and be done with it?'' he said.

Plaintiffs typically ask for modest damages but demand payment of their attorneys' fees, which can top $20,000. Kearney believes the plaintiffs and lawyers split the fees.

Commercial Web sites are the newest lucrative legal target.

Blind Brooklyn resident Marion Kiler, 66, sued eight sites throughout the state during May and June.

Among them was the Museum of Sex's online store, where she claimed to have made ''numerous'' attempts to buy products. The site's wares range from nipple clamps to penis-shaped pasta.

Cheryl Krist, 62, of Manhattan, has brought seven suits against businesses, including an East Village McDonald's, for not allowing her service dog, Bocci, inside.

But Kenneth Shiotani, an attorney at the National Disability Rights Network, called private litigation the ''most effective enforcement mechanism'' to make the city disability friendly.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sat, 16 Sep 2017 21:45

MANILA (Reuters) - Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte on Saturday asked the head of the country's Commission on Human Rights (CHR) if he was a paedophile for focusing on the killing of teenagers in the government's bloody war on drugs.

Duterte also suggested to lawmakers using CHR's proposed 678 million pesos budget to buy the police body cameras if they don't want to restore funding for the agency, which he has clashed with repeatedly over his anti-drugs campaign.

The CHR requested a budget of 1.72 billion pesos for 2018, but the government proposed 678 million instead. Duterte's allies in the lower house of Congress then voted to allocate it just 1,000 pesos ($20), in what critics of the drugs war said was retaliation for its efforts to investigate thousands of killings in the past 15 months, including those of two teenagers in August.

''Why is this guy so pre...suffocated with the issue of young people, especially boys? Are you a paedophile?'' Duterte asked, referring to CHR head Chito Gascon.

''Why are you smitten with teenagers? Are you? I'm having my doubts. Are you gay or a paedophile?,'' he said.

Gascon did not immediately reply to a request for comment.

Duterte also accused Gascon of being a spokesman for the opposition and criticised his scrutiny of police anti-drug activities.

''Why can't you move on to other issues that are besetting this country?'' Duterte said, citing the suffering of the people in the besieged southern city of Marawi.

Critics say police are executing suspects, and say the government has what is effectively a kill policy. Duterte has rejected that, and police say they kill only in self-defence.

The CHR has long said it lacks the manpower and resources to fully investigate the killings, the majority of which activists say are of users and small-time peddlers, with few high-profile arrests.

Vice President Leni Robredo, who was not Duterte's running mate and has locked horns with him numerous times, said the lawmakers' move regarding CHR's budget effectively abolishes the constitutional body.

Filipinos are largely supportive of the crackdown as a solution to tackling rampant crime, which Duterte says stems from drug addiction.

Duterte reiterated there will be no let up in the campaign, which he said was targeted at organised criminals trafficking drugs and not at ''teenagers without a sin.''

The firebrand leader, who is also fighting communist rebels following a breakdown in peace talks with the government, said he remained open to resuming negotiations to end nearly five decades of that conflict.

Reporting by Karen Lema; Editing by Hugh Lawson

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sat, 16 Sep 2017 21:55

Politics

By Staff| Sep 15 2017

Last meeting of the government The government met for the last time on Monday. Photo/Vilhelm

Following wide outrage in Icelandic society after it was revealed yesterday that the Minister of the Interior had lied to Parliament and kept information from the public and that the Prime Minister had also kept information from the public, the junior coalition partner, the centrist Bright Future, has announced it will no longer support the government. The Prime Minister has yet to appear publicly.

Bright Future made the decision to withdraw from the coalition government at a meeting yesterday evening. The announcement was made shortly after midnight. At the heart of the story is fallout from a child abuse scandal which had ensnared the father of the Prime Minister, Benedikt Sveinsson. Mass protests have been announced in front of the house of parliament today afternoon at 16:00.

Two horrifying Child Abuse cases

The reason Bright Future has withdrawn its support for the government is that yesterday the public learned that the father of the Prime Minister, Benedikt Sveinsson, one of the wealthiest men in Iceland, had written a letter on behalf of Hjalti Sigurj"n Hauksson, the most notorious child molesters to be sentenced in Icelandic court, asking for his full pardon and that his criminal record to be expunged and "honor restored".

In Iceland criminals can apply for a full pardon five years after they have served their sentence. An applicant for pardon must present letters from two "respected and well known people" vouching for their changed and good character. The pardon application is approved by the Ministry of the Interior, then reviewed by a parliamentary committee and finally signed by the President of Iceland.

The case of two of Iceland's most notorious child molesters who received a full pardon this summer has rattled Icelandic society. The Icelandic public and media have spent much of summer discussing the two cases and the horrifying world of violence and abuse they revealed.

Public suspects a cover-up

One of the two men, who has changed his named to R"bert Downey, had been a prominent attorney before he was sentenced. He had systematically groomed dozens of young girls in difficult social circumstances whom he had singled out as potential victims. The family of one of his victims launched a campaign to answer why this man had been granted a full pardon. This campaign then drew public attention to the pardoning of a second child molester. One of their demands was that it would be revealed who had written letters on behalf of R"bert Downey.

The unwillingness of the government and the Minister of the Interior, as well as the majority of the Judiciary committee of Parliament to support these calls or just take them seriously, was interpreted by many as proof of a cover-up. Not least because the actions and statements of the parliamentary leaders of the Conservative party after the case became front page news alternated between fumbling and arrogance.

A second cover-up

This second man, Hjalti Sigurj"n Hauksson, had raped and abused his adopted daughter for 12 years, from the age of 5 until the girl finally managed to escape and press charges. He was sentenced in 2004 to five and a half years in prison, which is one of the longest sentences ever handed down in sex abuse cases in Iceland.

The details of the case are nothing short of horrifying. This summer the man was then granted a full pardon, despite the fact that there is no indication he has ever repented. His victim has revealed in interviews that the man has continued to harass her and her family, among other things by approaching her six year old daughter while she was on a field trip with her school. The man was working as a school bus driver at the time.

Yesterday it was revealed tha tone of the two people who had written letters on behalf of Hjalti Sigurj"n was the father of the Prime Minister, Benedikt Sveinsson. Benedikt is a prominent businessman, one of the wealthiest people in Iceland, and widely considered to be one of the most powerful actors in the Conservative party.

The Minister of the Interior knew that Benedikt had written the latter on behalf of the child molester, and had told the Prime Minister, Bjarni Benediktsson, of this fact in June. Neither the Prime Minister, nor the Minister of the Interior, had ny legal obligation to keep the identity of the person who had written the letter secret. It was only after media had been granted access to the information, following an Freedom of Information request, that the information came forth.

A breach of trust

Many members of the public, commentators and members of the political opposition have argued that the failure to disclose the information is part of a cover-up by the leadership of the Conservative party, which was trying to shield the Prime Minister's family from the shame of its patriarch having vouched for a man who is widely seen as a monster.

The fact that the Prime Minister and the Minister of the Interior kept the information from Parliament and even from the junior members of the government coalition, the leadership and MPs of the liberal center-right Restoration and centrist Bright Future, is also seen as a serious breach of trust between Parliament and the two ministers.

Read more: Analysis: The clouds of the Panama Papers hang over new coalition government

Late last night the leadership of Bright Future decided that the breach of trust between the coalition partners meant the party could no longer support the government. The government, which has been one of the least popular in Icelandic political history, had been plagued by internal friction since it was formed in January of this year.

Read more: Analysis: Despite a booming economy Icelandic government enjoys just 25% approval rating

Among the scandals which have plagued the government are a controversial sale of assets by state owned Landsbankinn to Benedikt Sveinsson, as well as lingering questions relating to his finances, as well as those of his son, the Prime Minister. Bjarni Benediktsson was one of the people who appeared in the Panama Papers, and companies with connections to his father and other family members have also been connected to off-shore tax havens.

Read more: Cloud of Panama Papers: Prime Minister refuses to discuss tax-haven report with Parliament

Third time a conservative government resigns

This is the second coalition government to fall amid a scandal in little more than a year. Last fall the coalition government of the conservative Independence Party and the socially conservative centrist Progressive Party resigned after then Prime Minister, Sigmundur Dav­° Gunnlaugsson, was revealed to have large holdings in tax havens.

Read more: Interview with disgraced former PM over Panama Papers nominated for an Emmy award

This is also the third time in a row that a government of the conservative party resigns before the four year term is up. In 2009 the government of Geir H. Haarde resigned under pressure by protests over the fallout from the 2008 financial crash.

Do you want to know more about this subject? Please send us a line at icelandmag@365.is.

Have you had an experience related to the contents of this article? Let us know!

Ask the Expert

By Staff

Economy

By Staff

Crime

By Staff

Travel

By Staff

Animals

By Staff

Nature

By Staff

By Staff

Geology

By Staff

Archeology

By Staff

Geology

By Staff

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sat, 16 Sep 2017 21:50

By Jan M. Olsen'‰|'‰AP By Jan M. Olsen'‰|'‰AP September 15

COPENHAGEN, Denmark '-- Iceland's nine-month-old, center-right government collapsed Friday after a small coalition member quit and the country's prime minister called for a new election ''as soon as possible,'' according to Icelandic media.

The centrist Bright Future Party quit over an attempt by the prime minister's father to help clear a convicted pedophile's name. It said in a Facebook post that there was ''a serious breach of trust'' behind its departure.

Prime Minister Bjarni Benediktsson took office in January with his Independence Party, the Reform Party and the centrists.

Together the three parties held the slimmest of majorities '-- 32 of the 63 seats in parliament following the Oct. 29 election, which was called after the former prime minister resigned amid protests over his offshore holdings that were revealed in the Panama Papers leak.

The Bright Future party has four seats in Iceland's parliament, the Althingi.

Benediktsson's father, Benedikt Sveinsson, had helped a convicted child molester apply for a clause within Iceland's judicial system allowing a person who has served their sentence for a serious crime to ''restore their honor'' and seek employment again.

In 2004, Hjalti Sigurjon Hauksson was convicted of raping his stepdaughter almost every day for 12 years and was sentenced to five years in prison.

When it came out that some government members, including its head, had kept information from the public about a letter seeking to expurge Hauksson's record, the Bright Future party said it was quitting.

Benediktsson is a former finance minister who was also named in the Panama Papers as having held a stake in a Seychelles-based investment company.

Iceland is a wind-lashed volcanic island near the Arctic Circle with a population of 320,000. The country suffered through years of economic upheaval after its debt-swollen banks collapsed during the 2008 financial crisis but now is experiencing a tremendous surge in tourism by those eager to see its pristine glaciers, fjords and waterfalls and the Northern Lights.

Copyright 2017 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Fri, 15 Sep 2017 11:14

Google TranslateHTTP/1.1 200 OK Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2017 11:14:47 GMT Expires: Fri, 01 Jan 1990 00:00:00 GMT Cache-Control: no-cache, must-revalidate X-Frame-Options: DENY Pragma: no-cache Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Language: en X-Content-Type-Options: nosniff Content-Encoding: gzip Server: HTTP server (unknown) X-XSS-Protection: 1; mode=block Alt-Svc: quic=":443"; ma=2592000; v="39,38,37,35" Transfer-Encoding: chunked

My Account Search Maps YouTube Play News Gmail Drive Calendar Google+ Translate Photos MoreShopping Wallet Finance Docs Books Blogger Contacts Hangouts Keep Even more from GoogleTranslateFrom:

To:

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sat, 16 Sep 2017 11:16

Apple has offered an explanation for an embarrassing glitch at the launch of its most expensive iPhone ever, arguing that the phone didn't make an error '' the company's staff did.

During the first ever public demonstration of the £999/£1,149 iPhone X, Apple executive Craig Federighi attempted to unlock the device using the company's new Face ID feature, which scans a user's face to ensure only they can unlock their phones. But the feature failed, bumping Federighi to an old-fashioned passcode entry screen and forcing him to switch to a backup phone.

Many assumed that the problem was that Face ID system failed to recognise Federighi. That would be a concerning prospect for a feature that is due to replace the company's tried-and-tested Touch ID fingerprint reader on its flagship smartphone. But Apple says this was not the issue at all: instead, the company said far too many people were messing around with the phone backstage.

''People were handling the device for stage demo ahead of time,'' an Apple spokesperson told Yahoo, ''and didn't realise Face ID was trying to authenticate their face. After failing a number of times, because they weren't Craig, the iPhone did what it was designed to do, which was to require his passcode. Face ID worked as it was designed to.''

The news will reassure those concerned that Face ID may not recognise their unique visage, but remains a warning sign for users who fear the feature won't live up to Touch ID, since more chances for accidental activation means Federighi's experience may be a common one.

While analysts seem bullish on Apple's chances with the iPhone X against stiff competition from rivals Samsung and others, whether the lack of Touch ID will be seen as a step back for the iPhone X remains to be seen.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 17 Sep 2017 14:16

George W. Bush and Bono / Instagram

BY: Paul Crookston

September 15, 2017 3:06 pm

George W. Bush announced Friday that Irish rock star Bono will receive the George W. Bush Presidential Center's Medal for Distinguished Leadership.

Bush called Bono "the real deal" for his medical and economic efforts for those in need, according to an Instagram post Friday. Bono is the lead singer of U2 and has led philanthropy efforts all over the world. He has particularly worked to help the poor in African nations.

"Bono's passion for ending poverty and disease is the real deal," Bush wrote. "He uses his celebrity not for personal gain, but to improve and save lives."

Bono has famously performed at charity concerts, such as Live Aid in 1985, and has combined philanthropy and music in many other projects. He has critiqued systems of administering aid that are not focused on long-term development, and championed economic development as the logical goal of his efforts.

"Aid is just a stopgap," he said at Georgetown University in 2013. "Commerce [and] entrepreneurial capitalism take more people out of poverty than aid. We need Africa to become an economic powerhouse."

In Bush's Instagram post Friday, he expressed his thanks for Bono's heart and leadership.

"I am thankful for his big heart and for his leadership, and I am proud to announce that he will be the first recipient of the @thebushcenter's Medal for Distinguished Leadership next spring," Bush wrote.

Bush also focused on African aid during his presidency. He has received applause even from his critics for his help in fighting major African health crises, specifically malaria and HIV/AIDS. In 2012, Bono praised Bush's efforts against the spread of HIV/AIDS on Jon Stewart's "Daily Show."

Bono had previously criticized the U.S. decision to enter into the Iraq War, and Bush's leadership, but a relationship grew out of the two's shared concern for Africa. In 2005, Bono met Bush in the White House and advocated for more relief efforts to help the world's poor.

"I'm representing the poorest and the most vulnerable people," Bono said at the time.

The Bush Presidential Center includes Bush's presidential library and the Bush Institute, which both seek to promote leadership. Bono will be awarded the center's first leadership medal in the spring of 2018.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 17 Sep 2017 12:11

The "Wall of Shame" at the National Counterintelligence and Security Center. It displays photos of double agents and leakers who've been caught. Gail Austin/NPRhide caption

toggle captionGail Austin/NPR The "Wall of Shame" at the National Counterintelligence and Security Center. It displays photos of double agents and leakers who've been caught.

Gail Austin/NPR It's called the "Wall of Shame."

Tucked away in the hall of an office building outside the nation's capital in Bethesda, Md., the wall features the portraits of double agents, traitors, leakers and saboteurs.

It's not a display most Americans will ever see. In fact, it requires a top-secret security clearance to ride the elevator up to the floor it's on.

The wall include photos and dossiers of Robert Hannsen, Aldrich Ames, Jonathan Pollard '-- among others '-- who all pleaded guilty to revealing America's secrets.

William Evanina, the head of U.S. counterintelligence. Office of the Director of National Intelligencehide caption

toggle captionOffice of the Director of National Intelligence William Evanina, the head of U.S. counterintelligence.

Office of the Director of National Intelligence "This is a reminder for our employees: this is why we do what we do," says William Evanina, head of U.S counterintelligence '-- the nation's spy-catcher in chief. This is his office building, the National Counterintelligence and Security Center.

Evanina gave NPR's Mary Louise Kelly a tour of the wall and sat down for a wide-ranging interview that included Russia's meddling in the 2016 election.

Evanina does not play a role in the ongoing investigations into Russian meddling in the election, but he does in figuring out how to prevent it from happening again. While he thinks the U.S. can take steps to prevent a reprise of last year, he says it's the unknown that probably gives him the biggest pause.

"I don't know if I can be confident in Russia not doing anything in the future, or any other country, because technology will change," Evanina says. "And as we look towards providing mitigation steps to what happened last time, we're not even aware where technology is three years from now."

New Technologies, New Challenges

Evanina says it's a cat-and-mouse game that's been going on for decades.

And then, there's Facebook. The company recently announced $100,000 in election ads were sold to Russian-linked accounts last year.

Evanina says while the government needs to work more effectively with the private-sector, including Facebook, trying to block such activity may not be the best use of resources. Instead, he says you need to understand what happened, be able to articulate the danger and then adapt.

"Does that mean we don't follow intelligence officers around anymore, that we spend more time on Twitter and Facebook and social media? And if that is the case, we have to train our personnel accordingly," he says.

Another priority for Evanina is confronting the "insider threat." That includes people within the intelligence community leaking information to the outside.

"I don't think we could ever stop someone who is intent on stealing a document," Evanina says. "Where we have succeeded significantly, and I will say some of the recent cases have shown this, is the ability to stop the bleeding once it occurs."

Evanina credits that to security measures put in place after Edward Snowden's extensive leak of classified information. "I don't think we're going to see someone get away with 1.5 million documents anymore."

Earlier this year, government contractor Reality Winner was indicted for allegedly leaking a classified report to an online news outlet. While Evanina wouldn't talk about that particular case, he again noted that Snowden had leaked more than a million documents.

"I think a lot of the reform efforts were set forth to prevent that from happening [again]," he says.

Preventing Leaks to the News Media

Last month, Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced the government intends to crack down on leaks to journalists. Evanina was at his side for the press conference and says the government needs to convince government employees and contractors that these leaks do damage.

"We need to get back to basics about what we do and why we do it," Evanina says. "I'm saying, 'Listen, you went through a lot of work your entire life to get to a point in your life where you have been bestowed the right to protect these secrets. Don't violate that.' "

Meanwhile, a new government memo written by National Security Advisor H.R. McMaster directs agencies across the federal bureaucracy to hold training sessions focused on the importance of protecting sensitive information. Included in the training materials is a video featuring Evanina.

How do we know this? The memo was leaked.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 17 Sep 2017 11:47

Link to Article

Archived Version

Source: Reuters Video: Latest Videos US

Sun, 17 Sep 2017 05:25

Bitcoin thrashed in tidal wave of negativity - 02:15

S&P ends above 2500 for first time - 01:29

Sen. Warren introduces Equifax bill - 01:21

Alphabet and Lyft in talks about investment - 01:13

Uber, Lyft hail down investors - 01:46

Breeding rabbits to beat hunger - 01:23

Spain to control Catalan finances ahead of vote - 01:44

Will Angry Birds IPO set investors aflutter? - 01:16

Macy's to hire 80,000 for holidays - 01:14

Renault-Nissan seeks to double savings - 01:53

Breakingviews TV: Guns and poses - 05:12

Link to Article

Archived Version

Source: Reuters Video: Latest Videos US

Sun, 17 Sep 2017 05:23

Protesters, counter-protesters face off at Virginia Confederate statue - 01:18

At least 30 refugees thought killed by DRC forces - 01:01

North Korean TV shows video of latest missile launch ove Japan - 02:04

London tube station reopens, UK threat level raised to critical - 00:54

First cracks emerge in EU plan to raise Internet titans' tax bills - 00:51

British police arrest man in hunt for London bombers - 00:53

'Significant' arrest made over London bombing - 01:55

Clashes in St. Louis after ex-cop acquitted of murder - 01:26

Police and protesters clash in St. Louis - 01:22

After a New N.Korea missile test, U.S. says it has military options - 01:55

Judge sides against Trump in fight over 'sanctuary cities' - 01:10

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 17 Sep 2017 04:39

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 17 Sep 2017 04:36

September 15, 2017 Look What You Made Me DoSeptember 15, 2017 ' A week after President Trump cut a surprise deal with Democrats, and 100 years after it was created, is the debt ceiling still serving its intended purpose? Plus, inside the alt-right idolization of Taylor Swift and medieval history and how some are trying to fight back. Finally, a new book argues that we may need less technology, even--or especially--if it means we become more bored. 1. Zachary Karabell, author of "The Leading Indicators: A Short History of the Numbers that Rule Our World," discusses the debt ceiling's history and frequent use as political football. 2. Mitchell Sunderland, Senior Staff Writer at Vice, on Taylor Swift's fascist following. 2. Historian David M. Perry on how medieval historians should respond to white supremacist affection for their field. 4. Manoush Zomorodi, host of the WNYC's Note to Self, on her new book, "Bored and Brilliant," and the dire need to disengage from technology.

September 12, 2017 The Counter-Jihad Movement & the Making of a PresidentSeptember 12, 2017 ' President George W. Bush, speaking at a mosque on Sept. 17, 2001: "The face of terror is not the true faith of Islam. That's not what Islam is all about. Islam is peace." Donald Trump, campaigning for president on March 9, 2016: "I think Islam hates us." David Yerushalmi was living in an Israeli settlement near Jerusalem speaking on the phone with his father when the planes hit the towers on Sept. 11, 2001. "We got it wrong," Yerushalmi remembers telling his father. Before Sept. 11th, Yerushalmi thought terrorism was about nationalism, a fight over land. Afterward, he decided terrorism committed by Muslim extremists was driven by Islam itself '-- and underpinned by Islamic Shariah law. Pamela Geller and David Yerulshami (Pamela Geller) So he packed up his family and moved to New York to become part of a fledgling community of conservatives who would come to be known as counter-jihadists. They had an uphill battle to fight: In the aftermath of Sept. 11, President Bush and most Americans, according to polls, did not equate Islam with terrorism. But 16 years later, even though there hasn't been another large-scale terrorist attack on American soil committed by a Muslim, America's perspective on Islam has changed '-- evidenced most notably by the election of a president who believes the religion itself hates the country. Yerushalmi is a big reason for this change of heart. He's a behind-the-scenes leader of the counter-jihad movement, filing lawsuits pushing back against the encroachment of Islam in the public sphere and crafting a series of anti-Sharia laws that Muslims and civil rights groups decry as Islamophobic. "Do I think that the United States is weak enough to collapse either from a kinetic Jihad, meaning war, or even a civilizational Jihad that the Muslim Brotherhood talks about? No. At least not in my lifetime. But do I think it's an existential threat that allows for sleeper cells and the Internet-grown Jihadist that we see day in and day out wreaking so much havoc here and in Europe? Yes. Do I see it as a threat to our freedoms and liberties incrementally through their so-called civilizational Jihad where they use our laws and our freedoms to undermine our laws and our freedoms? Absolutely." WNYC reporter Matt Katz speaks to Yerulshami about what he thinks is the creeping threat of Sharia law for the podcast "The United States of Anxiety" produced by New York Public Radio.

The Counter-Jihad Movement & the Making of a PresidentSeptember 8, 2017 Duck and CoverSeptember 8, 2017 ' The Trump administration has announced the end of the DACA program. We examine the rhetoric used to justify the decision. Plus: the Southern Poverty Law Center faces questions from across the political spectrum about its messaging and fundraising; and the surprising history of FEMA's Cold War origins and what it means for emergency response today. 1. Mark Joseph Stern [@mjs_DC] of Slate dissects the rhetoric used by the Trump administration to justify ending the DACA program. 2. Peter Beinart [@PeterBeinart] of The Atlantic on how Democrats frame immigration and what gets ignored in the discussion. 3. The Southern Poverty Law Center has faced criticism from the left and the right. Ben Schreckinger [@SchreckReports] of Politico breaks down concerns surrounding the group's messaging and fundraising. Then, SPLC President Richard Cohen [@splcenter] responds to the criticism and rebuts recent, dubious accusations from right-leaning media outlets. 4. Garrett Graff [@vermontgmg] wrote about "The Secret History of FEMA" for Wired this week. He explains FEMA's origins as a Cold War civil defense agency and how its mission has evolved.

September 1, 2017 Unnatural DisasterSeptember 1, 2017 ' Hurricane Harvey makes landfall, bringing with it a familiar set of reporting tropes. We unpack the language of storm reporting and why it falls short, and why these disasters expose a society's priorities. Plus: why there's no such thing as a "natural" disaster; and a conservative commentator on what would really bring a "breaking point" to Trump's relationship with Republicans. 1. Neena Satija of The Texas Tribune and Reveal discusses last year's investigative report, "Boomtown, Flood Town," about Houston's risk for flooding. 2. The American Storm Edition of the Breaking News Consumer's Handbook, with: Robert Holmes, national flood hazard specialist and coordinator for the U.S.G.S.; risk communication consultant Gina Eosco; and disaster historian Scott Knowles. 3. One of the most widely misreported stories of Hurricane Katrina involved deaths at St. Rita's nursing home in a New Orleans suburb. James Cobb, their lawyer, talked to Brooke about media scapegoating in disasters. 4. Noah Rothman of Commentary Magazine on why the Republican party isn't distancing itself more from President Trump.

August 30, 2017 Bob's Docs Finale: Conflicting NarrativesAugust 30, 2017 ' For the month of August, we've been running a series of interviews Bob has done with documentary filmmakers. We've been calling it "Bob's Docs," and each we've week we've gone through some of the themes of documentary filmmaking '-- from the personal journey to the gift of extraordinary access. We have one more bonus episode of "Bob's Docs," and this one is about what happens when documentaries dig into conflicting narratives. In 1977, a former beauty queen with a 168 IQ named Joyce McKinney became British tabloid fodder when she supposedly kidnapped her Mormon boyfriend at gunpoint and, for four days, kept him as her sex slave. Documentary filmmaker Errol Morris' 2011 documentary Tabloid looked into the claims and the tabloid coverage. Brooke spoke with Morris six years ago about what he learned about sensational reporting and the trouble of getting to the bottom of a he-said, she-said.

Bob's Docs Finale: Conflicting NarrativesAugust 25, 2017 This American War on DrugsAugust 25, 2017 ' Attorney General Jeff Sessions has signaled that he'd like to revamp the war on drugs. We take a look at the history of the battle, and how sensational media depictions of crack, heroin, and meth have helped fuel it. Plus: our Breaking News Consumer's Handbook: Drugs Edition. Then, a look at how America's first drug czar used racist propaganda to outlaw marijuana. And why the debate between treatment and law enforcement is blurrier than you might think. 1. Our Breaking News Consumer's Handbook: Drugs Edition: a critical look at what the press gets wrong about drugs and drug addiction, featuring Dr. Debbie Dowell of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Dr. Carl Hart of Columbia University, and author Maia Szalavitz. 2. Historian Alexandra Chasin and author Johann Hari tell the story of Harry Anslinger, the man who set our seeming eternal drug war in motion, and his ruthless pursuit of jazz singer Billie Holiday. 3. University of California Santa Cruz's Dr. Craig Reinarman examines how American presidents encouraged and harnessed hysteria around drugs for political gain. 4. Journalist Sam Quinones argues for the importance of aggressive policing in the effort to end America's opioid crisis.

This American War on DrugsAugust 23, 2017 Bob's Docs Episode Four: It's PersonalAugust 23, 2017 ' This episode features two interviews, and the first is actually a guest spot from Brooke Gladstone. Last year, Brooke spoke with James Solomon about his documentary, "The Witness", about the story of Kitty Genovese '-- a young woman who was famously murdered on a New York City street in 1965. Her murder came to symbolize urban apathy and the "bystander effect". Solomon documents Kitty's brother Bill Genovese's lengthy pursuit to discover the truth behind her life and murder.

Bob's Docs Episode Four: It's PersonalAugust 18, 2017 GuttedAugust 18, 2017 ' In the 1960s, pollution was a visible, visceral problem, and public pressure led a Republican president to create the Environmental Protection Agency. Now, the GOP wants to slash the agency's budget and roll back "burdensome" environmental regulations. The story of how the environment went from bipartisan issue to political battleground. Also, journalists and politicians have long avoided drawing a straight line between natural disasters and climate change. How that's changing, thanks to new "extreme weather attribution" science. And, the myth of the Great Pacific Garbage Patch, a useful '-- yet misleading '-- container for our collective anxieties about the planet. 1. Sinclair Broadcasting is poised to expand to more households. Felix Gillette of Bloomberg discusses the company's frugal '-- and right-wing '-- approach to local news. 2. Richard Andrews, Professor Emeritus of Environmental Policy at UNC Chapel Hill, and William Ruckelshaus, former EPA administrator, help us understand the history of the EPA and how the environment became a political battleground. 3. Heidi Cullen, chief scientist at Climate Central, explains how climate attribution science can help us better describe global warming's role in extreme weather events. 4. Slate columnist Dan Engber explores how the idea of a great garbage patch in the Pacific has helped us make sense of a changing climate that can be hard to visualize.

August 16, 2017 Bob's Docs Episode Three: PrurienceAugust 16, 2017 ' For the month of August we'll be running a series of interviews Bob has done over the years with documentary filmmakers. In the OTM office, the producers have been referring to the collection as "Bob's docs." Over the next few weeks we'll go through some themes of documentary film-making, from prurience to access to the personal journey. This week's theme is prurience. This episode features Bob's interview about the documentary "Weiner", about the disgraced former Congressman Anthony Weiner's attempt at redemption with an attempt at running for mayor of New York City. Weiner had agreed to let a pair of documentary filmmakers record his campaign (and his entire life) in the hopes that they would capture his triumph. Instead, the cameras were rolling as he faced yet another slew of sexting allegations. Elyse Steinberg is a writer and documentary film director. Josh Kriegman is a director and former political political consultant. Together, they produced and directed "Weiner". Since this interview, Weiner has pled guilty to a felony obscenity charge for sending pictures and messages to a 15-year-old girl. His sentencing hearing is scheduled for September.

Bob's Docs Episode Three: PrurienceAugust 11, 2017 You've Been WarnedAugust 11, 2017 ' After a week of fury and fire, On the Media takes a chill pill. We look at chilling warnings and opaque impediments, from reporters working with whistleblowers or trying to cover immigration courts, to media organizations reckoning with their future in the post-Gawker era. 1. Dana Gold of the Government Accountability Project speaks with us about the incomplete patchwork of legal protections for journalists in light of the government's newfound zeal for cracking down on "leakers." 2. Immigration reporter Julia Preston of the Marshall Project discusses the challenges journalists face covering immigration courts. Then, Judge Dana Leigh Marks, President of the National Association of Immigration Judges, describes the unique challenges facing judges in the immigration court system. 3. InSight Crime's Steven Dudley debunks some of the myths around the notorious MS-13 and explains why it's not all that the Trump administration describes. 4. Brian Knappenberger, producer and director of Nobody Speak: The Trials of the Free Press, gives us a behind-the-scenes look at his film, and describes the role of big money and morality in commanding the free press.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sat, 16 Sep 2017 22:06

Iceland's government, only formed in January, has been thrown into disarray after one of the three ruling coalition parties quit, leading the prime minister to call a snap election.

It follows the alleged cover-up by PM Bjarni Benediktsson of a scandal involving his father.

'ttarr Propp(C)'s Bright Future party announced it was terminating cooperation with the government over what it called a ''serious breach of trust.''

It's claimed Benediktsson's father '' wrote a letter to help clear the criminal record of man convicted of child sexual offences.

The letter recommended that his friend Hjalti Sigurj"n Hauksson '' should have his honour restored despite serving five years for raping a young girl.

The justice minister, Sigridur Andersen, of the Independence party, told Benediktsson about the letter in July but the government did not publicly disclose its existence until forced to do so by a parliamentary committee this week.

The development means the country faces a second election in less than a year .. and makes Bjarni Benediktsson's future very uncertain.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sat, 16 Sep 2017 18:59

ST. LOUIS -- Dozens of protesters faced off with police in riot gear in downtown St. Louis Friday after a judge acquitted former police officer Jason Stockley , who is white, was not guilty of first-degree murder in the 2011 death of 24-year-old Anthony Lamar Smith, a black man.

Stockley shot Smith five times after a high-speed chase. Prosecutors alleged Stockley planted a gun in Smith's car after he shot him.

According to KMOV-TV, police arrested 13 people, including 12 directly in front the old police headquarters, after protesters clashed with police. Four officers were injured as well, one received medical attention for an injured hand, the other three refused treatment.

Play Video

CBSN Protesters march on the streets of St. Louis after judge acquits ex-police officerAfter a judge acquitted former police officer Jason Stockley of first degree murder in the shooting death of Anthony Lamar Smith, protestors took...

St. Louis police chief Lawrence O'Toole later said at a press conference that "for the most part," the demonstrations were peaceful. But the police department released video of protesters jumping on a police car and tweeted photos of water bottles and rocks through at officers.

"I would say that all in all today's protests were very peaceful and the police exercised great restraint. That is a good outcome for a very tense day," O'Toole said.

A smaller group stood in front of a city bus filled with officers in riot gear, blocking it from moving forward. The bus backed up and protesters again tried to stop it, with a few throwing water bottles. The bus moved less than a block before police in riot gear began pushing back the crowd.

KMOV-TV posted a video from Twitter that showed an altercation between protesters and police. Protesters attempted to block a bus carrying officers, according to KMOV-TV.

KMOV-TV tweeted a video of some protesters burning an American flag.

Smith's mother, Anne Smith, spoke Friday near the intersection where her son was killed, KMOV-TV reports.

"I'm not going to stand here and say 'no justice, no peace.' My soul is burning, my heart is broken. I say I ain't get no justice, I could never be at peace," Anne Smith said. "I can't speak for no one else, but I know the system didn't work on behalf of Anthony Lamar Smith."

Hundreds of protesters marched in downtown St. Louis immediately following the verdict, some protesters shouted, "If we can't get no justice y'all can't get no peace" and burned a St. Louis Cardinals sweatshirt, according to a reporter for CBS St. Louis affiliate KMOV-TV. At 7 p.m., protesters gathered at Maryland Plaza to organize another march.

The St. Louis police tweeted just after 6:30 p.m. that the protests are "no longer considered peaceful" and protesters were ignoring commands to leave the streets -- and therefore subject to arrest.

As protesters resisted, two women told The Associated Press that police used pepper spray. Both women's faces had been doused with milk, which is used to counter the effects of pepper spray.

The police also said on Twitter that rocks were thrown at buses carrying officers and a man was arrested for damaging a police vehicle.

Fears of unrest prompted several downtown businesses to send employees home early, including two of the biggest, Wells Fargo Advisors and Nestle Purina PetCare. U.S. Bank closed six branches. Some schools closed early and postponed events scheduled for Friday. An Alzheimer's Walk scheduled for Saturday downtown was postponed.

Protester efforts at civil disobedience were largely unsuccessful. When several demonstrators tried to rush onto Interstate 64, they were blocked on an entrance ramp by police cars and officers on bikes. When they tried to enter the city's convention center, the doors were locked.

Members of the St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department prevent protesters from entering Interstate 64 after the acquittal of Jason Stockley, a former St. Louis police officer charged in the 2011 fatal shooting of Anthony Lamar Smith, a black man, in St. Louis, Missouri, Sept. 15, 2017.

Reuters/Whitney Curtis

The case played out not far from the suburb of Ferguson, which was the scene of the fatal shooting of Michael Brown, the unarmed black 18-year-old who was killed by a white police officer in 2014. That officer was never charged but eventually resigned.

Stockley insisted he saw Smith holding a gun and felt he was in imminent danger. The officer asked the case to be decided by a judge instead of a jury.

"This court, in conscience, cannot say that the State has proven every element of murder beyond a reasonable doubt or that the State has proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant did not act in self-defense," St. Louis Circuit Judge Timothy Wilson wrote in the decision.

Wilson said he was not convinced of Stockley's guilt. And as for Smith, the judge wrote that "an urban heroin dealer not in possession of a firearm would be an anomaly," CBS News' Dean Reynolds reports.

St. Louis Circuit Attorney Kim Gardner said she was disappointed.

Play Video

CBSN Protesters take to St. Louis streets after ex-cop acquittedProtesters have taken to the streets in downtown St. Louis after former police officer Jason Stockley was found not guilty in the 2011 shooting d...

"While officer-involved shooting cases are extremely difficult to prevail in court, I believe we offered sufficient evidence that proved beyond a reasonable doubt" that Stockley intended to kill Smith, Gardner said in a written statement.

The head of the St. Louis chapter of the NAACP asked President Trump and the Justice Department to review the acquittal.

Assistant Circuit Attorney Robert Steele emphasized during the trial last month that police dashcam video of the chase captured Stockley saying he was "going to kill this (expletive), don't you know it."

Less than a minute later, the officer shot Smith five times. Stockley's lawyer dismissed the comment as "human emotions" uttered during a dangerous police pursuit. The judge wrote that the statement "can be ambiguous depending on the context."

Prosecutors objected to the officer's request for a bench trial.

The Constitution guarantees the right of criminal suspects to have their cases heard "by an impartial jury." But defendants can also opt to have the verdict rendered by a judge.

Stockley, 36, could have been sentenced to up to life in prison without parole. He left the St. Louis police force in 2013 and moved to Houston.

Stockley is the fourth officer in the last four months to be acquitted of murder charges involving a black victim, Reynolds reports.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sat, 16 Sep 2017 13:24

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sat, 16 Sep 2017 12:26

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sat, 16 Sep 2017 12:20

On September 11, 2001, Lt. Heather ''Lucky'' Penney in an F-16 at Andrews Air Force Base. She had her orders. She was to take down down United Airlines Flight 93. The hijacked plane was headed toward Washington DC. Three other planes had hit targets in New York and Washington, and Flight 93 was destined to become the fourth.

[Scroll Down for Video]

Penney was the second combat pilot in the air that morning. The idea of shooting down a civilian aircraft, even a hijacked one, was troublesome enough''but Penney had no missiles or live ammunition. All she had were her orders and her plane. She was going to take the plane down the hard way.

''We wouldn't be shooting it down. We'd be ramming the aircraft,'' Penney said of the surreal moment. ''I would essentially be a kamikaze pilot.''

Ten years after the event, Penney began talking openly about that day.

Penney was one of the first female combat pilots. She now works for at Lockheed Martin, where she helps direct the F-35 program.''We had to protect the airspace any way we could,'' she said.

On that Tuesday in 2001, there were no planes standing by ready to defend the skies over Washington. Not a single plane equipped for a dogfight.

''There was no perceived threat at the time, especially one coming from the homeland like that,'' said Col. George Degnon, vice commander of the 113th Wing at Andrews. ''It was a little bit of a helpless feeling, but we did everything humanly possible to get the aircraft armed and in the air. It was amazing to see people react.''

It would take an hour or more to arm a plane, and that process was begun, but they needed pilots in the air immediately.

''Lucky, you're coming with me,'' said Col. Marc Sasseville, her commanding officer.

''I'm going to go for the cockpit,'' Sasseville said.

''I'll take the tail.'' And with that, the two skipped their pre-flight checks and took off.

''We don't train to bring down airliners,'' said Sasseville. He's now stationed at the Pentagon. ''If you just hit the engine, it could still glide and you could guide it to a target. My thought was the cockpit or the wing.''

Sasseville's plan was to maneuver the faster, more agile F-16 into the commercial airliner with enough time to eject. That timing, though, would require split-second perfection.

''I was hoping to do both at the same time,'' he said. ''It probably wasn't going to work, but that's what I was hoping.''

''If you eject and your jet soars through without impact,'' Penney said, thinking back. She wasn't going to try to eject.

In the end, they didn't have to make the sacrifice. United 93 went down in Pennsylvania. Passengers aboard the plane fought back against the hijackers, and crashed in an isolated field.

''The real heroes are the passengers on Flight 93 who were willing to sacrifice themselves,'' Penney said. ''I was just an accidental witness to history.''

When asked why she was willing to fly a kamikaze mission, Penney doesn't hesitate. ''Why? Because there are things in this world that are more important than ourselves. Freedom. The Constitution of the United States. Our way of life. Mom, baseball, apple pie; these things and so many more that make us uniquely American. We belong to something greater than ourselves. As complex and diverse and discordant as it is, this thing, this idea called America, binds us together in citizenship and community and brotherhood.''

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sat, 16 Sep 2017 12:12

WASHINGTON (AP) '-- The blaring, grinding noise jolted the American diplomat from his bed in a Havana hotel. He moved just a few feet, and there was silence. He climbed back into bed. Inexplicably, the agonizing sound hit him again. It was as if he'd walked through some invisible wall cutting straight through his room.

Soon came the hearing loss, and the speech problems, symptoms both similar and altogether different from others among at least 21 U.S. victims in an astonishing international mystery still unfolding in Cuba. The top U.S. diplomat has called them "health attacks." New details learned by The Associated Press indicate at least some of the incidents were confined to specific rooms or even parts of rooms with laser-like specificity, baffling U.S. officials who say the facts and the physics don't add up.

"None of this has a reasonable explanation," said Fulton Armstrong, a former CIA official who served in Havana long before America re-opened an embassy there. "It's just mystery after mystery after mystery."

Suspicion initially focused on a sonic weapon, and on the Cubans. Yet the diagnosis of mild brain injury, considered unlikely to result from sound, has confounded the FBI, the State Department and U.S. intelligence agencies involved in the investigation.

AP has learned that so-called "health attacks" in Havana indicate some of the incidents were confined to specific rooms or even parts of rooms with laser-like specificity, baffling U.S. officials who say the facts and the physics don't add up. (Sept. 14)

Some victims now have problems concentrating or recalling specific words, several officials said, the latest signs of more serious damage than the U.S. government initially realized. The United States first acknowledged the attacks in August '-- nine months after symptoms were first reported.

It may seem the stuff of sci-fi novels, of the cloak-and-dagger rivalries that haven't fully dissipated despite the historic U.S.-Cuban rapprochement two years ago that seemed to bury the weight of the two nations' Cold War enmity. But this is Cuba, the land of poisoned cigars, exploding seashells and covert subterfuge by Washington and Havana, where the unimaginable in espionage has often been all too real.

The Trump administration still hasn't identified a culprit or a device to explain the attacks, according to interviews with more than a dozen current and former U.S. officials, Cuban officials and others briefed on the investigation. Most weren't authorized to discuss the probe and demanded anonymity.

"The investigation into all of this is still under way. It is an aggressive investigation," State Department spokeswoman Heather Nauert said Thursday. "We will continue doing this until we find out who or what is responsible for this."

In fact, almost nothing about what went down in Havana is clear. Investigators have tested several theories about an intentional attack '-- by Cuba's government, a rogue faction of its security forces, a third country like Russia, or some combination thereof. Yet they've left open the possibility an advanced espionage operation went horribly awry, or that some other, less nefarious explanation is to blame.

Aside from their homes, officials said Americans were attacked in at least one hotel, a fact not previously disclosed. An incident occurred on an upper floor of the recently renovated Hotel Capri, a 60-year-old concrete tower steps from the Malecon, Havana's iconic, waterside promenade.

The cases vary deeply: different symptoms, different recollections of what happened. That's what makes the puzzle so difficult to crack.

In several episodes recounted by U.S. officials, victims knew it was happening in real time, and there were strong indications of a sonic attack.

Some felt vibrations, and heard sounds '-- loud ringing or a high-pitch chirping similar to crickets or cicadas. Others heard the grinding noise. Some victims awoke with ringing in their ears and fumbled for their alarm clocks, only to discover the ringing stopped when they moved away from their beds.

The attacks seemed to come at night. Several victims reported they came in minute-long bursts.

Yet others heard nothing, felt nothing. Later, their symptoms came.

The scope keeps widening. On Tuesday, the State Department disclosed that doctors had confirmed another two cases, bringing the total American victims to 21. Some have mild traumatic brain injury, known as a concussion, and others permanent hearing loss.

Even the potential motive is unclear. Investigators are at a loss to explain why Canadians were harmed, too, including some who reported nosebleeds. Fewer than 10 Canadian diplomatic households in Cuba were affected, a Canadian official said. Unlike the U.S., Canada has maintained warm ties to Cuba for decades.

Sound and health experts are equally baffled. Targeted, localized beams of sound are possible, but the laws of acoustics suggest such a device would probably be large and not easily concealed. Officials said it's unclear whether the device's effects were localized by design or due to some other technical factor.

And no single, sonic gadget seems to explain such an odd, inconsistent array of physical responses.

"Brain damage and concussions, it's not possible," said Joseph Pompei, a former MIT researcher and psychoacoustics expert. "Somebody would have to submerge their head into a pool lined with very powerful ultrasound transducers."

Other symptoms have included brain swelling, dizziness, nausea, severe headaches, balance problems and tinnitus, or prolonged ringing in the ears. Many victims have shown improvement since leaving Cuba and some suffered only minor or temporary symptoms.

After the U.S. complained to Cuba's government earlier this year and Canada detected its own cases, the FBI and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police traveled to Havana to investigate.

FBI investigators swept the rooms, looking for devices. They found nothing, several officials briefed on the investigation said.

In May, Washington expelled two Cuban diplomats to protest the communist government's failure to protect Americans serving there. But the U.S. has taken pains not to accuse Havana of perpetrating the attacks. It's a sign investigators believe that even if elements of Cuba's security forces were involved, it wasn't necessarily directed from the top.

Cuba's government declined to answer specific questions about the incidents, pointing to a previous Foreign Affairs Ministry statement denying any involvement, vowing full cooperation and saying it was treating the situation "with utmost importance."

"Cuba has never, nor would it ever, allow that the Cuban territory be used for any action against accredited diplomatic agents or their families, without exception," the Cuban statement said.

After half a century of estrangement, the U.S. and Cuba in 2015 restored diplomatic ties between countries separated by a mere 90 miles of water. Embassies were re-opened and restrictions on travel and commerce eased. President Donald Trump has reversed some of those changes, but left others in place.

Mark Feierstein, who oversaw the Cuba detente on President Barack Obama's National Security Council, noted that Cuban authorities have been uncharacteristically cooperative with the investigation.

If the Trump administration felt confident Raul Castro's government was to blame, it's likely the U.S. would have already taken major punitive steps, like shuttering the newly re-established American Embassy. And the U.S. hasn't stopped sending new diplomats to Cuba even as the victim list grows.

"Had they thought the Cuban government was deliberately attacking American diplomats, that would have had a much more negative effect," Feierstein said. "We haven't seen that yet."

___

Weissenstein reported from Havana. Associated Press writers Bradley Klapper, Eric Tucker and Lauran Neergaard in Washington, Rob Gillies in Toronto and Jake Pearson in New York contributed.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sat, 16 Sep 2017 11:09

Well, that was something.

During a panel discussion on the Jemele Hill controversy and the White House calling her to be fired, things took an entirely different turn when sports radio host and provocateur Clay Travis pointed out that he only believes in two things fully.

''I believe in the First Amendment and boobs,'' Travis stated.

It took a beat, but host Brooke Baldwin wanted Travis to clarify what he had just said, asking him specifically if he actually sad ''boobs.''

''Boobs, two things that never let me down, the first amendment and boobs,'' Travis said. ''Those are the two things I believe in absolutely in the country.''

Further down the line, Baldwin still wanted to make sure that Travis was actually talking about women's breasts and not booze. When she confirmed that was indeed the case, she ended the interview early.

''I'm done, I'm sorry. I'm done,'' she exclaimed. ''This conversation is over, yanking mikes, bye. Forgive me, live television happens and you think you heard something, you are not sure and then you realize it happened, so I apologize for him on that.''

Immediately after the segment, both Baldwin and Travis took to Twitter to remark on what had happened.

Watch the clip above, via CNN.

UPDATE '''' 11:58 pm ET: A CNN spokesperson has provided Mediaite with this statement in response to Travis' tweet:

Clay Travis was not booked again on CNN. Prior to his appearance with Brooke Baldwin, he had been tentatively scheduled to appear Monday on HLN.

That interview has been cancelled.

[image via screengrab]

'--

Follow Justin Baragona on Twitter: @justinbaragona

Have a tip we should know? tips@mediaite.com

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sat, 16 Sep 2017 05:02

NASHVILLE, TN (WSMV) - The president of Lipscomb University is apologizing for a centerpiece in his home that some deemed offensive.

In an email to the university, President Randy Lowry said he invited African-American students to his home to discuss their experience at the school.

In the email, Lowry said students voiced concerns about the centerpiece in his home, which featured stalks of cotton.

''The content of the centerpieces was offensive, and I could have handled the situation with more sensitivity,'' Lowry wrote in the email. ''I sincerely apologize for the discomfort, anger or disappointment we caused and solicit your forgiveness.''

A student posted a picture of the centerpiece on social media.

Stay with News 4 for updates to this story.

Copyright 2017 WSMV (Meredith Corporation). All rights reserved.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Fri, 15 Sep 2017 22:48

No Apology, No Explanation: Fox News And The Seth Rich Story : NPRNo Apology, No Explanation: Fox News And The Seth Rich StorySeveral months after Fox News retracted its story about the death of Seth Rich, the network has done nothing to explain what went wrong.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Fri, 15 Sep 2017 21:07

Comedian Sarah Silverman was forced to apologize after she was caught exaggerating a story about being paid less than a man for a gig - to highlight the gender pay gap.

The comic and feminist campaigner recalled an incident at the New York Comedy Club when she claimed she was paid less than her male counterpart, for a piece she recorded a wage-discrimination-activism video for Levo League.

But Silverman has been forced to apologize after New York Comedy Club owner Al Martin revealed the story was false, because Silverman had been paid less purely because she appeared as a guest on the show and wasn't meant to receive anything - her male counterpart Todd Barry was booked for the slot.

Scroll down for video

Comedian and campaigner Sarah Silverman has been forced to apologize after she used a fake story about getting paid less than her male friend to do a job, as she tried to emphasize the issue of the gender pay gap

Silverman has since publicly apologized to Martin and revealed she fabricated the story.

But she stressed that critics should not use the story as a way to undermine the gender pay gap campaign.

'To the maniacs who want to use this as a chit against women's issues, I ask that you please don't. Because that would be super s****y,' she said in a statement, according to National Review.

In the video, released on April 6, Silverman accused Martin of paying her $50 less than Barry to perform.

She claimed while both did 15 minute back-to-back sets she was paid $10, while Barry went home with $60.

'So I went back inside and I asked the owner Al Martin and I said, "Al, why did you pay me $10 and you paid Todd Barry $60?"' she said.

Silverman appeared in the video and was later forced to apologise for fabricating the pay gap story S

'And he, it was so perfect. He goes, "Oh, did you want a $60 spot?" It was symbolic, I didn't need $60, but, you know it was pretty s****y.'

She added: 'If you work a job and a man is working the same job, then you should be getting paid the same.'

However Martin revealed what really happened in a Facebook post - prompting Silverman's apology.

She said: 'When I was interviewed by Levo, they asked me "Do you remember a time you were paid less for the same job" and this story, being just that, popped into my head.'

The comic said she regretted mentioning Martin by name, who had always been 'so lovely' to her. She also admitted her anecdote had not been a good example of the gender pay gap.

Silverman apologized for naming club owner Al Martin in the fabricated story but said the issue around her incorrectly recounting the anecdote should not be used to undermine the campaign for wage equality

Silverman is dating Welsh actor Michael Sheen (left) Before that, she was with Jimmy Kimmel (right)

In a Facebook post Martin said he fully accepted Silverman's apology and invited her back to perform.

He wrote: 'It takes a big person to apologize and and today Sarah proved she is that kind of person.'

Silverman came under criticism last month after she posted a list of ten 'rape prevention tips' on Twitter.

Critics blasted the comic for offering 'tips' to potential rapists while dozens of men responded by branding her sexist for suggesting that all men desire to rape women.

The sarcastic set of rules, which focus on the perpetrator of the crime rather than the victim, also include 'if you are in an elevator and a woman gets in, don't rape her', as well as 'when you encounter a woman who is asleep, the safest course of action is not to rape her'.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Fri, 15 Sep 2017 20:36

ProPublica found that Facebook had enabled advertisers to target ads to people who expressed an interest in anti-Semitic topics.

RACHEL MARTIN, HOST:

Two of the tech companies that rule our world are in the news this morning, Facebook and Google. And we'll get to Google in a moment. But first, Facebook - according to new investigative reporting from ProPublica, Facebook is taking money to connect advertisers with anti-Semites. For more, let's bring in NPR's Aarti Shahani. She joins us via Skype.

Hey, Aarti.

AARTI SHAHANI, BYLINE: Hi.

MARTIN: So lay out exactly what ProPublica did and what they found.

SHAHANI: So ProPublica did something really simple and with clever reporting. The official line from Facebook is, hate speech is in violation of our community standards, and we don't tolerate it. The reality is Facebook is creating tools to sell it. ProPublica decided to go into Facebook, not as a regular user but into the advertising section. It's automated online. They didn't call a customer service line. And they selected terms like, we want to target ads to people who express interest in Jew hater and how to burn Jews.

MARTIN: Those exact phrases?

SHAHANI: Yes. Those exact phrases.

MARTIN: Wow.

SHAHANI: And Facebook accepted their money, $30, and placed the ad, which in this case wasn't anti-Semitic material. It was just a link to a news article. Then ProPublica called Facebook and said, (laughter) yeah, you guys are letting us target to anti-Semitic subgroups. Those ad terms have since disappeared from the platform. And Facebook says they weren't common or widespread.

MARTIN: But still, it seems like a big oversight on their part.

SHAHANI: Yeah, absolutely. You know, and think of it this way. Facebook's business is based on letting advertisers do exactly what ProPublica did, which is targeting the most personal, even insidious parts of ourselves. OK? There's an industry term for this. It's called psychographic marketing. In the old days, if you were placing ads, you relied on demographics. But with psychographics, you go deeper. You don't just advertise to, say, men in Baltimore, age 19 to 35, who are black. You can add interests, like cop killer. And if Facebook finds and zaps that term, you pick a proxy - you know, say, a band or a movie that's all about mowing down cops.

MARTIN: Wow. That is a problem with a - I imagine, a difficult solution, if any. I mean, how do you fix that?

SHAHANI: Yeah. There's not a silver bullet here. You know, Facebook has been focused on growth - on hypergrowth. Every quarter, the CEO, Mark Zuckerberg, gets on a quarterly earnings call and shares these dazzling numbers about how much their mobile advertising business has grown. And, you know, something I think about is, what if Zuckerberg also reported on an error rate or a harm rate, you know, just like in the 20th-century industry, you might see disclosures around carbon emissions. What if Facebook and other data companies had to create and report a kind of harm metric, you know, for hate speech, calls to violence, Russian influence on U.S. elections? You know, that doesn't exist. I'm just thinking out loud here.

MARTIN: Yeah.

SHAHANI: Facebook, by the way, pays for NPR's video content, some of it.

MARTIN: So before we let you go, Google is also facing some hot water over some allegations about hiring or paying. What's going on?

SHAHANI: Yeah. On Thursday, plaintiffs filed a class-action lawsuit in California. It's on behalf of all women employed by Google in the state over the last four years. And the claim is Google is breaking the law, labor laws, by paying women less than men for substantially similar work.

MARTIN: All right. NPR's Aarti Shahani reporting on two controversies facing a couple of big tech giants, Facebook and Google, this morning.

Thanks so much, Aarti.

SHAHANI: Thank you.

(SOUNDBITE OF REKI'S "MOONBEAM")

Copyright (C) 2017 NPR. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use and permissions pages at www.npr.org for further information.

NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by Verb8tm, Inc., an NPR contractor, and produced using a proprietary transcription process developed with NPR. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR's programming is the audio record.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Fri, 15 Sep 2017 12:54

Image copyright Reuters Image caption A passer-by in Tokyo looks at a TV screen reporting news about North Korea's missile launch North Korea has fired a ballistic missile across Japan, creating new tension in the region after its nuclear bomb test less than two weeks ago.

The missile reached an altitude of about 770km (478 miles), travelling 3,700km before landing in the sea off Hokkaido, South Korea's military says.

It flew higher and further than one fired over Japan late last month.

Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe said his country would "never tolerate" such "dangerous provocative action".

South Korea responded within minutes by firing two ballistic missiles into the sea in a simulated strike on the North.

US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson also condemned the launch and the UN Security Council will meet later on Friday in New York at the request of the United States and Japan.

Why does this new test matter?The launch took place from the Sunan district of the capital Pyongyang just before 07:00 local time (22:00 GMT on Thursday), South Korea's military says.

Sunan is home to Pyongyang International Airport, 24km north of the city centre.

Media playback is unsupported on your device

Media caption North Korea missile triggers Japan warning alarmsAs with the last test on 29 August, the missile flew over Japan's northern Hokkaido island before splashing down in the Pacific Ocean. There were no immediate reports of damage to aircraft or ships.

Sirens sounded across the region and text message alerts were sent out warning people to take cover.

Comparison of missile launches over Japan15 September29 AugustDistance travelled3,700km (2,299 miles)2,700kmMaximum altitude770km550kmLanding distance from Japan2,200km1,180kmFlight duration19 minutes32 minutesMissile typeThought to be intermediate range missileThought to be intermediate range Hwasong-12Observers say it is likely to have been an intermediate range ballistic missile (IRBM) though Japanese officials believe there is still a possibility it was an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM).

What is so alarming about the new launch is that the US Pacific territory of Guam, which North Korea says it has plans to fire missiles towards, is 3,400km from Pyongyang, putting it within range of the latest missile.

Sanctions on the North were tightened this week in response to its sixth nuclear test on 3 September, which reportedly involved a miniaturised hydrogen bomb that could be loaded on to a long-range missile.

How will the international community respond? After the latest round of sanctions, it is not clear what other course of action is open to the UN Security Council.

Only on Monday, the Security Council voted unanimously to restrict oil imports and ban textile exports, in an attempt to starve the North of fuel and income for its weapons programmes.

Mr Tillerson put the burden of response to the latest test on China and Russia, the North's main economic partners.

They "must indicate their intolerance for these reckless missile launches by taking direct actions of their own", he said.

He said that China supplied North Korea with most of its oil, while Russia was the largest employer of North Korean forced labour.

What was the reaction from China and Russia?Chinese foreign ministry spokeswoman Hua Chunying said her country was not the "focal point of the conflict".

"The various directly involved parties should take responsibility," she added, in remarks that appeared aimed at the US and South Korea. "Any attempt to wash their hands of the issue is irresponsible."

Ms Hua called for a peaceful solution "through formal diplomatic means".

Russia's foreign ministry condemned North Korea's "illegal" test, but added: "Regrettably, aggressive rhetoric is the only thing coming from Washington."

Have North Korea's missile tests paid off?

How is South Korea responding?In South Korea, President Moon Jae-in held an emergency meeting of his national security council, where he said that dialogue with the North was "impossible in a situation like this".

Image copyright EPA Image caption South Korea tested missiles in response to the North's new launch Officials have been ordered to prepare for possible North Korean chemical, biological and electromagnetic pulse (EMP) attacks, a presidential spokesman said.

North Korea has said it has bombs capable of sending EMP shock waves, which would disrupt power supplies, although the claim has been greeted with some scepticism.

The country does have an extensive chemical arsenal and may also have biological weapons.

Why is the North acting like this?It insists it needs a nuclear-weapons programme to ensure its survival and there has been no let-up in its fiery rhetoric.

On Thursday, it threatened to "sink Japan and turn America to ashes".

Image copyright Reuters/KCNA Image caption North Korea said in early September that it had tested a "missile-ready" hydrogen bomb A commentary in North Korea's state-run Rodong Sinmun newspaper after the missile launch accuses the US and South Korea of conducting "ceaseless" exercises as a provocation.

North Korea's missile programmeMedia playback is unsupported on your device

Media caption How would war with North Korea unfold?Pyongyang has been developing weapons, initially based on the Soviet-developed Scud, for decadesConducted short and medium-range missile tests on many occasions, sometimes to mark domestic events or periods of regional tensionPace of tests has increased in recent months; experts say North Korea appears to be making significant advances towards building a reliable long-range nuclear-capable weaponOn 3 September, North Korea said it tested a hydrogen bomb that could be miniaturised and loaded on a long-range missilePushing the envelopeRupert Wingfield-Hayes, BBC News, Tokyo

Image copyright KCNA Image caption North Korea's rocket launch last month was described by Japan as an "unprecedented threat" This test came as a surprise to nobody.

North Korea is steadily proceeding down the path to full ICBM capability. To do that, it needs to test-fire its projectiles - every other missile-armed nation has done the same.

It started earlier this year by firing its new longer-range Hwasong missiles into the Sea of Japan, then flew one over Hokkaido in August. Next it tested a powerful nuclear device, which it claims it can put on a missile.

Now it has tested another intermediate range missile at longer range and higher altitude.

The next step will almost certainly be a test of the Hwasong-14 ICBM over Japan and far out into the Pacific.

The aim of all this is to develop and deploy a reliable missile that can hit the mainland US.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Fri, 15 Sep 2017 11:49

Link to Article

Archived Version

Fri, 15 Sep 2017 11:46

Link to Article

Archived Version

Fri, 15 Sep 2017 04:44

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 17 Sep 2017 14:50

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 17 Sep 2017 14:44

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 17 Sep 2017 14:20

BY: Alex Griswold

September 15, 2017 5:42 pm

"The View" host Whoopi Goldberg suggested Friday that maybe the growing recognition of "antifa" is the result of conservatives turing it into a "catch phrase."

When co-host Paula Faris pointed out that even President Barack Obama's Department of Homeland Security and FBI warned about antifa groups, Goldberg protested that the report was flawed.

Goldberg questioned the report's validity because it dated back to the Obama years when there were no large fascist demonstrations she could remember.

"When we look to see what they were talking about, there was nothing there," she said. "We went to see what they had been protesting, what fascist stuff antifa had been protesting '' there's nothing there. We can't find anything."

"Antifa is one of those things '' I don't want to say they're right '' but someone came up with as a catch phrase so you could say, 'there's violence on the other side,'" Goldberg said.

Goldberg suggested later in the discussion that the people who were complaining loudest about antifa might be the people who were actually behind the group's creation.

"Oftentimes I found that sometimes the side that is kvetching the loudest has sort of orchestrated this so they can bitch about it," Goldberg said.

"I'm not sure who was storming through the streets. I'm not sure who was storming through the streets," she said in reference to protests.

Antifa, "anti-fascist," members purport violence is acceptable to combat what they consider "fascism," and they therefore often cover their faces in order to avoid recognition by authorities. The group has gained attention in recent months following members' role in violent protests around the country.