Month: January 2020

Are Virginia Politicians Really So Fragile They’d Pass A Bill Making It Illegal To Criticize Them?

Are Virginia Politicians Really So Fragile They’d Pass A Bill Making It Illegal To Criticize Them?

Authored by Daisy Luther via The Organic Prepper blog,

There’s a very good reason that Virginia wants to disarm civilians with a rash of new, unconstitutional laws. That’s because they seem to be modeling themselves after one of those countries where the government cannot be publicly criticized without great risk to the critic.

Yet another new bill is on the table and this one criminalizes criticism of certain government officials. The summary of HB1627, proposed by Delegate Jeffrey M. Bourne, reads:

Threats and harassment of certain officials and property; venue. Provides that certain crimes relating to threats and harassment may be prosecuted in the City of Richmond if the victim is the Governor, Governor-elect, Lieutenant Governor, Lieutenant Governor-elect, Attorney General, or Attorney General-elect, a member or employee of the General Assembly, a justice of the Supreme Court of Virginia, or a judge of the Court of Appeals of Virginia. In addition, threats to damage property may be prosecuted in the City of Richmond if the property is owned by the Commonwealth and located in the Capitol District. (source)

Oh, muffin. Have the people you’re oppressing been hurting your feelings? Then, by all means, while you’re actively trying to dismantle the Second Amendment, you should pass another unconstitutional law to attack the First Amendment.

It’s sort of like declaring a State of Emergency and calling gun owners white supremacists because you know you pushed them too hard and now you’re scared. But longer-lasting.

It’s also like communist China where critics can end up vanishing into a labor camp or watch their entire family be arrested. Or Thailand where lèse-majesté laws mean that a critic can be imprisoned for 3-15 years per count for any hurtful words about the king.

What constitutes a threat or harassment?

What exactly do the words “threats” and “harassment” mean in the terms of HB1627?

I’m glad you asked. If you take a look at some other codes that have been previously passed in Virginiastan, you’ll see that it can be something as simple as foul language.

Matt Palumbo wrote:

The bar for harassment is already as low as “vulgar language” in Virginia’s code 18.2-152.7:1:

If any person, with the intent to coerce, intimidate, or harass any person, shall use a computer or computer network to communicate obscene, vulgar, profane, lewd, lascivious, or indecent language, or make any suggestion or proposal of an obscene nature, or threaten any illegal or immoral act, he shall be guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor. 

Bourne’s bill proposes adding the following amendment:

A violation of this section may be prosecuted in the jurisdiction in which the communication was made or received or in the City of Richmond if the person subjected to the act is one of the following officials or employees of the Commonwealth: the Governor, Governor-elect, Lieutenant Governor, Lieutenant Governor-elect, Attorney General, or Attorney General-elect, a member or employee of the General Assembly, a justice of the Supreme Court of Virginia, or a judge of the Court of Appeals of Virginia.

Bourne’s Bill also changes the language of “he shall be guilty” to “he is guilty” of a Class 1 misdemeanor.

It’s insane that a bill defining harassment so vaguely is already on the books in Virginia – and it’s even more insane that someone is proposing expanding it so that politicians can legally intimidate their detractors with ease. (source)

Can you imagine the way this bill could be used to silence detractors? It’s so vague that it could be enforced completely arbitrarily.

If you say mean things on the internet, if you use swear words when talking about our elected officials, or if you happen to suggest some solutions like… I don’t know… is tarring and feathering considered illegal and immoral?…then you could be guilty under this proposed law. My comments section alone would fill an entire prison cellblock, not to mention the comments sections of other websites.

When a government plays stupid games like trying to disarm a bunch of gun-loving, rural-dwelling Virginians, that government is bound to get stupid prizes like those same Virginians marching on the capital and criticizing them on the internet.

People in public office open themselves up to criticism.

This is why we have a First Amendment. If anyone in the state should be allowed to be criticized, it’s the Governor, Governor-elect, Lieutenant Governor, Lieutenant Governor-elect, Attorney General, or Attorney General-elect, a member or employee of the General Assembly, a justice of the Supreme Court of Virginia, or a judge of the Court of Appeals of Virginia.

By the very nature of running for public office, one should expect to be the target of some verbal harassment. People who are so thin-skinned as to make a law about why nobody should be able to say mean things to or about them have no business whatsoever in government.

I wonder if this petition to recall Governor Northam counts as being abusive toward him? (Please take a moment to go sign it.) The bad news is, the Virginia state congress has been working on another bill meant to keep them in power by changing the rules for a recall.

HB842 reads:

Removal of public officers; petition requirements; signature requirements. Clarifies that the requirement that a petition for the removal of a public officer be signed under penalty of perjury applies only to the person or persons filing such petition with the circuit court. Registered voters signing the petition for purposes of reaching the required number of signatures shall not be required to sign under penalty of perjury. The bill also increases the required number of signatures to a number of registered voters in the locality equal to 25 percent, up from 10 percent, of the total number of votes cast at the last election for the office, and requires the signatures to be collected within a 60-day period. (source)

The hits just keep on coming in Virginia. Redistricting and a crapton of money from Michael Bloomberg during the election served to turn this state’s congress upside down. A legitimate protest has been meaningless to the government of Virginia. The members of the legislature don’t care what Virginians think and they’re arrogant enough to pass vaguely worded laws to silence their constituents.

This is the very definition of tyranny.

Don’t think it can’t happen in your state.

What’s happening in Virginia is a cautionary tale and political road map for what will soon happen in the rest of the country.

  • First, they took over the legislature by redrawing districts and dumping in millions of dollars from out of state.

  • Then they began changing the rules so they can’t be recalled.

  • Then they began imposing draconian gun control measures.

  • Then they set about to make criticism of them illegal.

Could it be any more clear that every step of this was planned ahead of time?


Tyler Durden

Thu, 01/30/2020 – 13:45

Tags
Law Crime

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/3aTyXA5 Tyler Durden

Michael Flynn Wants To Withdraw Guilty Plea, Alleges Prosecutors Threatened To Indict His Son

Two years after former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI, he is attempting to withdraw his plea and get his case tossed out. In a move that suggests he might be on to something, the Justice Department is backing away from a prison recommendation, saying probation would be a “reasonable sentence.”

The case stemmed from the federal investigation into the alleged links between Donald Trump’s presidential campaign and Russian interests. Flynn was accused of concealing conversations he had with a Russian ambassador during the Obama-to-Trump transition, as well as trying to hide his work representing the Turkish government. As part of his plea deal, Flynn promised to cooperate with Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller’s investigation.

Mueller’s eventual report failed to provide either the smoking gun that Trump’s opponents wanted or the complete exoneration that Trump’s supporters insist is in there. Now Flynn is accusing his former defense team of giving him bad advice, due to some complicated conflict of interest issues. (The Washington Post explains it here.) His new lawyers have also latched onto the problems the Justice Department’s Office of the Inspector General found with the warrant applications to snoop on Carter Page. Flynn’s team argues that prosecutors withheld potentially exculpatory evidence (such as misconduct during the investigation itself) and that a wayward prosecutor was trying to suborn perjury and trying to get him to make false statements.

Flynn is now claiming that he never lied and that he “succumb[ed] to the threats from the government to save my family.” (According to Flynn, the authorities threatened to indict his son as well.)

Meanwhile, prosecutors are backing off the idea that Flynn should do prison time, comparing his alleged crimes with those of former National Security Adviser Sandy Berger and Gen. David Petraeus, neither of whom went to jail for their crimes. (Berger lied about removing classified information from the National Archives. Petraeus pleaded guilty to mishandling classified information and providing access to his biographer with whom he was having an affair.) But the Justice Department still insists that Flynn is guilty and that his plea should be accepted.

A judge will have to decide what to do by the end of February, when Flynn is due to be sentenced. It’s difficult to get a judge to withdraw a guilty plea. On the other hand, the new evidence gives Flynn’s complaints more credibility than they would have had back in 2017.

One lesson: Prosecutors depend far too much on intimidating people into accepting plea deals rather than actually proving their case. Another: People in positions of power and influence are better able to push back against possible prosecutorial misconduct. Not everyone has the resources of Michael Flynn.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/2uKDioD
via IFTTT

Michael Flynn Wants To Withdraw Guilty Plea, Alleges Prosecutors Threatened To Indict His Son

Two years after former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI, he is attempting to withdraw his plea and get his case tossed out. In a move that suggests he might be on to something, the Justice Department is backing away from a prison recommendation, saying probation would be a “reasonable sentence.”

The case stemmed from the federal investigation into the alleged links between Donald Trump’s presidential campaign and Russian interests. Flynn was accused of concealing conversations he had with a Russian ambassador during the Obama-to-Trump transition, as well as trying to hide his work representing the Turkish government. As part of his plea deal, Flynn promised to cooperate with Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller’s investigation.

Mueller’s eventual report failed to provide either the smoking gun that Trump’s opponents wanted or the complete exoneration that Trump’s supporters insist is in there. Now Flynn is accusing his former defense team of giving him bad advice, due to some complicated conflict of interest issues. (The Washington Post explains it here.) His new lawyers have also latched onto the problems the Justice Department’s Office of the Inspector General found with the warrant applications to snoop on Carter Page. Flynn’s team argues that prosecutors withheld potentially exculpatory evidence (such as misconduct during the investigation itself) and that a wayward prosecutor was trying to suborn perjury and trying to get him to make false statements.

Flynn is now claiming that he never lied and that he “succumb[ed] to the threats from the government to save my family.” (According to Flynn, the authorities threatened to indict his son as well.)

Meanwhile, prosecutors are backing off the idea that Flynn should do prison time, comparing his alleged crimes with those of former National Security Adviser Sandy Berger and Gen. David Petraeus, neither of whom went to jail for their crimes. (Berger lied about removing classified information from the National Archives. Petraeus pleaded guilty to mishandling classified information and providing access to his biographer with whom he was having an affair.) But the Justice Department still insists that Flynn is guilty and that his plea should be accepted.

A judge will have to decide what to do by the end of February, when Flynn is due to be sentenced. It’s difficult to get a judge to withdraw a guilty plea. On the other hand, the new evidence gives Flynn’s complaints more credibility than they would have had back in 2017.

One lesson: Prosecutors depend far too much on intimidating people into accepting plea deals rather than actually proving their case. Another: People in positions of power and influence are better able to push back against possible prosecutorial misconduct. Not everyone has the resources of Michael Flynn.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/2uKDioD
via IFTTT

Wawa Customers’ Payment Data Is Being Offered For Sale Online After Massive Data Breach

Wawa Customers’ Payment Data Is Being Offered For Sale Online After Massive Data Breach

Things just got worse for Wawa’s after the company’s recent massive data breach announced in December. 

Now, it appears that credit and debit card information belonging to the chain’s customers is being offered for sale online, according to Bloomberg. The data breach “ranks among the largest payment card breaches of 2019, and of all time” said fraud intelligence company Gemini Advisory. 

The data breach was announced back in December. Gemini has since found that data from cards used at Wawa stores is available for sale on “Joker’s Stash”, a notorious online marketplace where credit card information is often bought and sold. 

On Monday, data from 100,000 cards became available but Joker’s Stash claimed it had data on 30 million cards of Wawa customers. It’s likely that more data will be released in batches over the next 12 to 18 months, Gemini said. 

Wawa says it is “aware of reports of criminal attempts to sell come customer payment card information” and has alerted its payment card processor, payment card brands and card issuers in order to try and preemptively address the issue.

Wawa has also offered its customers a year of free credit monitoring, ostensibly so they can watch their credit decline in real time as their accounts are fraudulently used by 13 year olds in Russia to order toy drones and Facebook ads against whatever Democratic candidate is running against President Trump this year.  

The breach came as a result of malware running on Wawa payment processors from March until December of last year. “Potentially all” Wawa locations were compromised, according to CEO Chris Gheysens. 

Wawa said the breach was contained 2 days after it was found and that they remained confident that  “…only payment card information was involved, and that no debit card PIN numbers, credit card CVV2 numbers or other personal information were involved.”


Tyler Durden

Thu, 01/30/2020 – 13:30

Tags
Technology Internet
Business Finance

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2OcwV4y Tyler Durden

Democrat Congressional Committee Demands Google Bury “Climate Misinformation”

Democrat Congressional Committee Demands Google Bury “Climate Misinformation”

Authored by Eric Worrall via WattsUpWithThat.com,

The U.S. House of Representatives Select Committee on the Climate Crisis has demanded Google demonetize climate skeptics, and provide education to millions of people who have been exposed to “dangerous misinformation”.

The key actions demanded:

  • Stop promoting climate denial and climate disinformation videos by removing them immediately from the platform’s recommendation algorithm.

  • Add ‘climate misinformation’ to the platform’s list of borderline content

  • Stop monetising videos that promote harmful misinformation and falsehoods about the causes and effects of the climate crisis.

  • Take steps to correct the record for millions of users who have been exposed to the climate misinformation on YouTube.

The people who wrote that letter seem to believe ordinary people are too stupid to figure things out for themselves; they think voters have to be guided into making acceptable choices, by experts like the Democrat majority members of The U.S. House of Representatives Select Committee on the Climate Crisis.

*  *  *

Update(EW): Elizabeth Warren has just announced criminal penalties for tech companies which spread “disinformation”, if the purpose of that alleged disinformation is judged to voter suppression.


Tyler Durden

Thu, 01/30/2020 – 13:10

Tags
Environment
Politics

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/3aRCOhf Tyler Durden

For the Third Year in a Row, California Legislators Have Killed a Promising Housing Reform Bill

A major housing reform bill failed in California yesterday. Again.

The bill, SB 50, would have allowed denser housing construction near transit stops and job centers and would have legalized four-unit homes on almost all residential parcels statewide. The California Senate voted 18–15 in its favor, but the bill needed a majority, not just a plurality, of the 40-member Senate to pass. A number of lawmakers were absent or abstained, so the legislation is basically dead. (There’s a chance that it could be brought up for a second vote today, but that is very unlikely.)

This is the third year in a row that a version of this bill has failed to pass.

The arguments against SB 50 on the Senate floor were varied, with senators saying it would encourage building in wildfire zones, spur gentrification, take too much control from cities, and/or demonize owners of single-family homes.

Throughout the legislative process, the bill’s author, Sen. Scott Weiner (D–San Francisco), kept amending his legislation to appeal to his bill’s two biggest critics: local governments and “equity groups.” To appease the latter, developers benefiting from the bill’s upzoning provisions would have to rent out as many as 25 percent of the new units they’d build to low-income renters at below-market rates. Another provision in the bill would have delayed the bill’s effect for five years in “sensitive communities” and prevented the development of new apartments on land that hosted tenants in the last seven years.

In January, Wiener amended SB 50 again to create more flexibility for local governments. So long as they zoned for an equivalent amount of new housing, they wouldn’t have to follow the bill’s specific requirements about upzoning near transit and job centers.

That was enough to get a sizable number of local officials and local governments on board, including a lot of tightly zoned Silicon Valley suburbs. But Weiner failed to secure the support of a single Los Angeles–area senator. And equity advocates continued to give the legislation the cold shoulder. They argue that Wiener’s legislation, by allowing for the development of new market-rate housing, will only allow unaffordable luxury developments being built, doing nothing to help low-income renters.

Last week, a coalition of these organizations sent a letter to Wiener announcing their opposition to the bill. SB 50 “will exacerbate the housing challenges experienced by low-income people, people of color, and other vulnerable people,” they wrote.

The concern is understandable but misplaced. It is true that new market-rate buildings will be unaffordable to a majority of renters. But even expensive market-rate housing improves housing affordability for everyone. The more high-end apartments that are built, the fewer high-income earners will be going around bidding up the price of older, lower-rent units. That expands the number of moderately priced units available to people with incomes, helping to keep rents stable.

This process is known as filtering, and it is the foundation of the YIMBY argument for allowing the construction of more market-rate housing as a solution to California’s housing crisis.

Some affordable housing advocates, including many of SB 50’s critics, argue that the filtering process takes a long time and doesn’t ultimately help those at the bottom of the income ladder. Yet recent research suggests that filtering can have an almost immediate, positive effect on affordability. And if the pace of filtering is the problem, the solution is to allow even more market-rate development, speeding the process along.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/2OdZSNr
via IFTTT

From the Archives: February 2020

15 Years Ago

February 2005

“If the Republicans started aggressively trying to overturn Roe v. Wade or to outlaw all legal protections for same-sex couples, it would likely alienate many moderates—particularly if national security became a less prominent issue, or a less advantageous one for the GOP. Meanwhile, a pro-choice, pro–gay rights Republican in the Arnold Schwarzenegger mold would lose some ‘values voters’ who would either switch to a more conservative third-party candidate or stay home, but [such a candidate] would likely pick up a lot of votes from the more libertarian independents uneasy with the influence of the religious right.”
Cathy Young
“The ‘Values’ Panic”

“There are three good reasons to be skeptical that November 3 sounded the death knell for old-style political journalism. First, every presidential election since 1960, if not earlier, has been followed by increasingly louder whither-journalism sessions. It was only four years ago that the major networks and newspapers were vowing never again to get bamboozled by Election Day exit polls. Needless to say, such fretting does not always produce reforms.”
Matt Welch
“That Old, Tired Balancing Act”

20 Years Ago

February 2000

“David Sumpter…has received and served a criminal sentence for marijuana possession. The state of Indiana isn’t through with him, though; it wants to punish him again for the same offense. Officially, the state is trying to collect a ‘controlled substance excise tax,’ under a law that the Indiana Supreme Court declared unconstitutional in 1995.”
Stephen Hayes
“Pot Stickers”

“Together these events signal a development that was bound to arrive sooner or later: America’s high-tech industry is now officially under assault from America’s other most successful industry, the litigation business. If we’re lucky, Silicon Valley will now realize that it’s in the same boat with conventional businesses that have come under courtroom attack—and perhaps begin to think about how best to unite in resistance.”
Walter Olson
“Gold Bugs”

25 Years Ago

February 1995

“The cost of processing and conveying information will consume a steadily growing fraction of every budget, private and public, for the rest of our lives, and quite possibly for the rest of American history. Manufacturing, transportation, energy, finance, education, medical care—the prosperity of almost every sector of the economy will hinge on telecommunications and information processing. Growing the information economy will be as critical to our national wealth as maintaining a stable currency.”
Peter Huber
“Communication Cleanup”

“Ideologically, Republican legislative gains represent a victory for numerous organizations, think tanks, and activists organized in the past few years to combat government expansion. The term-limits movement, the ‘wise-use’ and property-rights movements, taxpayer associations, gun-rights organizations, and the rejuvenated small-business lobby all helped provide Republican candidates with issues, foot soldiers, and momentum.”
John Hood
“State House Sweep”

40 Years Ago

February 1980

“Now if the members of [the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG)], or any other medical organization, wish to proselytize for hospital delivery, issue policy statements, and present evidence to document the reasons for their views, that is their right. But they go much further, threatening and intimidating those who do not agree with their stand. Many doctors are refusing to give prenatal care to women who are planning an out-of-hospital delivery….Often their refusal comes from a fear of reprisal—loss of hospital privileges or withdrawal of insurance coverage—rather than from genuine acceptance of ACOG’s policy on home birth.”
Sarah Foster
“Look What the Stork Brought to Phoenix!”

45 Years Ago

February 1975

“In 1976 the liberals will attempt to resurrect that old Kennedy magic through Ted Kennedy, but at this stage it does not look as though the youngest Kennedy brother has the necessary equipment to carry it off. His intellectual shortcomings prompted his own father to make unflattering comments about him, and his crass stupidity (if not criminal negligence) at Chappaquiddick is bound to hurt him in the same manner Watergate all but castrated Richard Nixon.”
Jerome Tuccille
“The Failure of the New Deal Coalition”

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/36yXXJC
via IFTTT

From the Archives: February 2020

15 Years Ago

February 2005

“If the Republicans started aggressively trying to overturn Roe v. Wade or to outlaw all legal protections for same-sex couples, it would likely alienate many moderates—particularly if national security became a less prominent issue, or a less advantageous one for the GOP. Meanwhile, a pro-choice, pro–gay rights Republican in the Arnold Schwarzenegger mold would lose some ‘values voters’ who would either switch to a more conservative third-party candidate or stay home, but [such a candidate] would likely pick up a lot of votes from the more libertarian independents uneasy with the influence of the religious right.”
Cathy Young
“The ‘Values’ Panic”

“There are three good reasons to be skeptical that November 3 sounded the death knell for old-style political journalism. First, every presidential election since 1960, if not earlier, has been followed by increasingly louder whither-journalism sessions. It was only four years ago that the major networks and newspapers were vowing never again to get bamboozled by Election Day exit polls. Needless to say, such fretting does not always produce reforms.”
Matt Welch
“That Old, Tired Balancing Act”

20 Years Ago

February 2000

“David Sumpter…has received and served a criminal sentence for marijuana possession. The state of Indiana isn’t through with him, though; it wants to punish him again for the same offense. Officially, the state is trying to collect a ‘controlled substance excise tax,’ under a law that the Indiana Supreme Court declared unconstitutional in 1995.”
Stephen Hayes
“Pot Stickers”

“Together these events signal a development that was bound to arrive sooner or later: America’s high-tech industry is now officially under assault from America’s other most successful industry, the litigation business. If we’re lucky, Silicon Valley will now realize that it’s in the same boat with conventional businesses that have come under courtroom attack—and perhaps begin to think about how best to unite in resistance.”
Walter Olson
“Gold Bugs”

25 Years Ago

February 1995

“The cost of processing and conveying information will consume a steadily growing fraction of every budget, private and public, for the rest of our lives, and quite possibly for the rest of American history. Manufacturing, transportation, energy, finance, education, medical care—the prosperity of almost every sector of the economy will hinge on telecommunications and information processing. Growing the information economy will be as critical to our national wealth as maintaining a stable currency.”
Peter Huber
“Communication Cleanup”

“Ideologically, Republican legislative gains represent a victory for numerous organizations, think tanks, and activists organized in the past few years to combat government expansion. The term-limits movement, the ‘wise-use’ and property-rights movements, taxpayer associations, gun-rights organizations, and the rejuvenated small-business lobby all helped provide Republican candidates with issues, foot soldiers, and momentum.”
John Hood
“State House Sweep”

40 Years Ago

February 1980

“Now if the members of [the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG)], or any other medical organization, wish to proselytize for hospital delivery, issue policy statements, and present evidence to document the reasons for their views, that is their right. But they go much further, threatening and intimidating those who do not agree with their stand. Many doctors are refusing to give prenatal care to women who are planning an out-of-hospital delivery….Often their refusal comes from a fear of reprisal—loss of hospital privileges or withdrawal of insurance coverage—rather than from genuine acceptance of ACOG’s policy on home birth.”
Sarah Foster
“Look What the Stork Brought to Phoenix!”

45 Years Ago

February 1975

“In 1976 the liberals will attempt to resurrect that old Kennedy magic through Ted Kennedy, but at this stage it does not look as though the youngest Kennedy brother has the necessary equipment to carry it off. His intellectual shortcomings prompted his own father to make unflattering comments about him, and his crass stupidity (if not criminal negligence) at Chappaquiddick is bound to hurt him in the same manner Watergate all but castrated Richard Nixon.”
Jerome Tuccille
“The Failure of the New Deal Coalition”

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/36yXXJC
via IFTTT

Mahmoud Abbas Seeks UN Security Council Rejection Of Trump’s ‘Deal Of The Century’

Mahmoud Abbas Seeks UN Security Council Rejection Of Trump’s ‘Deal Of The Century’

Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas plans to submit a draft resolution condemning Trump’s ‘deal of the century’  Mideast peace plan to the UN Security Council, where he’ll urge the council with the co-sponsorship of non-permanent member Tunisia (serving a 2-year term) to the vote on the matter.

“Of course we would like to see a strong, large opposition to this Trump plan,” Palestinian U.N. Ambassador Riyad Mansour told reporters. He slammed the US initiative unveiled Tuesday at the White House as “the opposite of peace” that would allow Israel “to annex” 40% of the Palestinian territory.

Abbas is due in Cairo Saturday for a meeting of Arab League foreign ministers, after which he’ll attend the African Union summit, among others where he’ll gen up diplomatic momentum against the US plan.

“We will continue the consultations. These consultations will be culminated in a visit by President Abbas within the next two weeks to the Security Council, in which he will put before the entire international community the reaction of the Palestinian people and the Palestinian leadership to this onslaught against the national rights of the Palestinian people by the Trump administration,” Mansour said further.

The Palestine representative explained: “We will also be consulting with everyone,” and added, “Hopefully, by that time we will have the agreement on the text that the Security Council will vote on it.”

The Trump plan’s unveiling alongside Israeli PM Netanyahu this week immediately unleashed fierce protests and clashes with police in the West Bank.

Meanwhile, immediately following Trump’s unveiling details of the plan, which critics argue demanded few if any significant concessions from the Israeli side, Netanyahu announced that Israel will move forward to vote Sunday to annex some 30% of all West Bank territory.

Netanyahu said that “Israel will apply its laws to the Jordan Valley and to the Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria.” This means a million or so Palestinian residents could come under Israeli rule, which sparked a fierce backlash both internationally and among some members of US Congress. 

Aside from Hamas and the Palestinian Authority under Abbas immediately rejecting the plan to which they were not privy, nor had any negotiating role (after already declaring it would be dead on arrival), Turkey was among the first internationally to condemn it.

It also appears there won’t be much support at the UN for the new plan: “U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres says the United Nations remains committed to supporting Palestinians and Israelis in resolving their conflict on the basis of U.N. resolutions, international law and bilateral agreements,” the AP reported. However, securing a UN Security Council vote is quite another thing.

Referencing the the pre-1967 borders, UN spokesman Stephane Dujarric said, “The position of the United Nations on the two-State solution has been defined, throughout the years, by relevant Security Council and General Assembly resolutions by which the Secretariat is bound.”


Tyler Durden

Thu, 01/30/2020 – 12:55

Tags
Politics
War Conflict

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2RGuvNw Tyler Durden

Stocks, Bond Yields Tumble After CDC Confirms First Person-To-Person Virus Spread In US

Stocks, Bond Yields Tumble After CDC Confirms First Person-To-Person Virus Spread In US

Well that changes things…

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and Illinois public health officials confirmed Thursday the nation’s first person-to-person transmission of the coronavirus.

The new patient is the spouse of the Chicago woman who brought the infection back from Wuhan, China, the epicenter of the outbreak, CDC officials said during a press briefing.

Equity markets, desperate to believe that this is contained… are catching on…

And 30Y Yields are about to break to a 1 handle…

It would appear that WHO has no choice but to declare emergency now.

“These developments in terms of the evolution of the outbreak and further development of transmission, these are of grave concern and has spurred countries into action,” Dr. Mike Ryan, executive director of the WHO’s health emergencies program said.

“What we know at this stage, this is still obviously a very active outbreak and information is being updated and changing by the hour.”

As a reminder, in 2003 there was NO human-to-human transmission of SARS in the US.

Developing…


Tyler Durden

Thu, 01/30/2020 – 12:41

Tags
Health Medical Pharma
Disaster Accident

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2RFCryz Tyler Durden