Facebook Algorithm Flags, Removes Declaration of Independence Text as Hate Speech

America’s founding document might be too politically incorrect for Facebook, which flagged and removed a post consisting almost entirely of text from the Declaration of Independence. The excerpt, posted by a small community newspaper in Texas, apparently violated the social media site’s policies against hate speech.

Since June 24, the Liberty County Vindicator of Liberty County, Texas, has been sharing daily excerpts from the declaration in the run up to July Fourth. The idea was to encourage historical literacy among the Vindicator‘s readers.

The first nine such posts of the project went up without incident.

“But part 10,” writes Vindicator managing editor Casey Stinnett, “did not appear. Instead, The Vindicator received a notice from Facebook saying that the post ‘goes against our standards on hate speech.'”

The post in question contained paragraphs 27 through 31 of the Declaration of Independence, the grievance section of the document wherein the put-upon colonists detail all the irreconcilable differences they have with King George III.

Stinnett says that he cannot be sure which exact grievance ran afoul of Facebook’s policy, but he assumes that it’s paragraph 31, which excoriates the King for inciting “domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavored to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages.”

The removal of the post was an automated action, and Stinnett sent a “feedback message” to Facebook with the hopes of reaching a human being who could then exempt the Declaration of Independence from its hate speech restrictions.

Fearful that sharing more of the text might trigger the deletion of its Facebook page, The Vindicator has suspended its serialization of the declaration.

In his article, Stinnett is remarkably sanguine about this censorship. While unhappy about the decision, he reminds readers “that Facebook is a business corporation, not the government, and as such it is allowed to restrict use of its services as long as those restrictions do not violate any laws. Plus, The Vindicator is using Facebook for free, so the newspaper has little grounds for complaint other than the silliness of it.”

Of course, Facebook’s actions here are silly. They demonstrate a problem with automated enforcement of hate speech policies, which is that a robot trained to spot politically incorrect language isn’t smart enough to detect when that language is part of a historically significant document.

None of this is meant as a defense of referring to Native Americans as “savages.” That phrasing is clearly racist and serves as another example of the American Revolution’s mixed legacy; one that won crucial liberties for a certain segment of the population, while continuing to deny those same liberties to Native Americans and African slaves. But by allowing the less controversial parts of the declaration to be shared while deleting the reference to “Indian savages,” Facebook succeeds only in whitewashing America’s founding just as we get ready to celebrate it.

A more thoughtful approach to Independence Day—for both celebrants and social media companies alike—would be to grapple with those historical demons.

from Hit & Run https://ift.tt/2z3CMno
via IFTTT

Snyder: Civil Unrest Is Here, Prepare For A “Summer Of Rage”

Authored by Michael Snyder via The Economic Collapse blog,

On Friday, Michael Moore went on Bill Maher’s HBO show and suggested that the U.S. military would side with progressives in a civil war against Donald Trump.  You can watch Moore make these comments on YouTube right here

The very next day, Antifa thugs violently clashed with pro-Trump conservatives that had gathered for a prayer rally on the streets of Portland, Oregon. 

Flash-bang grenades were thrown by Antifa activists, the police confiscated “mace, clubs, gloves with reinforced knuckles, batons, knives and handgun clips”, and many were injured and had to be taken to the hospital.  The violence was so dramatic that some are actually calling this the first skirmish in America’s next civil war. 

Last week, a shocking poll found that 31 percent of all Americans believe that there will be a civil war in America within the next five years and that 59 percent of Americans believe that Donald Trump’s opponents will resort to violence.  But after the events of this past weekend, we no longer have to wonder if civil unrest is coming to America.  Civil unrest is already here, and it is going to get much worse in the months ahead.

The next several months are being billed as a “summer of rage”.  Progressive leaders continue to insist that they are “the majority” and that it is time for them to “start acting like the majority”.

Of course they aren’t talking about mobilizing voters and taking the country back at the polls in November.

Instead, they are talking about more direct action.

For example, Michael Moore told Bill Maher that if they don’t act now, Americans are going to deeply regret not rising up against “fascism” while there was still time to do so

Documentary filmmaker Michael Moore was fired up on Friday night’s “Real Time,” telling host Bill Maher that now is the time to stand together to stop the “madness” in the Trump administration, even comparing it to the dystopian world seen in “The Handmaid’s Tale.”

“We are living ‘The Handmaid’s Tale,’” Moore said. “This is a serious point. The best part of the show is the flashbacks, where she tries to figure out where was the point where it was too late. Where was the point that if we all just had risen up, just done something? But because it happens in little increments. That’s how fascism works.”

And Michael Moore certainly intends to be at the tip of the spear.

In fact, he also told Bill Maher that he plans “to join a million other Americans to surround the United States Capitol” to protest Donald Trump’s nominee for the Supreme Court.

Of course we don’t even know who the nominee will be yet.  There are rumblings that it could be Amy Coney Barrett, and if that is the case the left is really going to freak out then.

Chris Matthews of MSNBC is speaking in apocalyptic terms as well.  He says that this is a time “to fight”, and he is convinced that “it’s gonna be almost like Spanish Civil War stuff”

“So I would say I think this is gonna be the fight of the century,” he told MSNBC. “I think the Democrats have to say no way. No one passes this line. I think it’s gonna be almost like Spanish Civil War stuff – you watch!”

“It’s time for Democrats to play Hardball,” he added. “I’m Chris Matthews and I’m urging them to do just that. There are times to fight and this is one of them.”

I don’t think that most conservatives really understand what is happening.

These radical leftists are ready to put their lives on the line.  They are entirely convinced that Donald Trump is another version of Hitler and that Trump supporters are all a bunch of fascists, and they truly believe that they need to do whatever is possible to fight “the rising tide of fascism” in this country.

The following excerpt from an opinion piece by Charles M. Blow in the New York Times is a glimpse into how these crazed progressives currently view Donald Trump…

He is a racist who disparages black and brown people, whether they be immigrants, Muslims, people from Haiti and Africa, Barack Obama, the mayor of San Juan or Maxine Waters. People equivocate about it and excuse it.

He is attacking the press in the most aggressive of terms so that what they reveal about him will be viewed with skepticism.

He is attempting to weaken our institutions, our protocols and conventions, our faith in the truth, our sense of honor and our respect for the rule of law.

To these progressives, there is no greater cause then resisting Donald Trump and trying to take America back.

During his conversation with Bill Maher, Michael Moore insisted that the “moment is now” and that this movement is something worth giving your life for

“What are people willing to commit to? What would you give your life for?” Moore said. “What would you be willing to actually put yourself on the line for? That moment is now. We are going to lose our democracy if we haven’t already. We have no choice, my friends. We all have to rise up.”

When people are ready to die for a cause, suddenly they will do things that they would not normally do.

Normally, Americans do not throw flash-bang grenades at one another, but that is precisely what happened in Portland over the weekend.  Trump supporters that had gathered to pray were caught unprepared for the violence that erupted, and one woman was entirely convinced that Antifa had come down there to “try to murder us”

‘They were throwing rocks, they were throwing bottles, you need to tell the truth,’ one middle-aged woman in a Make America Great Again hat said after the clashes, addressing media in remarks caught on camera.

‘No one on our side did anything violent, everything was self defense,’ she claimed. ‘You guys have to stop it because you’re encouraging these people to come down here and try to murder us.’

You can watch five minutes of footage from the Portland riot here.  Even though I have been warning that this is coming for a very long time, even I was greatly shocked by the ferocity of the violence.

The thin veneer of civilization that we all take for granted is rapidly disappearing, and it is going to be exceedingly hard to stop civil unrest from erupting in major cities all over the nation.

As I end this article today, let me leave you with an ominous warning from a progressive that was just published by the Washington Post

The backlash is coming. It is the deserved consequence of minority-rule government protecting the rich over everybody else, corporations over workers, whites over nonwhites and despots over democracies. It will explode, God willing, at the ballot box and not in the streets.

You can only ignore the will of the people for so long and get away with it.

via RSS https://ift.tt/2MK7a8o Tyler Durden

Conservatives #BoycottWalmart for Selling ‘Impeach 45’ Onesies

Enraged that Walmart’s website would dare sell clothing imprinted with the phrase “Impeach 45,” a group of conservatives has launched a #BoycottWalmart campaign.

It started Monday night when Ryan Fournier, chairman of Students for Trump, tweeted about a line of “Impeach 45” onesies advertised on Walmart’s website. (The “45” is a reference to Donald Trump’s status as 45th president of the United States.) “What kind of message are you trying to send?” Fournier wrote:

It didn’t take long for Fournier’s tweet to go viral, and soon #BoycottWalmart was trending on Twitter:

What those users didn’t realize was that Walmart is also selling a variety of pro-Trump hats and shirts. The company isn’t pushing a liberal, anti-Trump agenda; it’s just trying to get people to buy clothes.

Nor is Walmart itself selling the “Impeach 45” clothing. As noted by Bloomberg, the real sellers are companies such as Old Glory and Teespring Inc., which advertise on Walmart’s website and give the retail giant a cut of the profits. (Some of the “Impeach 45” merchandise seems to have disappeared from Walmart’s website after Fournier’s tweet.)

People have the right to deny Walmart their business for any reason they please. But conservatives love to call easily offended liberals “snowflakes.” In this case the snowflakes are the ones who can’t handle the sight of swag sporting a viewpoint they don’t agree with.

from Hit & Run https://ift.tt/2KEp2nD
via IFTTT

Imran Awan Gets Sweetheart Plea Deal; DOJ Won’t Prosecute Alleged Spy Ring, Cybercrimes

The Department of Justice won’t prosecute Imran Awan, a former IT administrator for Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz and dozens of other Democrats, for allegations of cybersecurity breaches, theft and potential espionage, as part of a plea agreement one one count of unrelated bank fraud. 

After the entry of your client’s plea of guilty to the offense identified in paragraph 1 above, your client will not be charged with any non-violent criminal offense in violation of Federal or District of Columbia law which was committed within the District of Columbia by your client prior to the execution of this Agreement -Awan Plea Agreement

Awan withdrew hundreds of thousands of dollars after lying on a mortgage application and pretending to have a medical emergency that allowed him to drain his wife’s retirement account. He then wired large sums of money to Pakistan in January, 2017.

When word of a plea agreement emerged last week, President Trump was none too pleased: 

Awan and several family members worked for Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz along with 20% of House Democrats as IT staffers who held – as the House Inspector General called it – the “keys to the kingdom,” when it came to accessing confidential information on Congressional computer systems. 

And while ample evidence of potential crimes were found by the House Inspector General, the DOJ says they found no evidence of wrongdoing.

The Department of Justice said it “found no evidence that [Imran] illegally removed House data from the House network or from House Members’ offices, stole the House Democratic Caucus Server, stole or destroyed House information technology equipment, or improperly accessed or transferred government information.”

That statement appears to take issue — without explaining how — with the findings of the House’s Nancy Pelosi-appointed inspector general, its top law enforcement official, the sergeant-at-arms, and the statements of multiple Democratic aides.

In September 2016, the House Office of Inspector General gave House leaders a presentation that alleged that Alvi, Imran, brothers Abid Awan and Jamal Awan, and a friend were logging into the servers of members who had previously fired him and funneling data off the network. It said evidence “suggests steps are being taken to conceal their activity” and that their behavior mirrored a “classic method for insiders to exfiltrate data from an organization.”

Server logs show, it said, that Awan family members made “unauthorized access” to congressional servers in violation of House rules by logging into the servers of members who they didn’t work for. –Daily Caller

Awan was arrested at Dulles airport while attempting to flee the country – one day after reports emerged that the FBI had seized a number of “smashed hard drives” and other computer equipment from his residence. While only charged with bank fraud, there is ample evidence that the Awans were spying on members of Congress through their access to highly-sensitive information on computers, servers and other electronic devices belonging to members of Congress. 

Luke Rosiak of the Daily Caller has compiled the most comprehensive coverage of the Awan situation from start to finish – and outlines exactly why the Awans’ conduct warranted serious inquiry. 

On Feb. 3, 2017, Paul Irving, the House’s top law enforcement officer, wrote in a letter to the Committee on House Administration that soon after it became evidence, the server went “missing.”

The letter continued: “Based upon the evidence gathered to this point, we have concluded the employees are an ongoing and serious risk to the House of Representatives, possibly threatening the integrity of our information systems.”

Imran, Abid, Jamal, Alvi and a friend were banned from the House network the same day Kiko sent the letter.

The alleged wrongdoing consisted of two separate issues.

The first was the cybersecurity issues. In an April 2018 hearing spurred by the Awan case, Chief Administrative Officer Phil Kiko testified: “The bookend to the outside threat is the insider threat. Tremendous efforts are dedicated to protecting the House against these outside threats, however these efforts are undermined when these employees do not adhere to and thumb their nose at our information security policy, and that’s a risk in my opinion we cannot afford.”

The second was a suspected theft scheme. Wendy Anderson, a former chief of staff for Rep. Yvette Clarke, told House investigators she believed Abid was working with ex-Clarke aide Shelley Davis to steal equipment, and described coming in on a Saturday to find so many pieces of equipment, including iPods and Apple TVs, that it “looked like Christmas.

Meanwhile, as we noted in June, the judge in the Awan case, Tanya Chutkan, was appointed to the D.C. US District Court by President Obama on June 5, 2014, after Chutkan had contributed to him for years.

Opensecrets.org

Prior to her appointment to the District Court, she was a partner at law firm Boies Schiller & Flexner (BSF) where she represented scandal-plagued biotechnology company Theranos – which hired Fusion GPS to threaten the news media. Because of this, Chutkan had to recuse herself from two cases involving Fusion GPS.

Meanwhile, BSF attorney and crisis management expert Karen Dunn – who prepped Hillary Clinton for debates and served as Associate White House Counsel to Obama – represents Hillary Clinton aide Huma Abedin. Another BSF attorney, Dawn Smalls, was John Podesta’s assistant while he was Obama’s Chief of Staff. And if you still had doubts over their politics, BSF also republished an article critical of Donald Trump in their “News & Events” section.

In short, the Judge in the Awan case – appointed by Obama after years of contributing to him, was a partner at a very Clinton-friendly law firm. It should also be noted that Obama appointed Chutkan’s husband, Peter Krauthammer, to the D.C. Superior Court in 2011. 

The left has, of course, seized upon the plea deal to suggest that there was no wrongdoing. 

via RSS https://ift.tt/2lSuOEr Tyler Durden

Boycott: Walmart Under Fire For Selling “Impeach 45” Apparel

Walmart is facing backlash from conservatives after it was discovered Monday that the superstore is carrying “Impeach 45” merchandise on its website.

The discovery was brought to mainstream attention by Ryan Fournier, chairman of the group Students for Trump, who asked the company in a Tweet “@walmart why are you selling Impeach 45 baby clothes on your website?????”

Since then, a boycott has gone viral under the hashtag #BoycottWalmart:

The baby One Piece on the site currently has 46 one-star reviews, such as “I would never buy this and I cannot believe this is being promoted…,” and “I bought this for the babies that want it, but it didn’t fit since they’re all full grown adults. Do you have bibs perhaps? They tend to drool a lot when they speak of 45, especially that Congresswoman from California.”

Trump HUD appointee Lynne Patton said: “Imagine if they sold “Impeach 44” shirts? @Walmart would be called racist by every single celebrity on the internet & be forced to close for diversity training.”

“#BoycottWalmart starts now. As long as you keep selling Impeach Trump gear my family will no longer shop at your stores.”

Another Twitter user pointed out that Amazon is also selling the controversial apparel:

The slogan was first programmed into the American psyche by Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA) who has led chants of “Impeach 45” at political rallies.

The anti-Trump apparel isn’t the first time Walmart has come under fire for divisive clothing. In 2016, they removed a range of “black lives matter” apparel from their shelves after the National Fraternal Order of Police (NFOP), a police advocacy group, accused Walmart of “profiting from racial division,” reports Pritha Paul of the International Business Times

The line of clothing, sold by a third party manufacturer on Walmart.com, which stirred up controversy at the time were merchandize containing the caption “Bulletproof — Black Lives Matter.” –International Business Times

“Like other online retailers, we have a marketplace with millions of items offered by third parties that includes Blue Lives Matter, Black Lives Matter and All Lives Matter merchandise. After hearing concerns from customers, we are removing the specific item with the ‘bulletproof’ reference,” a Walmart spokesman told Fortune in a statement.

via RSS https://ift.tt/2z7lVjx Tyler Durden

“Stock Markets Look Ever More Like Ponzi Schemes”

Authored by Richard Murphy via Tax Research UK blog,

The FT has reported this morning that:

Debt at UK listed companies has soared to hit a record high of £390bn as companies have scrambled to maintain dividend payouts in response to shareholder demand despite weak profitability.

They added:

UK plc’s net debt has surpassed pre-crisis levels to reach £390.7bn in the 2017-18 financial year, according to analysis from Link Asset Services, which assessed balance sheet data from 440 UK listed companies.

So what, you might ask? Does it matter that companies are making sense of low-interest rates to raise money when I am saying that government could and should be doing the same thing?

Actually, yes it does. And that’s because of what the cash is being used for. Borrowing for investment makes sense. Borrowing to fund revenue investment (that is training, for example, which cannot go on the balance sheet but still adds value to the business) makes sense. But borrowing to pay a dividend when current profits and cash flow would not support it? No, that makes no sense at all.

Unless, of course, you are CEO on a large share price linked bonus package and your aim is to manipulate the market price of the company. It is that manipulation that is going on here, I suggest. These loans are being used to artificially inflate share prices.

The problem is systemic. In the US the problem is share buybacks, which I read recently have exceeded $5 trillion in the last decade, meaning that US companies are now by far the biggest buyers of their own shares. That is, once again, market manipulation.

And this manipulation does matter.

People think their savings and pensions are safe because of rising share prices. They do not realise it is all a con-trick.

And companies claim that their pension funds are better funded as a result of these share prices, and so they are meeting their obligations to their employees when that too is a con-trick. They may be insolvent when the truth is known, so serious is the fraud.

And sentiment is, wholly irrationally, but nonetheless definitely, based on the fact that if markets are high then all must be right in the world. After all, why else is the FTSE reported every hour on every news bulletin but to tell us the national financial mood?

And what is actually being reported is a fraud. The corporate world is not all right. It is out of ideas. And it is so bereft of ideas that it can’t even run outsourcing businesses, which were said to be the easiest thing in the world to get right.

And as fiasco after fiasco shows, the reports of well being in the form of the financial statements are themselves manipulated, or just blatantly cooked.

No one knows where the tipping point for any crisis will come from. I am not claiming I do. But the charade that current stock market valuations represent will be seen through some time soon. Those values are being maintained by Ponzi schemes. And such schemes always end in tears.

via RSS https://ift.tt/2u3JCnj Tyler Durden

NSA Purging Millions of Improperly Collected Call Records Is Important (and Not About Trump)

NSA ChipThe National Security Agency (NSA) has announced that it is deleting millions of phone and text records it has gathered since 2015, because it is holding a bunch of records it was not supposed to have.

Such discoveries are not unusual (which itself should be more of an outrage). The NSA previously stopped an entire type of record collection and retention (communications that were “about” a person of interest to the NSA) because the agency was getting its hands on private communication data it was not authorize to receive.

In this case, Congress passed the USA Freedom Act in 2015 to better control (and potentially limit) the NSA’s access to the metadata (that is, everything but the conversations’ actual content) of Americans’ communications. This reform was part of a backlash against the mass surveillance exposed by Edward Snowden, and the bill was passed after some privacy-minded lawmakers, such as Sens. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), forced a part of the Patriot Act to expire that was being used to justify mass amounts of domestic snooping.

Under the USA Freedom Act, the NSA no longer collects and combs through our communications metadata itself. Instead it now has to request records from telecommunications companies using strictly defined search terms. No more fishing expeditions. Allegedly.

The problem, as Charlie Savage of The New York Times uncovered, is that the telecom companies were accidentally sending too many records in response to NSA requests. And so the agency was receiving private personal information about Americans’ communications data that it neither asked for nor had the right to examine:

As a result, when the agency then fed those phone numbers back to the telecoms to get the communications logs of all of the people who had been in contact with its targets, the agency also gathered some data of people unconnected to the targets. The National Security Agency had no authority to collect their information.

“If the first information was incorrect, even though on its face it looked like any other number, then when we fed that back out, by definition we’d get records back on the second hop that we did not have authority to collect,” [an NSA spokesman] said.

This is a problem, and we don’t know how extensive it is as yet. The NSA requested more than 500 million telecom records just last year. It is unable to determine which records it has the authorization to collect, so it is purging all of them.

Earlier today, President Donald Trump weighed in with a tweet, unfortunately making it about himself:

This is not about Trump and it’s not about whether the FBI was appropriate or inappropriate in its surveillance and investigations of his former staff and their alleged ties to Russia. It’s about you and me and the government’s access to our private information and its poor management of this information. It may well be a disgrace. But it’s not part of the “Witch Hunt” that Trump believes is happening.

Trumpifying this NSA surveillance situation is a problem, because the environment of political polarization will inevitably lead to a situation where politically engaged people care only about how it affects Trump. Cato Senior Fellow Julian Sanchez rightfully tweeted out a worry that the response by the media could be to claim that this isn’t really a big deal since it doesn’t actually connect to the president. That would mean ignoring its effects on our own privacy.

Many of the same privacy-minded lawmakers who managed to force some of the surveillance authorities of the Patriot Act to expire also opposed the USA Freedom Act. Congressmen like Justin Amash (R-Mich.), Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), and Jared Polis (D-Colo.) voted against the bill because they believed it still gave the government too much power to collect our records without warrants. Sen. Paul rejected the USA Freedom Act for the same reason. He tweeted this response to Trump today:

Unfortunately, Trump has shown that he’s perfectly fine with snooping on Americans without a warrant as long as those Americans aren’t his buddies. He happily signed a bill in January renewing and expanding the government’s authority to secretly spy on Americans under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act Amendments.

from Hit & Run https://ift.tt/2MHX6g2
via IFTTT

Israel Poised For Complete Annexation Of West Bank, UN Warns

Just prior to a United Nations Human Rights Council meeting on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict this week, a UN legal expert has declared that Israel is moving closer to formal annexation of the West Bank

“After years of creeping Israeli de facto annexation of the large swathes of the West Bank through settlement expansion, the creation of closed military zones and other measures, Israel appears to be getting closer to enacting legislation that will formally annex parts of the West Bank,” UN official Michael Lynk said.

Israeli-occupied West Bank. Image via Newscom

Lynk’s warning was posted on the web site of the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (UNHRC) — the rights monitoring body that both the United States and Israel are boycotting, with the US recently stunning the council by announcing its pullout last month, citing a general anti-Israel bias.

The UN statement highlighted Israeli expansion: “This would amount to a profound violation of international law, and the impact of ongoing settlement expansion on human rights must not be ignored,” Lynk continued. “This is my third mission to the region since I assumed the mandate in May 2016, and the reports I received this week have painted the bleakest picture yet of the human rights situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory,” he said after returning from an information gathering mission to the region.

The statement also highlighted restriction on Palestinian movement, night raids and the lack of building approvals, and what the UNHRC has called a creeping de facto annexation of West Bank territory. Lynk will deliver a full and final presentation of his findings before the UN General Assembly 73rd session in October — this as a formal UN investigation into the recent shootings of hundreds of Palestinian protesters in Gaza by Israeli security forces is simultaneously underway, an inquiry which was also condemned by the United States and Israel in a May vote. 

This week will likely only serve to confirm in Ambassador Nikki Haley’s mind that the UNHRC is in her words issued in June, a “cesspool of political bias” as at the UNHRC on Monday a number of countries spoke under Agenda Item 7, which mandates consideration of Israeli human rights violations against Palestinians as a permanent agenda item, and which the Haley unsuccessfully tried to defeat at the General Assembly before deciding to quit the council. 

The US State Department has noted in an official statement, “No other nation has an entire agenda item dedicated to it at the Council. The continued existence of this agenda item is among the largest threats to the credibility of the Council.”

However, Monday’s session reveals that the firm US stance and behind the scenes diplomatic pressure may be having an impact. The Jerusalem Post reports that Western nations held a de facto boycott of the Agenda 7 debate in Geneva on Monday:

Only 22%, 43 nations out of the 193 UN countries who could have taken the floor, stood up to condemn Israel. France, which had initially signed up to speak, changed its mind at the last moment and was not present in the room when its name was called.

The silence marked a slim sign of continued success for the Israeli and US campaign to abolish the UNRHC mandate that requires a debate on Israeli actions against the Palestinians at every council session under Agenda Item 7.

Neither the US nor Israel, nor France were the room for the deliberations.

The Palestinian delegation, however, welcomed those states engaged in the “general debate of Item 7 [against] the will and wish of the occupying power to not participate in the debate on this item which deals with the illegal practices of the occupation and the refusal to comply with international humanitarian law.”

Palestinian Authority Ambassador Ibrahim Khraishi said, in words clearly directed at Israel and the US and their allies, that violators of Palestinian rights “should withdraw from the council and not come back until they change this approach that is destructive of law and morality and principles, and adds more radicalism and promotes terrorism.”

Some analysts have predicted that US absence from the UNHRC will give the Palestinian and Arab side more influence at the council; however, time will tell if more countries, like France this week, will eventually bow to US pressure. 

via RSS https://ift.tt/2z8wwL9 Tyler Durden

Critics of Corporate Campaign Cash Silent When Donors to Light Rail Initiatives Ink Light Rail Contracts

Worries about corporate cash buying elections have far more to do with the candidates and causes that the money is being spent on than any principled objection to monied interests influencing votes. Nothing illustrates this better than the double standards applied to corporate donations to light rail ballot initiatives.

In May, a Nashville light rail ballot initiative went down in flames, with two-thirds of voters rejecting it. A month later, The New York Times published a story pinning the blame on Charles and David Koch, who supposedly sunk Nashville’s initiative and others like it just to line their own pocket books. (Disclosure: Charles and David Koch have also given money to the nonprofit that publishes Reason.)

In the two weeks since the Times story’s release, public transit boosters in the media have spread this narrative far and wide.

“Thanks for exposing the ulterior motives of the Koch brothers, who oppose public transit projects as their conglomerate reaps profits from oil and gasoline production,” wrote Paul P. Skoutelas, the president of the American Public Transportation Association, in a letter to the Times.

“Excellent story showing how Kochs push their oil biz interests, disguised as philosophy,” tweeted Jane Mayer, a writer at The New Yorker. “The willingness of big money interests to attack local transit proposals should be a warning to Massachusetts,” wrote Renee Loth at The Boston Globe. Similar takes made the rounds on such progressive-leaning websites as Daily Kos, Common Dreams, Jalopnik, and Streetsblog.

Meanwhile, a far more direct and clear-cut example of corporations reaping benefits from their involvement in light-rail politics was going completely unnoticed.

A couple days after the Times piece hit newsstands, Phoenix’s Valley Metro transit agency announced that it was awarding a design contract for its 1.5-mile Northwest Phase II light rail extension to Jacobs Engineering Inc. The value of the contract has not been disclosed. What has been disclosed is Jacobs’ donations to the ballot initiative that made its new contract possible.

In 2015, the firm gave $10,000 to support Prop. 104, a transit initiative that boosted Phoenix’s sales tax to pay for building out its then-20-mile light rail network. Flush with Prop. 104–provided cash, the Phoenix City Council voted in 2016 to accelerate the Northwest Phase II timetable, and with it the need to take on contractors like Jacobs.

This kind of self-serving corporate activism in the norm for a firm like Jacobs. In 2016, for example, the company gave $50,000 to support Los Angeles’ Measure M, which approved $120 billion in spending on public transit improvements in the next 40 years. The measure passed with nearly 70 percent of the vote, and Jacobs is already cashing in. In 2017, the company was named as a subcontractor for “program management support services” for Measure M projects.

Plenty of other firms engage in this kind of behavior. The engineering consultants Parsons Brinckerhoff Inc. also donated $200,000 to support Measure M. The measure has since provided funding for a light rail extension the company had been hired to work on.

Another repeat donor is the engineering firm Siemens, which gave $5,000 to Phoenix’s Prop. 104 and has since been awarded a $57.9 million contract by Valley Metro to supply 11 light rail cars. A similar story played out in Seattle, where Siemens donated $50,000 to the city’s 2016 Sound Transit 3 ballot initiative, which would spend $54 billion adding 62 miles of light rail. The initiative passed, and Siemens then nabbed a $155 million contract to supply 30 new rail cars to the network.

Almost 90 percent of transportation ballot initiatives won in November 2017. Nearly 70 percent garnered voter approval in 2016. The years 2013, 2014, and 2015 all show the pass rate for public transit ballot initiatives hovering just above 70 percent. Given that these initiatives involve usually-loathed tax increases, this is a remarkable feat—one made possible in part by comically lopsided funding ratios between the “yes” and “no” campaigns.

Phoenix’s Prop 104 campaign saw the official “yes” campaign committee receive a little over $1 million in donations from contractors, engineering firms, trade unions, and others. The only two registered “No” campaign committees received about $4,000 combined.

The same goes for Seattle’s Sound Transit 3 initiative. The Seattle Times reported in October 2016—two weeks before voters went to the polls—that the pro–Sound Transit 3 side had scooped up over $3 million in donations, about 10 times more than the $300,000 opponents had been able to scrape together.

Los Angeles’ Measure M election saw $36,000 donated to the official No campaign. The Yes side received donations in excess of $10 million.

One might think that this repeated sequence of events, whereby corporate donors spend big on one-sided public transit campaigns and then ink contracts to build said transit, would provoke at least a little bit of concern from commenters who frame their criticism of anti-light rail campaign spending in terms of opposition to undue corporate influence.

Yet news about who gets the contracts to build light rail networks after the votes have been counted rarely appear outside trade publications. These stories certainly don’t appear on the front page of The New York Times. Should saintly light rail win on election day, that’s obviously the will of the people. Only when this anointed transit option loses do we need to go asking questions about what nefarious puppet masters deceived the voters.

from Hit & Run https://ift.tt/2MMVO3h
via IFTTT

Why Are The Sacramento Kings Mining Ethereum?

Authored by Molly Jane Zuckerman via CoinTelegraph.com,

The Sacramento Kings basketball team has teamed up with a crypto mining hardware firm to install mining machines in an indoor arena, with the crypto earnings funding a scholarship program, local news outlet The Sacramento Bee reported yesterday, June 28.

image courtesy of CoinTelegraph

The Kings have partnered with company MiningStore for the installation of Ethereum (ETH) mining machines in Sacramento’s Golden 1 Center. All crypto proceeds will go to multi-year scholarship program MiningForGood, which the Sacramento Bee describes as a charity for tech education and workforce development in Sacramento.

The first recipient of funding from the Kings will reportedly be an initiative for black communities in Sacramento called “Build. Black. Coalition.”

Vivek Ranadive, the Kings’ principal owner, said that the mining scholarship program aims to “inspire the next generation of tinkerers [sic] and thinkers to create change in their own community and around the globe.”

Ranadive calls the team’s crypto-mining plans “innovative,” stating:

“Opportunity begins when technology allows the world to find innovative solutions to complex problems.”

Mining Ethereum for charitable causes has already been tried out around the world. In February, UNICEF Australia asked PC gamers to mine ETH  in their downtime as a donation to Syrian children, and Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin donated $2.4 million in ETH to fund anti-aging research.

The Sacramento Bee notes that the Kings began accepting Bitcoin (BTC) for their team store in 2014 after partnering with BitPay.

via RSS https://ift.tt/2u1fgBW Tyler Durden