838: Hillary and the Vase

Link to Article

Archived Version

Wed, 29 Jun 2016 14:38

Image copyrightAFPImage caption Turkey has been alarmed by dramatic gains made by the Kurdish YPG militia in Syria Turkey has renewed its bombardment of Kurdish fighters of the People's Protection Units (YPG) inside Syria, prompting calls for restraint from the UN, US and EU.

Ankara says it is retaliating against what is calls provocations by the YPG, but it has long-warned against the YPG making territorial advances in northern Syria near its border.

Why is Turkey hostile to Kurdish rebels in Syria ? Turkey views the YPG as an extension of the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK), a Turkish-Kurdish rebel group fighting for autonomy since the 1980s.

Image copyrightGetty ImagesImage caption YPG fighters in Syria A ceasefire between Turkey and the PKK ended last year and clashes have since claimed hundreds of lives on both sides.

While Turkey is fighting against the PKK on its soil, neighbouring Syrian Kurds continue carving out a self-declared autonomous region known as Rojava, and the YPG has gained the trust of Turkey 's international allies in the fight against so-called Islamic State (IS).

What is the international reaction to Turkey's bombing of Kurds? The PKK is considered a "terrorist" organisation by the EU and the US , but Turkey has failed to convince its Western allies to do the same for the YPG in Syria .

The US State Department and Pentagon both pressed Turkey to immediately stop shelling the YPG and urged Syrian Kurds not to expand their areas of operation.

The EU also called on Turkey to stop shelling Syrian territory and refrain from further complicating the efforts of world powers to halt the hostilities.

The UN has urged Turkey to comply with international law in Syria .

How have the Syrian Kurds reacted to Turkey 's bombardment?Image copyrightGetty ImagesImage caption Syrian Democratic Forces take up positions in their battle against IS A Syrian Kurdish-led alliance, which also includes Arabs (Syrian Democratic Forces), has been advancing and taking over strategic areas from various armed Islamist groups despite Turkey 's ongoing bombardments.

The captured areas include Marea near the town of Azaz, which was included in Turkey's earlier plans for a "buffer zone" in northern Syria.

YPG spokesman Redur Khalil has said that the alliance's forces would advance until they "captured Azaz and expelled all the terrorists".

Why do Kurds accuse Turkey of backing IS and al-Qaeda-linked rebels? Kurds accuse Turkey of using the US-led coalition against IS as a cover to attack the Kurdish PKK in both Turkey and Iraq , and now against the YPG in northern Syria .

The US and EU consider the YPG as one of their most effective allies in the fight against IS.

The Kurds say that Turkey 's bombardment of their positions is helping IS to attack Kurdish-held frontline areas in Syria and Iraq .

IS militants attacked Syrian Kurdish villages south of Kobane a day after Turkey began shelling the YPG.

The Turkish bombardment has also angered Iraqi Kurds, since IS has increased its attacks against Iraqi Kurdish forces in the Makhmur area near the city of Mosul .

"Turkey shamelessly and openly backs IS and al-Qaeda terrorists against Kurdish freedom fighters," Sadi Pria, a top Iraqi Kurdish official in Irbil, has said.

What role does the PKK have in all this? Image copyrightGetty ImagesImage caption The aftermath of fighting between government troops and PKK fighters in south-eastern Turkey, January 2016 Syrian Kurds, including those leading the YPG, share the PKK's aspiration to establish an autonomous democratic confederation, but the YPG denies Turkey's claim that it is an extension of the PKK.

PKK leaders have repeatedly warned of a "total civil war" inside Turkey in retaliation for attacks against Syria 's Kurds.

Meanwhile, the Turkey-PKK battlefield has expanded from guerrilla fighting in the mountains to urban warfare in the heart of Turkey 's predominantly Kurdish cities, including in Diyarbakir .

Where is this heading? Turkey says it will continue to bombard the Syrian Kurds as long as it feels threatened by them.

The YPG will most probably ignore Turkey 's threats and continue its advances to capture more areas. In July 2015, the group took over the strategic border town of Tal Abyad despite Turkey 's threats not to do so.

On the other side of the border an escalation of the Turkey-PKK conflict is highly likely in the form of urban and rural warfare, especially after winter.

BBC Monitoring reports and analyses news from TV, radio, web and print media around the world. You can follow BBC Monitoring on Twitter and Facebook.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Wed, 29 Jun 2016 14:43

ISTANBUL'--President Recep Tayyip Erdogan said Wednesday that Turkey would continue shelling U.S.-backed Kurdish militants across the border in Syria, despite calls from Washington and other Western capitals to halt the attacks.

Turkish forces have shelled northern Syria repeatedly in recent days, targeting Kurdish forces that have capitalized on Russian airstrikes to seize new ground at the expense of rival forces backed by Turkey and...

Link to Article

Archived Version

Mon, 27 Jun 2016 13:59

Ticking the LGBT box on her weekly campaign checklist, Hillary Clinton made a ''surprise'' appearance at New York City's Gay Pride parade on Sunday.

With close aide Huma Abedin at her side, Clinton walked with New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio and Al Sharpton. Bill Clinton was nowhere to be found.

Multiple videos show the chaotic security scene as Secret Service agents, police and campaign staffers yell and push to keep the perimeter around Clinton moving.

One chap is looking forward to Bill serving as ''first lady.''

But nearly as quickly as she was there, she was gone. Reporters note Clinton exerted herself for four whole blocks.

''Four blocks later, HRC gets back into the Scooby van and leaves,'' NBC's Monica Alba tweeted.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Tue, 28 Jun 2016 15:58

Dublin, 3am. It's a Sunday morning in a Dublin apartment. ''It's G o'clock,'' cries the host. Six naked men line up to take a carefully measured dose of the drug known as G.

Get the measure wrong and you can become comatose; in the worst case scenario, you can die. A designated responsible person ticks their name off a chart so that they don't take the next dose too soon, and they down a shot of alcohol. After a while, sex resumes.

G '' short for GBL '' is made from common household chemicals. It's also a party drug which increases libido. Along with the drugs crystal meth, GBH and mephadrone, it has become common in sex parties.

In November last year, the British Medical Journal warned the rise of ''chemsex'' in the UK means it is no longer an alleged media scare story, but a public health priority. Chemsex typically involves use of illegal psychoactive substances, with multiple partners having sex. In an editorial, the authors warned: ''Many barriers exist to chemsex drug users accessing services, including the shame and stigma often associated with drug use and ignorance of available drug services.''

Although London is the epicentre of the ''chemsex'' scene, it is on the rise in Dublin, and for similar reasons.

Adam Shanley, director of Gay Switchboard Ireland, says people may engage in chemsex because of problems with intimacy and relationships, as well as wider social pressures such as sexual health stigma, gym-fit body expectations and turning online chats into genuine relationships.

''If you've grown up hearing how gay people are inferior and less, it's possible that you enter adulthood repressing who you are and guarding against intimacy.

''Relationships can and often do start online, but it's also easy to organise hook-ups on apps like Grindr, your directory of local gays.

''While chemsex is still relatively rare in Dublin, these potent drugs can remove inhibitions, increase libido and help erase those feelings of shame.''

Crystal meth, G and mephadrone are highly addictive drugs. G is cheap and easily available and can be particularly dangerous because overdoses can induce coma or death and it cannot be taken with alcohol. Users are often young and affluent men with disposable income, who don't consider themselves addicts.

One man who started taking it on the party scene now takes daily hits. With inhibitions lowered, unprotected sex increases; add needles to the mix and it's a recipe for higher rates of HIV and Hepatitis C.

On gay dating apps such as Scruff and Grindr, we know what other men mean when they say they are ''chem friendly'', though ''not into chems'' is far, far more common on profiles.

Shanley says there are plenty of people on the Dublin gay scene who take G, don't become addicted or engage in unsafe sex practices, or go to one or two chemsex parties and don't return.

''My concern lies with those who do end up with a dependency.''

Dr Paddy Mallon is a HIV researcher at UCD. ''Over the past three to five years, my colleagues in London report how gay men meet is changing. The gay bar is in decline. People meet through social media and, instead of using drugs for clubbing, they're using them to facilitate arousal. Sex is becoming less inhibited and group sex is more common, as is condomless sex.''

This isn't a ''gay problem'', says Mallon, and chemsex is just one facet of a much wider sexual health crisis. HIV is on the rise. The HSE reported 75 new cases of HIV in the first three months of 2015 and 128 in the same period this year, a 75 per cent rise.

Figures from 2014 show that about half of new diagnoses are of men who have sex with men (MSM), with 33 per cent heterosexual and smaller figures for IV drug users (17 per cent), mother-to-child transmission (0.2 per cent) and unknown (11 per cent). Syphilis and other STIs are on the march too; Dublin and the east coast are the epicentre and 80 per cent of new syphilis infections are among MSM.

About 40 per cent of MSM have never taken a HIV or sexually transmitted infection test, according to the results of a recent internet survey of 3,000 MSM.

Those least likely to take a HIV test are more likely to be young, not identify as gay, are closeted and have low levels of education.

''Data shows that condomless sex is increasing across the board, including among heterosexual people,'' says Mallon. ''But we don't have enough data because sexual health services in Ireland are woefully under-resourced. And the message about safe sex is not getting through.''

Schools remain free to teach whatever they want about sex and sexuality.

US President Barack Obama recently withdrew all federal funding for abstinence programmes. Here, publicly funded schools using these models remain under no obligation to share any information about what they are teaching.

Meanwhile, some schools continue to either ignore homosexuality and the gay children in their class, or they issue a bland statement that ''homophobia is wrong'' while either openly or tacitly supporting religious doctrines that gay people should abstain from sex.

''Sex education is still too heavily focused on the biological aspects,'' says Mallon.

''We need to discuss health aspects, and we need to do it, in age-appropriate ways, at a much younger stage.

''We don't want HIV stigmatised, but young people need to know that while HIV is treatable, it is a chronic disease and, when not diagnosed on time, still leads to Aids deaths. Nobody is happy to have HIV.''

Mallon and Shanley both say that addiction services, under huge pressure with IV drug use among heroin and cocaine users, have not been able to get on top of it.

''Our services tend to be opiate based and not equipped to deal with this problem, should it become bigger,'' says Shanley.

Shanley knows this issue risks stigmatising gay people. ''But in London, they swept it under the carpet and it got out of control. We can get ahead of it.''

Nick's story:

Nick* has been involved in Dublin's chemsex scene for about two years. Before that, he often had sex while sniffing poppers (amyl nitrate) or on ecstasy or cocaine. He says that most men at chemsex parties are taking drugs, with G the most common but cocaine, E and cannabis are used too.

''It creates a relaxed, euphoric feeling, removing inhibitions about your body, or about your sexuality. It increases horniness. G and crystal can be addictive and I've had issues with G addiction, though I've dealt with them now and feel able to just use it at weekends.''

At the parties, Nick sometimes has sex with one or two men and sometimes with eight or nine. ''Condoms are not used a lot of the time, and drugs tend to stop guys worrying about STIs. I've had to get PEP [HIV post-exposure prophylaxis] after possibly exposing myself at a party. But I get tested regularly and am HIV negative.''

The parties can be lonely and disconnected, he says. ''I mostly find them to be fun and a good release, but they can be frustrating when some or most of the guys are either too high to have sex, or too distracted by their phones, trying to arrange other, hopefully more attractive guys to come to the party.''

*Name has been changed

Link to Article

Archived Version

Tue, 28 Jun 2016 15:57

London's gay community is facing a new challenge as men indulging in days-long orgies organised on social media, fuelled by drugs, such as liquid ecstasy, or ''G'', in a practice known to doctors as ''chemsex''.

London's Vauxhall district is rapidly changing, fuelled by the property boom that is altering the face of the city. But at its heart, it still holds on to a commercial gay club scene, complete with saunas and sex on the premises.

The gay community in the city has known many challenges over the past three decades, linked to the Aids epidemic that ravaged its ranks from the 1980s, silently at first, and then more loudly, along with the social ostracisation that it provoked.

Today, however, the community is facing a new challenge, due to the growth in the numbers of men indulging in days-long orgies organised on social media, fuelled by drugs, such as liquid ecstasy, or ''G'', in a practice known to doctors as ''chemsex''.

Years of efforts to spread safe-sex practices are being lost among a new generation, which grew up after the arrival of Aids, leading doctors to warn that HIV rates and sexually-transmitted diseases cases are rising rapidly.

Last night, Radio 4's The Report programme included the stories of men involved in ''chemsex'', including a Liberal Democrat general election candidate, Adrian Trett '' who unsuccessfully ran in the Vauxhall constituency.

DiscriminationThe focus has angered some in the gay community who believe it will lead to a new round of discrimination, though others '' including many in the community itself '' recoil from a new round of hedonism in a UK society where homosexuality is a more public part of life than before.The latest chapter has prompted a new vocabulary: ''chems'', ''chill outs'' and ''G-comas'', with participants losing their sexual inhibitions after taking a cocktail of crystal meth, mephedrone and GHB, which prompts both euphoria and sleepiness.

''Slamming'', where drugs are injected during orgies, is increasingly common too, which has led to overdoses, panic attacks, convulsions and sexual assaults, according to the Metropolitan Police.

Injecting crystal meth, which is better known as ''Tina'' in the gay community, brings a longer, more intense ''high'' than smoking it, escalating the libido and removing inhibition. Five sex partners in a session is an average.

Indeed, police and doctors report that the use of crystal meth is largely confined to those in the gay community involved in group sex. Seven in 10 use needles. Two-thirds of those with HIV admit to not taking their HIV medication while under the influence.

Most worryingly of all, nearly nine in every 10 believe they contracted HIV '' which is rising again in London '' through their use of drugs such as crystal meth, GBL and Mephedrone.

One in every eight gay men in London is HIV positive, compared with one in every 26 in the rest of the UK, while Lambeth has the highest prevalence of HIV of anywhere in the country, affecting 14 of every 1,000 people in the borough.

The growth in ''chemsex'' parties has been fuelled, too, by social media, where groups are brought together relatively anonymously, and where the past life stories of those involved remain a mystery to others.

Phone apps such as Grindr are driving the numbers. ''Everything we are hearing from clubbers and gay men on this scene is that it is prevalent and increasing. Three years ago, this wasn't mentioned at all,'' says Yusef Azad of the National Aids Trust.

Often, involvement is justified on the back of boasts about sexual liberation, but that often it hides loneliness and despair: ''I don't have the confidence to talk to someone in a bar or a club,'' said one 22-year-old, who organises all of his sex life online.

UnprotectedThe numbers involved are unknown, but they are growing significantly. A study last year by the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine showed that a third of men surveyed in London reported that they had had unprotected sex while under the influence of chemsex drugs.Even more worryingly, figures gathered by Antidote, the north London clinic that is the city's only dedicated drugs and alcohol service targeted at the LGBT community, report dramatic rises in the numbers of people taking drugs during sex. In 2011, a fifth of those questioned by the clinic said they had done so. A year later, the number had risen to 80 per cent, though the total numbers involved are believed to have increased significantly since then.

''The reason so many gay men use chems is a search for intimacy. Gay men often grow up keeping a secret,'' says Dave Stuart from the Dean Street Clinic. ''They grow up being hyper vigilant and not sharing who they really are.

''That is the direct opposite of intimacy. They come of age into a sexualised gay scene where they try to navigate hook-up apps, normalised drug use and risky sex. They try to incorporate intimacy, but with no frame of reference,'' he said.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Mon, 27 Jun 2016 03:37

I've never seen such snobbery in my life. The post-Brexit condescension has been nauseating. The media, pundits, and academics have desperately tried to paint the Brexit voters as ignorant, backwoods troglodytes who only voted to leave the EU because they don't like brown people.

Take this viral article from the Washington Post: ''The British are frantically Googling what the E.U. is, hours after voting to leave it.''

Leftists and elitists salivated over the article '' more proof of their own intellectual and moral superiority.

Just one problem. The article claims that searches for ''What is the EU?'' within Britain had ''more than tripled'' in the hours after the referendum. Did nobody ask: tripled from what number? Well, when you look at the data Google provides, it looks less than 1000 Brits made that Google search.

But the headline, ''1000 Brits Google 'What is the EU'? After Referendum'' doesn't have the same ring to it. It doesn't fit the narrative.

The journalists at WaPo were using Google Analytics to see the relative trends of Google searches '' but that doesn't show the actual numbers. Google AdWords, however, does show the numbers.

That's right '' for the entire month of May, ''What is the EU'' was searched around 8100 times in the UK. That's about 270/day on average.

Well, if that number more than tripled, that means 945 searches total. If you assume that the 270/day trend would have continued, that's a whopping 675 additional searches in the entire UK. Virtually nothing. Not to mention, there's no way to tell who made the searches '' it could have been 4th graders in school learning about the EU for the first time. It could have been rural farmers who didn't vote and just wanted to know how it would affect them. Heck, it could have been tourists in London who wanted to know more about the EU.

Regardless, it's doubtful the people at WaPo care about the actual numbers. It's the irresistible article headline that matters. Anything that makes opponents seem stupid and ignorant '' regardless of the facts '' that's what readers want to see.

Thanks to Remy Smith for pointing this out

Update: WaPo got their numbers from this Google tweet. The actual phrase was not ''What is the EU'', as the headline claims. Instead, it was ''What happens if we leave the EU?'' Well, those concrete numbers are even more revealing.

That's right '' the May average is a whopping 1300 searches total '' that's 43 per day. Now surely, that number will haven risen in June. Still, let's say it goes up tenfold. You're looking at 430 searches. Can WaPo take down their article now?

Link to Article

Archived Version

Mon, 27 Jun 2016 20:34

GETTY

German Angela Merkel met with European heads today at the EU summitThe foreign ministers of France and Germany are due to reveal a blueprint to effectively do away with individual member states in what is being described as an ''ultimatum''.

Under the radical proposals EU countries will lose the right to have their own army, criminal law, taxation system or central bank, with all those powers being transferred to Brussels.

Related articlesControversially member states would also lose what few controls they have left over their own borders, including the procedure for admitting and relocating refugees.

The plot has sparked fury and panic in Poland - a traditional ally of Britain in the fight against federalism - after being leaked to Polish news channel TVP Info.

GETTY

Polish politicians say the plans include loss of control of a number of key policy areasGETTY

Polish foreign minister Witold Waszczykowski has blasted the planThe public broadcaster reports that the bombshell proposal will be presented to a meeting of the Visegrad group of countries - made up of Poland, the Czech Republic, Hungary and Slovakia - by German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier later today.

Excerpts of the nine-page report were published today as the leaders of Germany, France and Italy met in Berlin for Brexit crisis talks.

In the preamble to the text the two ministers write: "Our countries share a common destiny and a common set of values ??that give rise to an even closer union between our citizens. We will therefore strive for a political union in Europe and invite the next Europeans to participate in this venture."

The revelations come just days after Britain shook the Brussels establishment by voting to leave the European Union in a move some have predicted could leave to the break-up of the EU.

A number of member states are deeply unhappy about the creeping federalism of the European project with anti-EU sentiments running high in eastern Europe, Scandinavia and France.

GETTY

Opponents of the EU have warned of its ambitions to create a superstateGETTY

Britain voted to leave the European Union in an historic referendum last ThursdayResponding to the plot Polish Foreign Minister Witold Waszczykowski raged: "This is not a good solution, of course, because from the time the EU was invented a lot has changed.

''The mood in European societies is different. Europe and our voters do not want to give the Union over into the hands of technocrats.

''Therefore, I want to talk about this, whether this really is the right recipe right now in the context of a Brexit."

There are deep divides at the heart of the EU at the moment over how to proceed with the project in light of the Brexit vote.

Some figures have cautioned against trying to force through further political integration, warning that to do so against the wishes of the European people will only fuel further Eurosceptic feeling.

This is not a good solution

Polish Foreign Minister Witold Waszczykowski

A few weeks before the Brexit vote European Council president Donald Tusk warned that European citizens did not share the enthusiasm of some of their leaders for ''a utopia of Europe without conflicting interests and ambitions, a utopia of Europe imposing its own values on the external world, a utopia of Euro-Asian unity''.

He added: ''Increasingly louder are those who question the very principle of a united Europe. The spectre of a break-up is haunting Europe and a vision of a federation doesn't seem to me to be the best answer to it.''

His view was backed up by the leader of the eurozone countries, Dutch politician Jerome Dijsselbloem, who added: ''In the eurozone some are pushing for a completion of the monetary union by creating a full political union, a euro area economic government or even a euro budget'... to me it is obvious.

''We need to strengthen what we have and finish it, but let's not build more extensions to the European house while it is so unstable.''

Meanwhile Lorenzo Condign, the former director general of Italy's treasury, has said it is nearly impossible to see Europe opting for more integration at such a time of upheaval.

He said: ''It seems difficult to imagine that the rest of the EU will close ranks and move in the direction of greater integration quickly. Simply, there is no political will.

''Indeed, the risk is exactly the opposite - namely that centrifugal forces will prevail and make integration even more difficult.''

But others see the Brexit vote as an opportunity to push ahead with the European elite's long-cherished dream of creating a United States of Europe.

Spain's foreign minister Jose Manuel Garcia-Margallo has called for ''more Europe'' whilst Italy's finance minister, Carlo Padoan, is advocating a common budget for the eurozone states.

And Emmanuel Macron, France's economy minister, wants to go even further and set up a common eurozone treasury which would oversee the permanent transfer of funds from wealthier northern Europe to shore up Mediterranean economies.

Related articles

Link to Article

Archived Version

Mon, 27 Jun 2016 14:41

Analysis A petition to nullify the UK's EU referendum and hold another appear to be riddled with fraudulent data. Raw data examined reveals that many of the participants come from outside the UK, or use IP addresses outside the UK. Only UK or British citizens and residents can create or sign a petition, according to the rules. You can see the geographical breakdown here.

Some 39,411 signatories came from Vatican City, even though the city state has a permanent population of only 450. Over 23,000 voted from North Korea.

The House of Commons petitions committee is investigating the petition for fraud, and has already removed 77,000 ''signatures'' - but says the site was ''not hacked''. The petition, ironically created weeks ago by a Leave campaigner, calls for the vote to be rerun if turnout was under 75 per cent, or the winning plurality was under 60 per cent. It has reached 3.6 million signatures.

However the geolocation data for the votes can easily be examined.

Although the UK's voted to leave the EU with a clear democratic majority of on a turnout of 72.9 per cent, the petition to change the rules after the fact was promoted by the BBC's Brian Cox and former Guardian editor Alan Rusbridger.

''The sight of educated men and women trying to overturn a national referendum with an online petition is pathetic beyond belief,'' wrote Chris Snowdon of the Institute for Economic Affairs. ''Many of the arguments made by the Remain camp were fundamentally anti-democratic; they prefer to have an elite in charge with whom they agree [rather] than have a demos in charge with whom they do not. Since losing the referendum, their contempt for democracy and the demos has become terrifyingly explicit. Every attempt is being made to find a way of overruling the will of the people.''

Helen Jones MP, Chair of the Petitions Committee, said MPs would discuss whether the petition could trigger a Parliamentary debate. Not all do. ®

BootnoteNo doubt some signatures are valid. Your reporter's school class lists here in leafy North London - a bastion of middle class Remain supporters - were hijacked by parents urging others to sign the Second Referendum petition. Normally parents admonish their children for throwing their toys out of the pram.

Sponsored:Best practices for writing a successful NSF MRI grant proposal

Link to Article

Archived Version

Wed, 29 Jun 2016 19:46

The British readers are already extremely well informed about Islam and all the problems it poses. Fortunately, they do have far more discussions on this topic than we would find in the U.S. where the denial and ignorance is far deeper. The ads are in response to London's Muslim mayor's banned advertisements on buses and subways of bikini-clad women.

If our British based readers want to help promote more of these ads, please donate to Pamela Geller's anti-jihad campaign through this link.

.

.

June 26, 2016 | Tom Tillison |BizPac Review

Anti-jihad activist Pamela Geller announced a new ad campaign that will be kicking off in London on Monday that is sure to get plenty of attention.

The ads will appear on 100 London taxis and will feature quotes from Muhammad.

Geller, who co-founded the American Freedom Defense Initiative in an effort battle radical Islam in the United States, announced the ad campaign last week on the group's website.''Despite the overwhelming push-back and danger, we continue to fight on fiercely,'' she wrote. ''The war is in the homeland, and it's only just begun.''

And the fight is not cheap, Geller explained.

''London buses refused our ads, despite running Islamic prayers on their bus-sides. So we are putting our ads on 100 London taxis '.... they go up this week, but it's bloody expensive,'' Geller wrote.

Here's an example of one of the quotes:

Geller is behind last year's ''Draw Muhammad' contest in Garland, Texas, that ended with police killing two armed jihadists trying to storm the building.

And she continues the fight against radical Islam.

In addition to the controversial new ad campaign, Geller said that they also have a film crew in Europe working on a documentary.

''The film title, ''Can't We Talk About This?,'' is taken from Theo Van Gogh's last words before a Muslim beheaded him in broad daylight on a street in Amsterdam,'' she said.

Van Gogh was a Dutch film director killed in 2004 by a Muslim extremist.

The new film will feature interviews with Geert Wilders, Bat Ye'or, Douglas Murray, Lars Vilks (a Danish Muhammad cartoonist) and English ex-Muslim journalist Raheem Kassam.

Let the world know and share this:Like this:LikeLoading...

.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Thu, 30 Jun 2016 03:08

Pro-EU students claim they are so upset with the result of the Brexit vote that they have been left depressed and have a 'constant sick feeling'.

Some fanatical Remain supporters say they are 'grieving for our loss of cultural enrichment' - while others fear the stress could cause them to fail their exams.

And others blame the older generations for 'ruining their future' by opting for Leave even though the long-term effects will only be experienced by young people.

Around 75 per cent of voters under 25 opted for Britain to stay in the European Union, making them far more pro-EU than any other age group.

Scroll down for video

Support: Hundreds of young people have complained about the result of the EU referendum

However, only a third of young people actually bothered to turn out to the polls despite the huge impact the result of the vote will have on their futures.

In the wake of the shock vote, hundreds of students took to the internet to complain about what happened.

A thread on popular forum The Student Room entitled 'Does anyone else feel genuinely depressed about Brexit?' has had around 300 replies.

One student wrote: 'I've felt so down all day because of this, and just have this constant sick feeling in my stomach.

'I genuinely feel like I'm grieving. I feel like I'm grieving for our growing economy (slow but steady). I'm grieving for our loss of cultural enrichment.'

Upset: Some claimed that they would be unable to focus on their exams because of the vote to quit the EU

Another added: 'Took about an hour for my hands to stop shaking, and for my knees to return to some semblance of working order after I saw the result.'

Although some took care not to blame Leave voters for their upset, other were more blunt in their assessment.

One complained: 'I have felt sick all day, and ashamed. And angry, with special little peaks of rage dedicated to the claptrap by degrees either ignorant, racist or both, that leavers have peddled as their "reasons".'

Other students suggested that the political turmoil had affected their preparation for exams and insisted they deserved extra marks because they were so upset.

One wrote: 'Can I class Brexit as a traumatic event when fail my exams next week? Because honestly I'm so distracted now because of it.'

Another said: 'I wonder if I can get special consideration for my Further Maths and Physics exams today because I was stressed about Brexit?'

Victory: Nigel Farage helped lead the winning Leave campaign into last Thursday's referendum

A number of students have expressed fears that Brexit will prevent them from taking courses abroad, and expressed fears that British universities could see their funding squeezed.

Most university bosses came out in favour of a Remain vote, because of the EU grants which may now be in doubt after the vote to leave.

Matthew Sadd, who is studying a Master's in chemistry at Southampton University, said today: 'I'm very worried about my future career and study prospects because I want to continue to study, perhaps take a PhD.

'I now feel with Brexit my ability to go to further into the world of research has been severely limited.

'My options are so much more limited and that really infuriates me.'

Kingston University undergraduate Harriet King added: 'The thing that really got to me is why so many people voted leave - a failed misrepresentation against immigration.

'Immigration, both economic migrants and refugees, bring so much positivity to this country.

'In my opinion the free movement of people is the most important thing in the world, and a Brexit puts a hold on this.'

Simone Nielsen, a Danish student who is about to start a graduate degree at University College London, said she is now planning to leave the country in a year's time.

'I think a lot of Europeans feel very unwelcome now,' she said. 'My boyfriend and I had planned to stay here afterwards, but now we've decided to move to a place that actually wants us there.'

Link to Article

Archived Version

Thu, 30 Jun 2016 03:37

Daniel John Hannan (born 1 September 1971)[2] is a British politician, journalist, and author who is a Member of the European Parliament, representing South East England for the Conservative Party. He is also the Secretary-General of the Alliance of European Conservatives and Reformists (AECR), and is an advocate of localism and a Eurosceptic.

After stints as a speech-writer for Michael Howard and William Hague, Hannan was elected to the European Parliament at the 1999 election. He led the campaign to withdraw the Conservative Party from the EPP''ED, and was expelled from the group in 2008. Hannan joined the European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR) with his Conservative colleagues when it was formed in 2009 and became Secretary-General of its sister Europarty, the AECR. He currently serves on the Committee on Constitutional Affairs and the delegation to the ACP''EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly.[2] He is also President of the Young Britons' Foundation and a patron of Reading University Conservative Association.[3]

Hannan advocates localism, and he has written several books arguing for democratic reform. He is a Eurosceptic and is strongly critical of European integration. Besides politics, Hannan is a journalist; he has written newspaper leaders, a blog for The Daily Telegraph and currently writes for the online news website and aggregator CapX, and has published several books. Born in Peru, Hannan speaks Spanish and French fluently.[4] He occasionally delivers speeches to the European Parliament in Spanish and French.[5][6]

Early life[edit]Upbringing[edit]Hannan was born on his parents' farm near Lima, Peru.[7] His mother is Scottish.[8] Hannan's father served in Italy during the Second World War with the North Irish Horse of the British Army. Hannan has indicated that his father's Irish Catholic origins made him more sensitive to issues related to Northern Ireland and The Troubles.[9]

Growing up, he made regular trips to the family's cotton farm in Santa Cruz, Bolivia.[7] After spending his childhood in Peru, Hannan was educated at Winchester House School, Marlborough College and Oriel College, Oxford, where he studied Modern History.[7] He speaks English, French and Spanish.[4]

Early political career[edit]Hannan was President of the Oxford University Conservative Association (OUCA) in 1992. When standing in OUCA's committee elections for Michaelmas 1991, his strongly Eurosceptic views prompted accusations of "xenophobia" in the Oxford student paper Cherwell, prompting Hannan to threaten them with legal action.[10] He also served as national vice-chairman of Conservative Students from 1992 to 1993, and then chairman of Conservative Graduates from 1994.[11] He had earlier established the Oxford Campaign for an Independent Britain, and on 12 September 1992 led a members' protest at a European financial summit held in Bath, which was widely televised and, he has since light-heartedly claimed, led to the withdrawal of the Pound Sterling from the European Exchange Rate Mechanism a few days later.[12]

Through the CIB he became involved with the Bruges Group, and after he graduated he became, in 1994, director of a Eurosceptic political think-tank, the European Research Group. In 1996 he was hired by the Daily Telegraph as a leader-writer,[11] and has since contributed to The Spectator and many other newspapers and magazines around the world. In 1997 he became an adviser and speechwriter to Michael Howard, then Shadow Foreign Secretary,[13] and in 1998 he was given a place on the Conservative candidates' list for the following year's European Parliament election. He later became a speechwriter for party leader William Hague.[7] In 1999 he stood down from his posts at the European Research Group and Conservative Graduates.[11]

Member of the European Parliament[edit]Hannan was first elected to the European Parliament in 1999.

A year after his first election, Hannan was accused of using the Conservative Party's central office as headquarters for a campaign to persuade Danish voters to block the introduction of the European Single Currency; however, he was able to show that the campaign was actually being run from his Westminster flat.[14]

In his first term, he served on the Committee on Fisheries and the Delegation for Relations with Afghanistan.[2]

He was re-elected at the top of his party's list for the South East England constituency in 2004.

Hannan led the campaign to withdraw the Conservatives from the European People's Party''European Democrats (EPP''ED) group in the European Parliament and form a new anti-federalist group.[15] Hannan welcomed David Cameron's promise during Cameron's successful 2005 leadership campaign to withdraw: even promising to leave the EPP''ED unilaterally if the party didn't.[16]

In April 2008, Daniel Hannan was elected to the top position of the Conservative list for the 2009 European elections in the constituency of South East England, and in June 2009 he was re-elected to the European Parliament.[17]

In April 2009, he criticised an EC Directive that would end the exemption in British law for religious groups to discriminate on grounds on conscience.[18]

Campaign against the Lisbon Treaty[edit]Hannan opposed ratification of the Lisbon Treaty in the European Parliament and was one of several MEPs who took part in a demonstration in the chamber after Parliament voted to endorse the Treaty. He has continued to speak against the Treaty, and in the manner of Cato the Elder's famous call, Carthago delenda est, he ended every speech, whatever its subject, with a call for the Lisbon Treaty to be put to a referendum: "Pactio Olisipiensis censenda est".[19][20]

Expulsion from the EPP-ED[edit]Attempts by several MEPs to disrupt the work of the Parliament resulted in a majority of Members endorsing a rule change which gave the Speaker/President the discretion to limit the use of filibustering procedures if he "is convinced that these are manifestly intended to cause, and will result in, a prolonged and serious obstruction of the procedures of the House or the rights of other Members" (Rule 20, para 1). In the parliamentary session just before the new rule was to be presented by the President of the European ParliamentHans-Gert P¶ttering,[citation needed] Hannan criticised what he termed a deviation from the rule of law. He continued speaking after his allocated time had ended by quoting Edmund Burke, but was interrupted mid-quote and had his microphone cut off by Luigi Cocilovo, one of the 14 Vice-Presidents.[21] He then responded by damning, without vocal amplification, what he claimed were Parliament's deviations from its own rules:[22][23]

An absolute majority is not the same as the rule of law. I accept that there is a minority in this house in favour of a referendum. That there is a minority in this house against the ratification of the Lisbon Treaty. But this house must nonetheless follow its own rulebooks. And by popular acclamation to discard the rules under which we operate is indeed an act of arbitrary and despotic rule. It is only my regard for you Mr. Chairman and my personal affection for you that prevents me from likening it to the Erm¤chtigungsgesetz of 1933 which was also voted through by a parliamentary majority.

P¶ttering is a German national and a member of the same political group (EPP-ED) as Hannan. Hannan's remarks were attacked by other MEPs from the EPP-ED. The head of EPP-ED, Joseph Daul, responded by initiating proceedings to expel Hannan immediately from their Group. Hannan left the EPP-ED on 20 February 2008. He sat, for the remainder of the five-year term as a Non-Inscrit (not being a member of any of the Parliament's groups).[24] Following his 2009 re-election, he sits with the new eurosceptic European Conservatives and Reformists along with his Conservative Party colleagues.

"The Devalued Prime Minister" '' YouTube Hit[edit]Hannan came to prominence after making a speech in the European Parliament criticising Gordon Brown.[25] On 24 March 2009, after Gordon Brown had given a short speech to the European Parliament in Strasbourg in advance of the G20 London summit, Hannan followed up by delivering a 3-minute speech strongly criticising the response by Gordon Brown to the global financial crisis.[26] He finished the speech with the phrase, "the devalued Prime Minister of a devalued government", which was a quote from a speech by Labour Party leader John Smith criticising then-Prime Minister John Major in 1992.[27]

A video clip of the speech went viral on YouTube that evening,[28][29] attracting more than 630,000 views in 24 hours.[26][30] It became the 'most viewed today' YouTube video worldwide two consecutive days.[30] Hannan was invited to appear on several shows on American cable news channels, including Fox News and MSNBC: he appeared on television programme Hannity via video link at 9pm EST on the same day,[31] and on the Glenn Beck Program the following day.[32][33] He also appeared on Your World with Neil Cavuto, where he stated he would have voted for Ron Paul in the 2008 presidential election had he been an American citizen.[34] The main British television channels, particularly the BBC and ITV, gave the speech fairly limited coverage, for which they faced some criticism from Conservative MPs and "a handful of viewers";[35] Conservative MP Nigel Evans stated that their lack of coverage rendered YouTube the 'ultimate in public service broadcasting'. As of July 2012, there had been almost 3 million views of the clip.

ECR and AECR[edit]Hannan was re-elected in the 2009 European election, having been voted by party members to top the Conservatives' list in South East England. After the election, the Conservatives united with other anti-federalist, centre-right parties to form the European Conservatives and Reformists, for which Hannan had campaigned. Hannan was appointed the group's legal spokesperson. He resigned this position on 5 November 2009, after David Cameron announced that he wouldn't hold a referendum on the Treaty of Lisbon,[36] saying that he wanted to concentrate on campaigning for a referendum.[37] However, he accepted Cameron's decision, provided that a referendum on European integration was held.[38]

Hannan became the first Secretary-General of the ECR-affiliated European political party '' the Alliance of European Conservatives and Reformists (AECR) '' when it was founded on 1 October 2009.

He criticised a ban on blood donation by people who had visited the United States less than one month previously, a measure instituted due to the risk posed by West Nile fever following the 2003 US epidemic.[18]

At the 2014 European Parliament Elections, Hannan was again re-elected representing the South East of England.[39]

Political positions[edit]Localism[edit]Hannan is an advocate of localism.[7] He believes that local government independence is impossible without giving local government self-financing.[40] To that end, he supports replacing Value Added Tax with a local sales tax, set by local councils.[7]

Electoral reform[edit]Hannan argues in his writings and in the media (for example, during an appearance on Question Time on BBC television on 28 May 2009) for ballot initiatives (whereby electors can directly enact legislation as happens in Switzerland), a power of recall (whereby a sitting Member of Parliament can be forced to submit to re-election if enough of his local electorate support this), fixed term parliaments, local and national referendums, open primaries and the abolition of party lists. He is also an advocate of Single Transferable Vote as a replacement for the UK's First Past The Post system of voting.

Economic policy[edit]Hannan wrote in March 2011 criticizing anti-austerity protesters, stating that they "have decided to indulge their penchant for empty, futile, self-righteous indignation." He remarked, "After "No Cuts!" the marchers' favourite slogan was "Fairness!" All right, then... How about being fair to our children, whom we have freighted with a debt unprecedented in peacetime?"[41]

Foreign policy[edit]Hannan has a 'deep admiration' of the United States,[42] and describes himself as an Atlanticist with inherently positive views of the United States as well as other nations of the Anglosphere.

Hannan supports the British efforts in the Afghanistan war after the September 11th attacks, pointing out that "more British subjects died in the Twin Towers than in any terrorist atrocity in our history '' more than at Lockerbie or Omagh" (see Pan Am Flight 103 and Omagh bombing). He also supports a timetable for set military withdrawal from the country. He wrote in June 2010, "there comes a point when our presence is doing more harm than good, serving to destabilise Pakistan rather than to stabilise Afghanistan. We are reaching that point now."[43] He opposed the 2003 invasion of Iraq undertaken during the premiership of Tony Blair.[44] He was one of few British politicians who opposed British intervention in Libya.[42]

He endorsed then-Democratic candidateBarack Obama for President on 18 October 2008. He stated that a McCain presidency would mean an "imperial overstretch", particularly arguing that the U.S. should have been preparing to leave Iraq immediately. He labelled Obama's opponents as symbolic of "big federal budgets, protectionism, crony capitalism and, for that matter, the socialisation of failing banks."[45] On 14 June 2010, Hannan took back his endorsement, which he called his "single most unpopular post" in his blogging career. He argued, "Any American reader who wants to know where Obamification will lead should spend a week with me in the European Parliament. I'm working in your future and, believe me, you won't like it." He also accused the Obama administration of straining the special relationship between the US and the UK, particularly over the Falkland Islands.[46]

Social policy[edit]Hannan is opposed to the concept of "victimless crimes", and he favours drug decriminalisation: "I'd start with cannabis, and if that worked I wouldn't in principle be against decriminalising heroin."[7]

Health care[edit]In April 2009, he criticised claims that the National Health Service was the greatest British invention, saying that it is clearly eclipsed by the inventions of parliamentary democracy, penicillin, and common law, the discovery of DNA, or the abolition of slavery.[47] He said that the NHS has left Britain with low survival rates for cancers and strokes, a high risk of becoming more ill in hospital, and with constant waiting lists. He remarked on American television at a time when the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act was being debated that he "wouldn't wish it [the NHS] on anyone". David Cameron, who had said that his priorities were "three letters: NHS", distanced himself from Hannan's remarks, saying that Hannan has "some rather eccentric points of view".[48][49]

Writing in The Telegraph, Hannan said of the media storm provoked by his comments:

On a visit to the US, I was asked by an interviewer whether I would recommend a British-style health-care model, paid for out of general taxation. I replied that all three parties were devoted to the NHS, and that it had public support (although I added that this was at least partly the result of the inaccurate belief that free health care for the poor is a unique attribute of the British system). But I didn't want to dissemble: I have for years argued that Britain would be better off with a Singapore-style system of personal health-care accounts. So I cautioned against nationalisation, citing international league tables on survival rates and waiting times.[50][51]

At the same time, he made the wider point that: "we seem to have lost the notion that a backbencher speaks for himself. I like David Cameron, and want him to be Prime Minister, not least so that Britain stops racking up debt. But the idea that I therefore agree with him on every issue is, when you think about it, silly."[50]

Enoch Powell[edit]It was reported in August 2009 that Hannan had praised the Conservative politician Enoch Powell as "somebody who understood the importance of national democracy, who understood why you need to live in an independent country and what that meant, as well as being a free marketeer and a small-government Conservative."[52][53]

However, he is also on record as saying, "For what it's worth, I think Enoch Powell was wrong on immigration. The civil unrest that he forecast, and that many feared in 1968, didn't materialise. Britain assimilated a large population with an ease that few countries have matched. Being an immigrant myself, I have particular cause to be grateful for Britain's understated cosmopolitanism."[54]

Writing on The Telegraph website, Mr Hannan said: "I'm surprised that no one has picked up on the thing that I most admire about Enoch Powell, namely his tendency to ignore conventional wisdom and think things through from first principles. Like Rowan Williams, he always did his hearers the courtesy of addressing them as intelligent adults. Both men regularly got into trouble in consequence, either because they were genuinely misunderstood or because their detractors affected to misunderstand them. Neither responded by dumbing down. That, in politics, takes a special kind of integrity."[55]

UKIP[edit]In spring 2012, Hannan suggested that an accommodation be made between the Conservative Party and the UK Independence Party (UKIP),[56] something he has done repeatedly since.[57][58][59] In November 2014 Conservative MEP Sajjad Karim published a comment piece in The Guardian criticising Hannan's outspoken criticism of the EU and Conservative Party leadership and saying that Hannan seemed to be more "aligned to Ukip messaging than the more nuanced position mainstream parties have taken on the EU"; at the same time Tory MP Mark Pritchard wrote on Twitter: "If Daniel Hannan wants to go to Ukip he should just go, rather than damaging the re-election prospects of Conservative MPs in marginal seats."[60]

Journalism and other work[edit]Hannan has been a leader writer for the Daily Telegraph since 1996.[61] He has also written for various other newspapers, including The Wall Street Journal, the German daily Die Welt, the Swiss weekly Weltwoche, The Sunday Telegraph, The Catholic Herald, Freedom Today, the Brussels Journal and The Spectator.

He was the co-founder of a direct democracy group ("Direct Democracy") and co-author, along with 27 Conservative MPs elected in 2005, of Direct Democracy: An Agenda for a New Model Party, which proposes the wholesale devolution of power and the direct election of decision-makers. These ideas were developed further in a series of six pamphlets, The Localist Papers, serialised in The Daily Telegraph in 2007.

Awards and distinctions[edit]In 2009, Hannan was awarded the Bastiat Prize for Online Journalism for his Telegraph blog.[62] He was shortlisted for the Orwell Prize in blogging in 2011.[63] In 2014, Hannan won the Political Books Awards polemic of the year award, for his book How We Invented Freedom and Why it Matters.[64]

He won Speech of the Year at the 2009 Spectator Awards, for his Gordon Brown speech in the European Parliament.[65]

He has been named by The Telegraph as one of the 100 most-influential people on the centre-right in the United Kingdom for the last four years: peaking as the tenth-most influential in 2009.[66] This was up from 86th in 2008.[67] He fell to 33rd in 2010,[68] followed by 38th in 2011.[69]

Bibliography[edit]Books[edit]Hannan, Daniel (1993). Time for a fresh start in Europe. London: Bow Publications. Towards 1996: Britain in a Multi-Speed Europe. London: Institute for European Defence & Strategic Studies. 1994. ISBN 978-0-907967-54-5. The Challenge of the East. 1996. A Guide to the Amsterdam Treaty. London: European Research Group. 1997. The Euro: Bad for Business. London: European Research Group. 1998. What if Britain Votes No?. 2002. The Case for EFTA. London: Bruges Group. 2004. ISBN 978-0-9547087-3-3. Direct Democracy: An Agenda for a New Model Party. Douglas Carswell. 2005. ISBN 978-0-9550598-0-3. The Plan: Twelve Months to Renew Britain. Douglas Carswell. Lulu.com. 2008. ISBN 978-0-9559799-0-3. The New Road to Serfdom: A Letter of Warning to America. London: HarperCollins. 2010. ISBN 978-0-06-195694-2. Why America Must Not Follow Europe. New York: Encounter Books. 2011. ISBN 978-1-59403-560-9. A Doomed Marriage: Britain and Europe. London: Notting Hill Editions. 2012. ISBN 978-1-907-90322-9. How We Invented Freedom & Why It Matters. London: Head of Zeus. 2013. ISBN 9781781857533. Why Vote Leave. London: Head of Zeus. 2016. ISBN 9781784977108. Essays and reporting[edit]Hannan, Daniel (4 January 2014). "Here come the pirates! The Eurocrats are crazy to dismiss all the new, diverse Europsceptic parties as 'far right'". The Spectator324 (9671): 8''9. References[edit]^"sevenoaksconservatives.org". sevenoaksconservatives.org. Retrieved 1 September 2012. ^ abc"Daniel Hannan". European Parliament. Retrieved 3 March 2008. ^http://www.ruconservative.com/friends/^ abVacher Dod Publishing, Limited (2002). Dod's European Companion. London: Vacher Dod Publishing. p. 135. ISBN 978-0-905702-37-7. ^What's wrong with the European Commission 10 Feb 2010 - YouTube^"The Spanish Bailout". YouTube. 14 June 2012. Retrieved 1 September 2012. ^ abcdefgSylvester, Rachel; Thomson, Alice (5 October 2009). "Daniel Hannan: the Tory Eurosceptic MEP whom Labour loves to hate". The Times. Retrieved 16 December 2011. ^http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q8OYWCTtqzA^Hannan, Daniel (15 June 2010). "David Cameron was right to apologise: Bloody Sunday diminished us all '' Telegraph Blogs". London: Blogs.telegraph.co.uk. Retrieved 7 July 2010. ^David Blair, and ed. Andrew Page, The History of the Oxford University Conservative Association (OUCA, Oxford, 1995), p.38^ abcMEP biography European Parliament website^Daniel Hannan How Our One Small Protest Toppled the PoundDaily Telegraph (2002-09-13)^"Latin Link", The Times (17 May 1997) p22^George Eaton The NS Profile: Daniel HannanNew Statesman (2009-08-20)^"A foolish promise". The Economist. 13 July 2006. Retrieved 16 December 2011. ^Browne, Anthony; Charter, David (7 June 2006). "Tories close to splitting on Cameron's Europe U-turn". The Times. Retrieved 16 December 2011. ^"Partypolitical.com". Playpolitical.typepad.com. 8 June 2009. Retrieved 14 August 2009. ^ abAdams, Stephen (13 June 2011). "EC directive 'bans blood donations after US trips'". The Daily Telegraph. Retrieved 16 December 2011. ^Hannan, Daniel (17 January 2008). "EU treaty censored by Euro-federalists". London: The Daily Telegraph. Retrieved 3 March 2008. ^"European Parliament debates, 30 January 2008: Daniel Hannan". Webcitation.org. Retrieved 14 August 2009. ^"Debates '' 31 January 2008". European Parliament. 8 February 2008. Retrieved 7 March 2008. ^"Creeping EU Totalitarianism". YouTube. 18 February 2008. Retrieved 14 August 2009. ^"EU '-- The last days of democracy?". YouTube. 3 July 2008. Retrieved 14 August 2009. ^"Daniel HANNAN: History of Parliamentary Service". European Parliament. Retrieved 6 November 2015. ^"Browns join Twitter war over NHS". BBC News. 13 August 2009. Retrieved 7 March 2012. ^ abDanHannanMEP (24 March 2009). "Daniel Hannan MEP: The devalued Prime Minister of a devalued Government". YouTube. Retrieved 27 March 2009. ^The Recall of Parliament: Smith savages 'devalued government': Labour MPs roar approval for new leader '' Prime Minister defends Lamont '' Benn to launch referendum petition, Nicholas Timmins, The Independent, 25 September 1992^Martin, Iian (25 March 2009). "Hurrah for Hannan: Brown hasn't been spoken to like that for decades". Daily Telegraph (London). ^Bingham, John (25 March 2009). "MEP Dan Hannan's 'Brezhnev apparatchik' attack on Gordon Brown is a YouTube hit". Daily Telegraph (London). Retrieved 27 March 2009. ^ abWalker, Kirsty (27 March 2009). "An internet sensation, the Tory who told Brown to his face that he's a disaster". Daily Mail (London). Retrieved 27 March 2009. ^"Outcry Against U.S. Budget Heard Around Globe". Fox News. 27 March 2009. Retrieved 27 March 2009. ^"Daniel Hannan". Gather. 26 March 2009. Retrieved 27 March 2009. ^DanHannanMEP (25 March 2009). "Daniel Hannan MEP appears on Glenn Beck". YouTube. Retrieved 27 March 2009. ^DanHannanMEP (27 March 2009). "Daniel Hannan MEP appears on Your World with Neil Cavuto: Part 1/2". YouTube. Retrieved 28 March 2009. ^John, Bingham; Singh, Anita (27 March 2009). "Questions for BBC and ITV over Daniel Hannan speech coverage". London: Daily Telegraph. Retrieved 6 April 2009. ^Booth, Jenny; Bremner, Charles (5 November 2009). "Tories stung by autism gibe from French minister and resignations of MEPs". The Times. Retrieved 16 December 2011. ^Porter, Andrew (5 November 2009). "David Cameron faces further unrest over new EU policy". The Daily Telegraph. Retrieved 16 December 2011. ^Porter, Andrew; Kirkup, James (4 November 2009). "Tories admit defeat over Lisbon Treaty". The Daily Telegraph. Retrieved 16 December 2011. ^http://www.europarl.org.uk/en/european_elections/results.html^Oborne, Peter (30 April 2011). "Let's put the local back into local elections". The Daily Telegraph. Retrieved 16 December 2011. ^Hannan, Daniel (26 March 2011). "'March for the Alternative'? WHAT alternative?". The Daily Telegraph. Retrieved 27 March 2011. ^ ab"The war drums boom in Britain". The Economist. 18 March 2011. Retrieved 16 December 2011. ^Hannan, Daniel (26 June 2010). "David Cameron is right to want to leave Afghanistan '' Telegraph Blogs". London: Blogs.telegraph.co.uk. Retrieved 7 July 2010. ^Hannan, Daniel (30 March 2008). "Are we losing in Afghanistan?". The Daily Telegraph (London). Retrieved 7 November 2010. ^"Why this conservative is for Barack Obama". The Telegraph. 18 October 2008. ^"I admit it: I was wrong to have supported Barack Obama". The Telegraph. 14 June 2010. ^Hannan, Daniel (6 April 2009). "Americans! Don't copy the British healthcare system!". London: Blogs.telegraph.co.uk. Retrieved 14 August 2009. ^"Cameron: 'NHS Is Our Number One Priority'". Sky News. 14 August 2009. Retrieved 25 April 2010. ^"'Nasty Tories' beat retreat on hunting and spending cuts". Thisislondon.co.uk. Retrieved 14 August 2009. ^ ab"There is no harm in agreeing to disagree Let's return to the good old days when MPs didn't always toe the party line, says Daniel Hannan.". The Daily Telegraph (London). 28 August 2009. Retrieved 30 April 2010. ^Glen Beck with Daniel Hannan on UK NHS, YouTube, 2009^Prince, Rosa (26 August 2009). "Daniel Hannan risks angering David Cameron by praising Enoch Powell". The Daily Telegraph (London). Retrieved 30 April 2010. ^"Daniel Hannan & Enoch Powell: Spectacular Media Stupidity Guaranteed". The Spectator. 26 August 2009. Retrieved 7 July 2010. ^"Journalists' magic word". The Daily Telegraph (London). 6 November 2007. Retrieved 30 April 2010. ^"Down with collective responsibility". The Daily Telegraph (London). 28 August 2009. Retrieved 30 April 2010. ^Hannan, Daniel (24 May 2012). "A deal with UKIP is preferable to one with the LibDems". blogs.telegraph.co.uk. Retrieved 7 December 2014. ^Hannan, Daniel (3 May 2013). "A Conservative''Ukip coalition might come sooner than you think". blogs.telegraph.co.uk. Retrieved 7 December 2014. ^"Leaders set to review EU's agenda after Eurosceptic surge". itv.com. 26 May 2014. Retrieved 8 December 2014. ^"the moment of our victory, we Eurosceptics seem determined to throw it all away". The Telegraph. 26 May 2014. Retrieved 14 November 2014. ^Syal, Rajeev (12 November 2014). "Conservative MEP accused of being Ukip mouthpiece by fellow Tory". The Guardian. Retrieved 14 November 2014. ^A. and C. Black Publishers Staff (2007). Who's Who. London: A & C Black. ISBN 978-0-7136-7527-6. ^"Telegraph columnist and blogger Daniel Hannan awarded online prize". The Daily Telegraph. 27 October 2009. Retrieved 16 December 2011. ^Lachno, James (27 April 2011). "Christopher Hitchens' memoir among Orwell Prize 2011 nominations". The Daily Telegraph. Retrieved 23 January 2012. ^http://www.politicalbookawards.com/#awards^"Lord Mandelson named Politician of the Year". The Daily Telegraph. 12 November 2009. Retrieved 16 December 2011. ^Dale, Iain; Brivati, Brian (5 October 2009). "Top 100 most influential Right-wingers: 50-1". The Daily Telegraph. Retrieved 16 December 2011. ^Dale, Iain; Brivati, Brian (26 September 2008). "Top 100 right wingers: 100-76". The Daily Telegraph. Retrieved 16 December 2011. ^Dale, Iain; Brivati, Brian (4 October 2011). "Top 100 most influential Right-wingers: 50-26". The Daily Telegraph. Retrieved 16 December 2011. ^Dale, Iain; Brivati, Brian (4 October 2011). "The Top 100 most influential people on the Right 2011, 50''26". The Daily Telegraph. Retrieved 16 December 2011. External links[edit]

Link to Article

Archived Version

Thu, 30 Jun 2016 01:39

''Morning Joe'' hosts Mika Brzezinski and Joe Scarborough could soon go public as a couple. Page Six has exclusively learned that Brzezinski and her husband of 23 years have quietly divorced.

Popular MSNBC stars Scarborough and Brzezinski are widely rumored to be romantically involved '-- and there's plenty of on-air chemistry for all to see. But while Scarborough is also divorced '-- since 2013 '-- the TV duo have never confirmed they're romantically involved.

An NBC insider told us, ''Everybody at 30 Rock knows they are a couple .'‰.'‰. They are constantly together, they arrive and leave events together, even on weekends. They are each other's publicists and finish each other's sentences. It's the worst kept secret in TV.''

Brzezinski, 49, and her ex-husband, WABC Eyewitness News investigative reporter James Hoffer, who married in 1993, have undergone an under-the-radar divorce, which was recently settled, we're told. They have two teenage daughters.

Scarborough, 53, divorced Susan Waren, a former aide to former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, in 2013 after a 12-year marriage. The former couple, who have two children together, separated the previous year.

An MSNBC spokesperson confirmed to Page Six, ''Mika's divorce was finalized in the past year. She's really grateful that it was done amicably and in private. This has, of course, been a painful time for her family. So right now she is focused on her two teenage daughters, and on continuing to heal.''

The spokesperson declined to comment on the status of her relationship with Scarborough.

A friend of the ''Knowing Your Value'' author said: ''Mika has always been very open '-- in her books and elsewhere '-- about her failures and disappointments in life, her struggles with eating disorders, her career, the ups and downs of parenting.''

The friend added, ''I'm sure down the road she'll want to share more about this experience, but right now she thinks it's best for her family to have some privacy.''

Link to Article

Archived Version

Tue, 28 Jun 2016 22:44

Posted June 28th, 2016 @ 9:33am

For months I have been saying mostly good things in this blog about Trump's powers of persuasion, and mostly bad things about how the Clinton campaign does persuasion. And yet Clinton has a solid lead in the polls, assuming the polls are accurate. How can that be?

The quick answer is that Clinton's side is totally winning the persuasion battle.

Confused?

Clinton's side includes more than her campaign team. It also includes pundits, supporters on social media, and the liberal-leaning parts of the mainstream media. While the Clinton campaign itself has been notably weak with its persuasion game, the folks on her side have been viciously effective at branding Trump a crazy racist.

Nothing else in this election matters.

Viewed through the Master Persuader filter, the facts of this election don't matter because facts are not persuasive. The lies don't matter. The flip-flopping doesn't matter. Trump's command of the issues don't matter. Trump's insults don't matter. Policies don't matter. Trump University doesn't matter. Even charges of sexism are not enough to derail him.

The persuasion kill shot against Trump is the accusation that Trump is a crazy racist. When you combine crazy and racist, you have a lethal persuasion cocktail. And that's what the Clinton side has done.

The folks on social media tested lots of accusations against Trump until they found traction with the ''crazy racist'' theme in all its forms. And Clinton's campaign team wisely amplified it.

Remember when social media was saying Trump wasn't serious about running, or that he was a clown, or he was doing it for the money? Those accusations didn't get traction, and Trump swept them away with his continued success.

But the accusations kept coming, one after another, until the combo of crazy and racist bubbled to the top, as measured by social media virality. The Clinton campaign recognized the crazy racist theme as the best approach and started hammering on it through a variety of ''fear Trump'' message. Fear works when facts do not. And ''crazy racist'' is totally scary. And totally working. You can test it for yourself by asking any anti-Trumper to list the top three reasons for disliking Trump. Some form of ''crazy racist'' will normally come out on top. Persuasion-wise, every other reason is just noise.

If you're new to what I call the Master Persuasion Filter, and you're on the Clinton side, you probably don't see any persuasion there at all. What you see appears to be facts that say '' without a doubt '' that Trump is a crazy racist. But all of that is confirmation bias and persuasion.

For example'...

There was the time Trump called for a wall to keep illegals out, and social media said securing our borders '' which we already try to do '' is racist.

There was the time Trump suggested mass deportation of illegal immigrants, and social media said upholding current law is racist.

There was the time Trump suggested banning all Muslim immigrants until we figure out what the risk is, and how to deal with it. Islam is a belief system open to all, not a race, but social media branded it as racist.

There was the time Trump didn't denounce the KKK on CNN in a timely fashion. He says he didn't hear the question because of a bad earpiece, and he had denounced the KKK before the interview and several times after. Still, that one awkward interview created confirmation bias of racism because the public was primed to see it as such.

There was the time Trump called the judge in his Trump University case ''Mexican'' even though the judge was born in this country of Mexican immigrants. That seemed racist because voters were primed to see it that way. Keep in mind that Trump called Ted Cruz a Canadian for months and you didn't see that as racist.

As a legal strategy, it makes perfect sense for Trump to accuse the judge of bias. That way, if the ruling goes against Trump, he already has a defense in place. And realistically, no one believes the judge could give a favorable ruling to Trump without some awkwardness at his next family gathering. But voters saw Trump's accusations about the judge's bias '' a bias all humans have '' as racist because they were primed to see things that way.

And there are all the times Trump calls Elizabeth Warren Pocahontas, which is more silly than racist. But once you put it in context with the rest of the confirmation bias, it looks like some sort of pattern.

The facts don't matter. Facts never matter. What matters is that the ''crazy racist'' label picked up enough confirmation bias to stick like tar. The Clinton team won the month of June. And unless something changes, Clinton will saunter to an easy victory in November.

But remember also that Trump always makes aggressive first offers before negotiating to the middle. I predicted a softening of Trump's immigration proposals and you see that happening now, right on schedule. Those changes in his proposals won't be enough to change the election results because facts and policies are meaningless for persuasion. Trump would have to do far more to shake off the crazy racist label.

I now update my prediction of a Trump landslide to say that if he doesn't give a speech on the topic of racism '' to neutralize the crazy racist label '' he loses. There is nothing he can do with policy tweaks, debate performances, advertising, interviews, or anything else that would remove the tarring he received from the Clinton side. But a persuasive speech could do it.

How?

Trump needs to convince Americans of all types that he loves them and plans to protect them from outside forces. Here's a simple and persuasive formulation for that:

Example: ''If you are an American citizen '' of any color, ethnicity, gender, or religion '' I love you, and I'll fight for you. I support the melting pot of America, and I will fight to protect each of you from crime, terrorism, and economic risks.''

That's the basic idea. Talking about policies won't be enough. To become president, Trump has to embrace the melting pot. And he has to embrace the value of American diversity, loudly.

If Trump doesn't directly address the elephant in the room '' the accusation that he is a crazy racist '' he loses. If he makes a case for the value of American diversity '' and does it persuasively '' he wins in a landslide.

I expect him to do the latter.

Note: I endorsed Hillary Clinton for president '' for my personal safety '' because I live in California and it isn't safe to be seen as a Trump supporter here. But my political preferences do not align with either candidate.

'--

Bonus thought: If you were Trump, and you didn't want a stronger candidate to replace Clinton at the last minute, you would hold back your best attacks until she secures the nomination. My guess is that Trump's strongest attacks will start in late summer.

'--

If you think you can't be persuaded to do dumb things, you might want to buy my book.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Thu, 30 Jun 2016 05:20

A federal judge on Wednesday ordered the State Department to produce the e-mail records of Hillary Clinton's scheduler during her tenure as secretary of state, expanding an investigation being pursued by conservative nonprofit Citizens United into the overlap between Clinton's official travel and her meetings with foreign Clinton Foundation donors.

Citizens United is slated to receive all e-mails sent to and from Lona Valmoro, Clinton's State Department scheduler, in the two-week periods before each of 14 international trips Clinton took during her four years in office. David Bossie, president of Citizens United, hopes to confirm suspicions that Clinton maintained an off-the-books schedule, meeting with Clinton Foundation donors on the taxpayer's dime. ''Citizens United wants to know how many overseas dinners Secretary Clinton attended with Clinton Foundation donors that didn't make it on her schedule,'' he says.

Judge Rosemary Collyer, the federal judge presiding over a public-records case brought by Citizens United, was initially hesitant to allow the release of Valmoro's e-mails, and asked the group to provide one example of an off-the-books meeting with Clinton Foundation donors. As part of a joint filing with the State Department on Monday, Citizens United presented the judge with several pieces of evidence suggesting Valmoro deliberately struck from the official schedule a December 6, 2012, dinner in Dublin, Ireland, with several Clinton Foundation and Clinton campaign donors, organized by Teneo co-founder Declan Kelly. Though Valmoro was made aware of the Dublin meeting through an earlier e-mail chain, neither Clinton's archived daily calendar nor her detailed official schedule make any note of it.

Citizens United characterizes the State Department's decision to go along with the filing as an acknowledgement that Clinton did, in fact, maintain a secret schedule. Collyer was apparently convinced, ordering the State Department on Wednesday to produce 500 pages of Valmoro's e-mails by the end of August. An additional 500 pages will be released every four weeks from that date, until Citizens United obtains all messages relating to the 14 overseas trips specified.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Wed, 29 Jun 2016 20:06

ABOUT US

AIRLIVE.net is supported by a team of aviation enthusiasts.All data and information provided on this site is for informational purposes only. AIRLIVE.net makes no representations as to accuracy, completeness, currentness, suitability or validity of any information on this site and will not be liable for any errors or omissions. All information is provided on an as-is basis.Any information or suggestion, contact us.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Thu, 30 Jun 2016 03:12

Cairo (AFP) - Data from one of the black boxes of a crashed EgyptAir plane showed smoke alarms had sounded on board, while soot was found on the wreckage, an Egyptian-led investigative committee said Wednesday.

The black box had been retrieved from the bottom of the Mediterranean after the Airbus A320 with 66 people on board plunged into the sea on May 19 while heading to Cairo from Paris.

It had recorded the flight's data from its departure until it "stopped at an altitude of 37,000 feet (11,250 metres)," the committee said in a statement.

"Recorded data is showing a consistency with ACARS messages of lavatory smoke and avionics smoke," it said, two days after the damaged recorder was repaired in France.

Investigators had previously announced that the plane's automated Aircraft Communications Addressing and Reporting System (ACARS) sent signals indicating smoke alarms on board the plane before it went down.

"Parts of the front section of the aircraft showed signs of high temperature damage and soot," the committee statement added.

Egyptian investigators had confirmed that the aircraft had made a 90-degree left turn followed by a 360-degree turn to the right before hitting the sea.

The plane was carrying 40 Egyptians, 15 French, two Iraqis, two Canadians and one passenger each from Algeria, Belgium, Britain, Chad, Portugal, Saudi Arabia and Sudan.

The repair work of the cockpit voice recorder, the second black box, was underway at the France's BEA air safety agency.

The device had been found broken into pieces but salvage experts managed to retrieve the recorder's memory unit, Egypt's civil aviation ministry had said.

The committee statement said the search remained for the remains of the passengers and crew.

It "will continue till the full recovery of all the remains at the crash location," it said.

Both Egyptian and French judiciary have opened investigations into the mysterious incident, without ruling out that it had been deliberately downed.

The crash follows the bombing of a Russian passenger over Egypt's restive Sinai Peninsula last October, killing all 224 passengers and crew.

The Islamic State group claimed responsibility for that attack, but there has been no such claim linked to the EgyptAir crash, and the group usually swift claims responsibility for large scale attacks.

Egypt's aviation minister had initially said an attack was the more likely explanation, but President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi said there was no theory being favoured yet.

EgyptAir said last week advance compensation payments of $25,000 will be offered to families of the 66 people killed in the crash.

The payments are separate to those expected from insurance companies on behalf of various parties depending on the investigation into the disaster.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Thu, 30 Jun 2016 01:46

One of the guns used in the November 13, 2015 Paris terrorist attacks came from Phoenix, Arizona where the Obama administration allowed criminals to buy thousands of weapons illegally in a deadly and futile ''gun-walking'' operation known as ''Fast and Furious.''

A Report of Investigation (ROI) filed by a case agent in the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco Firearms and Explosives (ATF) tracked the gun used in the Paris attacks to a Phoenix gun owner who sold it illegally, ''off book,'' Judicial Watch's law enforcement sources confirm. Federal agents tracing the firearm also found the Phoenix gun owner to be in possession of an unregistered fully automatic weapon, according to law enforcement officials with firsthand knowledge of the investigation.

The investigative follow up of the Paris weapon consisted of tracking a paper trail using a 4473 form, which documents a gun's ownership history by, among other things, using serial numbers. The Phoenix gun owner that the weapon was traced back to was found to have at least two federal firearms violations'--for selling one weapon illegally and possessing an unregistered automatic'--but no enforcement or prosecutorial action was taken against the individual. Instead, ATF leaders went out of their way to keep the information under the radar and ensure that the gun owner's identity was ''kept quiet,'' according to law enforcement sources involved with the case. ''Agents were told, in the process of taking the fully auto, not to anger the seller to prevent him from going public,'' a veteran law enforcement official told Judicial Watch.

It's not clear if the agency, which is responsible for cracking down on the illegal use and trafficking of firearms, did this because the individual was involved in the Fast and Furious gun-running scheme. An ATF spokesman, Corey Ray, at the agency's Washington D.C. headquarters told Judicial Watch that ''no firearms used in the Paris attacks have been traced'' by the agency. When asked about the ROI report linking the weapon used in Paris to Phoenix, Ray said ''I'm not familiar with the report you're referencing.'' Judicial Watch also tried contacting the Phoenix ATF office, but multiple calls were not returned.

The ATF ran the Fast and Furious experiment and actually allowed criminals, ''straw purchasers,'' working for Mexican drug cartels to buy weapons at federally licensed firearms dealers in Phoenix and allowed the guns to be ''walked'''--possessed without any knowledge of their whereabouts. The government lost track of most of the weapons and many have been used to murder hundreds of innocent people as well as a U.S. Border Patrol agent, Brian Terry, in Arizona. A mainstream newspaper reported that a Muslim terrorist who planned to murder attendees of a Muhammad cartoon contest in Garland, Texas last year bought a 9-millimeter pistol at a Phoenix gun shop that participated in the ATF's Fast and Furious program despite drug and assault charges that should have raised red flags. Judicial Watch has thoroughly investigated Fast and Furious and has sued the Obama administration for information about the once-secret operation.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Mon, 27 Jun 2016 14:37

A new academic study has rocked the government in Berlin as people call for a 'dictatorship in the national interest' with one in ten wanting a new F¼hrer to lead them to glory.

The University of Leipzig's research team found that nearly 34 per cent of people quizzed thought Germany is 'dangerously overpopulated by foreigners.'

A total of 21.9 per cent agreed that Germany needs 'a single strong party that embodies the national community as a whole'.

Scroll down for video

Thirty per cent claimed Germany had been 'infiltrated by too many foreigners in a dangerous way'

One in every ten Germans wants their country to be led by a 'F¼hrer' applying 'a firm hand for the common good.'

And 71 years after Nazism was vanquished and the horror of the death camps revealed to a stunned world, 11 per cent of people questioned by the university researchers said Jews have too much influence in society.

Overall 12 per cent think Germans are by nature 'superior' to other people - a central plank of the ideology of Adolf Hitler and the original Nazis.

71 years after Nazism and the Hitler Youth (pictured) was vanquished, 11 per cent of people questioned by the university researchers said Jews have too much influence in society

Other findings included four out of every ten people thinking Muslims should be prohibited from immigrating to the country and half of respondents in a survey of 2,240 people saying they feel like 'foreigners in their own country.'

Thirty per cent claimed Germany had been 'infiltrated by too many foreigners in a dangerous way.' And three out of every five Germans believe migrants who have arrived in the country seeking sanctuary from war and terror are bogus.

'They are not really at risk of any persecution in their home country" was the question they agreed with.

The rise of the hard-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) party delivered hammer blows to Chancellor Angela Merkel's CDU conservatives in regional polls in March

'There has been no increase in extreme right attitudes, but in comparison with our study from two years ago people who have far-right attitudes are more prepared to use violence to achieve their aims,' said Dr Oliver Decker, one of the report's authors.

'There is a clear polarisation and radicalisation in German society, with more respondents also likely to completely reject violence this time around.

'The two groups exist next to each other. We have people who actively engage to help refugees and there are people who actively reject refugees,'' said Decker.

The study entitled 'The uninhibited middle' argues extremist thinking has become more acceptable in mainstream German society - one reason for the rise of the hard-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) party.

It delivered hammer blows to Chancellor Angela Merkel's CDU conservatives in regional polls in March and looks set to send MPs into national government in the general election in the autumn of next year.

'Most AfD voters have a hostile attitude to the world,' said report co-author Dr Elmar Braehler.

'The potential for extreme right or populist right-wing parties is still higher than what electoral results have yet shown,' he added.

The survey noted an increase in negative attitudes towards gyspy communities, with half of respondents saying such people should be banned from city centres.

Gypsies were persecuted by the original Nazis with hundreds of thousands of them murdered in the Holocaust.

And gays - also persecuted under the Third Reich - are also hated: 40 percent of people said they found it 'disgusting' when homosexuals kissed in public - an increase of 15 per cent in a similar survey in 2011.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Wed, 29 Jun 2016 20:54

Alvin Baez/Zuma

Two days before Puerto Rico was set to default on $2 billion in debt payments, the Senate staved off calamity by advancing a measure Wednesday that will allow the island to restructure its debts.

The Puerto Rico Oversight, Management, and Economic Stability Act, known as PROMESA, now heads to President Barack Obama for his signature. It will create an independent financial oversight board that will oversee the island's budgets and allow the Puerto Rican government to restructure its nearly $70 billion in debts with 18 different creditors. A key provision would halt all pending litigation related to the debt'--there are currently 14 different lawsuits'--and allow for continued funding of essential public health and safety services for the island's 3.5 million residents.

The measure was tacked on to a bill in the Senate that will reauthorize the National Sea Grant Program through fiscal year 2021.

"Obviously, the bill isn't perfect," Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said after its passage, according to the Washington Post. "But here's why we should support it: It won't cost taxpayers a dime; it prevents a bailout; and it offers Puerto Rico the best chance to return to financial stability and economic growth over the long term so we can help prevent another financial crisis like this in the future."

On Monday, Treasury Secretary Jack Lew sent a letter to McConnell arguing that failure to pass the bill by July 1 could lead to Puerto Rico defaulting on a $2 billion debt and interest payment and a possible court order forcing the island's government to pay creditors before providing essential services for its people. The result could have been that Puerto Rico would have stopped paying police officers and firefighters, shut down public transit, and even closed medical facilities.

The next day, Puerto Rico Gov. Alejandro Garcia Padilla wrote an op-ed for CNBC and argued that there was no choice but to pass this bill. He noted that the island's government has already cut millions in spending, eliminated thousands of public jobs, raised taxes, and withheld tax returns, and is currently $2 billion behind in payments to suppliers (in addition to the $2 billion debt payment due July 1).

"The emergency measures we have taken are unsustainable, harm our economy, reduce revenues and diminish our capacity to repay our debts," he wrote. "Puerto Rico cannot endure any more austerity."

The governor's op-ed echoed many Democrats, Puerto Ricans, and observers and said the independent financial review board'--which has broad powers over the island's budget decisions and is not accountable to any local elected leaders'--"unnecessarily undercuts the democratic institution of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico." Democracy Now's Juan Gonzlez noted Wednesday that a majority of Puerto Ricans oppose the bill and even the concept of an independent review board.

On Tuesday, as the Senate debated the bill, Democratic presidential contender Sen. Bernie Sanders railed against the bill, urging his colleagues not to support it, according to the Washington Post. Sanders has opposed the bill since it was proposed in the House.

"Is this legislation smacking of the worst form of colonialism, in the sense that it takes away all of the important democratic rights of the American citizens of Puerto Rico?" he asked Sen. Bob Menendez (D-N.J.), who was speaking against the bill at the time. "That basically, four Republicans who likely believe in strong austerity programs will essentially be running that island for the indefinite future?"

Here's how the financial review board works: The president will appoint the seven-member board by September 1, choosing the members from a list of names submitted by congressional leadership. '‹A nominee must have a background in finance, municipal bond markets, management, law, or government operations and cannot have a primary residence or business interest on the island. House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wisc.) will nominate three members; McConnell, Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), and Obama will each nominate one. The governor of Puerto Rico, or his designee, will have a non-voting spot on the board.

The cash-strapped Puerto Rican government is responsible for coming up with the initial $2 million to establish the board'--which will operate without any local oversight'-- and then will also be responsible figuring out its budget and permanently funding it to cover salaries for an executive director, other staff members, and overhead. The board will continue to be in charge of Puerto Rico's financial existence until the island's government has "adequate" access to short-term and long-term credit markets at reasonable interest rates and develops and maintains four consecutive years of on-target, board-determined budgets.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Mon, 27 Jun 2016 14:42

A group of East Coast states wants to help overhaul the way America pays for its decaying roads, and it's starting with Monopoly money.

Delaware, Pennsylvania, Connecticut and New Hampshire are proposing pilots to figure out how they might charge motorists a fee for the miles they travel '-- rather than taxing their gas, as state and federal officials do today.

The I-95 Corridor Coalition, which represents transportation officials from 16 states and the District of Columbia, applied for a federal grant last month to test the idea.

Officials would stitch together the policies and technologies needed to count the miles driven by 50 recruits from each of the four states, including state legislators, transportation officials or other willing guinea pigs. They would send out ''faux invoices'' monthly. And they would collect the data that legislatures '-- and the driving public '-- would require to decide if the change makes sense.

Although California plans to launch a pilot in July, also with fake invoices, and Oregon has had success with a volunteer program collecting actual cash, the concept is not particularly well known '-- or well loved across the country.

The Mineta Transportation Institute, which has polled the public on a variety of tax questions, found that the mileage tax was ''unwaveringly unpopular,'' but Asha Agrawal, Ph.D. who is thedirector of Mineta Institute's finance center, said that is not the end of the story. (Commonwealth Club of California)

The Mineta Transportation Institute, which has polled the public on a variety of tax questions for the past seven years, found that the mileage tax was ''unwaveringly unpopular.'' In the latest survey, which covered 1,500 people and was released this month, the institute found that support ranged between 23 percent and 48 percent, depending on how the question was framed. More people liked the idea if the mileage tax varied by how much a car pollutes.

But Jennifer Cohan, Delaware's secretary of transportation and chair of the coalition, said states have no choice but to seek alternatives.

''Reliance on the gas tax as a major contributor to funding transportation is no longer a viable option,'' Cohan said.

The federal gas tax of 18.4 cents per gallon has not been raised since 1993, and many states have not indexed their own gas taxes to inflation, so those key funding sources have fallen far behind the nation's needs.

And efforts to raise gas taxes can hit a political wall, as one did in Delaware last year. ''In general, it just leaves a bad taste in their mouth when you mention the words 'gas tax,''‰'' Cohan said.

According to the latest Mineta survey report, authored by Asha Weinstein Agrawal and Hilary Nixon, which was presented this month at the Commonwealth Club of California, between 31 percent and 75 percent of people supported increasing the gas tax '-- the higher figure if it was dedicated to maintenance.

Delaware ended up raising DMV fees instead. But advocates said that there needs to be a more comprehensive approach to plugging the gaping hole in the nation's transportation funding, which is why the group of states is delving into the intricacies of ''mileage-based user fees.''

Gas prices have stayed low since late 2014. Here's why, how long it could last and who the winners and losers are. (Gillian Brockell/The Washington Post)

''It's kind of hard to wrap your head around it,'' Cohan said, adding that she hopes to tap would-be opponents as some of the test subjects if they are awarded the grant.

''Whatever it ends up being, at least we'll have data. We'll actually have something to show: This is what it will look like if we actually implement it,'' she said.

Privacy remains a key issue, including how the government can track miles traveled without raising fears of snooping on where people are going.

Backers say that they are sensitive to such concerns, particularly after Edward Snowden's revelations about data collection by the National Security Agency left many spooked about government overreach. At the same time, people readily allow their movements to be charted and their personal details to be broadcast via smartphone apps.

Louis Neudorff, an engineer at the firm CH2M Hill, helped manage Oregon's effort and would play a key role if the I-95 group secures federal funding. He said there are a range of technological tools that allow miles to be tallied without intrusion. Drivers can plug a counting device into a port already found on many cars, he said. Cellphone apps are another option, including one that calls for the driver to take periodic photos of the odometer. One firm promises to pull mileage data from cars through a device hooked to gas pumps at local service stations, Neudorff said.

Cheaters seeking to game the system are a challenge as well.

Of course, some people have no objections to one of the most straightforward solutions: using GPS to measure distances. Such a method would also help solve one of the big questions the East Coast pilot projects would seek to answer: how to divvy up all the miles (and money) based on which state the car is in.

''You can drive three or four hours in our part of the world and go through three or four states,'' said Neudorff, who lives on Virginia's Eastern Shore. Loads of toll data from E-ZPass transponders that are already in many cars could help, he said.

''You cannot mandate GPS or, politically, this will never go anywhere. You have to have choices,'' Neudorff said.

Patricia G. Hendren, executive director of the I-95 coalition, said that people could opt out. Any future approach ''will offer the option to simply pay an annual fee,'' she said. But setting that fee could be sticky.

Backers said such questions, and even basics such as how much to charge per mile, are part of what needs to be hashed out in the experiments. Oregon, for example, has been charging 1.5 cents per mile in its volunteer program, which was designed to raise the same amount as gas-tax revenue.

The intent is that the mileage-based fee ''is not additive, but a substitute for the gas tax,'' Hendren said. The fake monthly bills would include ''estimated gas-tax credits,'' she said.

''The idea is to get folks comfortable that mileage-based user fees are a feasible, reasonable and easy-to-use approach,'' Hendren said. Vermont is among the five states that signed on for the planning portion of the project, but it is not undertaking a pilot ''due to financial constraints,'' she said.

Advocates said fairness is a selling point, arguing that people should pay for how much of the roads they use, just as they pay for water or electricity. Under the current system, electric cars avoid the gas tax altogether, though they have big environmental pluses.

''It's the age-old discussion: whether or not transportation should be user-based or more broadly based, because it's a basic function of government,'' said Aubrey Layne, transportation secretary in Virginia, which did not join the grant application. Layne said he supports the exploration, which could turn out to be ''part of the answer.''

But he said he is skeptical that it will be the primary way to close the nation's vast funding gap: ''I don't think it's the Promised Land that's going solve all our problems.''

Link to Article

Archived Version

Wed, 29 Jun 2016 19:16

Hillary would like to add, "Be Kind! It's his first diary!"An interesting new study about media bias was conducted recently by Harvard. The results perhaps aren't all that surprising to those of us who've been closely following press coverage throughout the primary process, but go a long way in shedding light on several key issues. Most notable among these are Clinton's downward trajectory in the ''likability'' department but also the fact the media has done a disservice to not only Clinton but also Sanders, supporters of both candidates and the party in general.

A new report released this week by Harvard Kennedy School's Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics, and Public Policy found Clinton has received far more negative coverage than any other candidate in the race thus far. The study was based on an analysis of news statements from CBS, Fox, the Los Angeles Times, NBC, the New York Times, USA Today, the Wall Street Journal, and the Washington Post.

''Far more negative?'' More like insanely more negative! The study found that 84 percent of Clinton's coverage has been ''negative in tone'' compared to just 43 percent for Trump and 17 percent for Sanders. Even though many of us would just assume forget about Rafael Cruz at this stage, it's notable to point out that he received fairly balanced press coverage in comparison to his opponent. So while the media insured their playing field was much more leveled, they didn't afford us the same luxury.

Judging by the data this study reveals, the media has done a true disservice to the left thus far with highly slanted, selective coverage managing to paint an inaccurate picture of both Clinton and Sanders. Why? Well, apparently it was more important to make the entire primary race more ''exciting'' by setting up a false ''David vs. Goliath'' narrative. They didn't really do that at all on the Republican side.

Sanders became the ''David'' in their narrative. In a truly lame effort to paint him as an outsider and anti-establishment alternative to Clinton's ''career politician'' (quite funny considering Sanders has been at it for decades himself) the press proceeded to mostly ignore his considerable experience so he'd appear more pristine. While this resulted in him being shielded from much negative press, it also cost him big with a paltry 7 percent in issues-related coverage. In other words, the world at large received even less insight into his platform and what he truly stands for than even Cruz. His credentials were put on the back burner in exchange for a ''good vs. evil'' fantasy scenario that played on for months on end. Considering one of Sanders' primary strengths as a candidate ARE his populist stances on numerous important issues, he was pretty much screwed over in this regard.

On the other hand, Clinton aka ''Goliath'' received more issues coverage than any other candidate but was otherwise painted as the Wicked Witch of the West with the media focusing primarily on HER shortcomings and constantly trying to explain why she was suddenly slipping in the polls. Gee, I wonder. Perhaps if they weren't themselves too busy wallowing around in fringe right wing conspiracy theories and unsubstantiated nonsense, things would have been different. No one is exactly forcing them to continue beating the dead horse that is Benghazi. Or Whitewater. Or Bill's extracurricular activities. Or her email habits. Or The Clinton Foundation accepting money from Middle Eastern countries, which is perfectly legal and par for the course as far as global charities go, mind you, but I guess not as much fun as theorizing that there MUST be something sinister afoot.

Still, planting unsubstantiated guilt-by-association seeds into people's minds is a piss poor excuse for real journalism by anyone's standard. And there is absolutely NO excuse for giving her nearly double the negative attention they give someone as outrageously unqualified and ridiculous as Trump. That's just flat out dishonest and irresponsible. Pretty much puts the insistent Republican claims that there's a ''left wing media bias'' to rest, does it not?

Regardless, while the major news organizations haven't done democrats / liberals / progressives any favors during this entire process and are certainly complicit in aiding any division we currently face, there's light at the end of the tunnel...

''The tide may be shifting as the campaign focuses on Clinton vs. Trump and she takes advantage of the focus and the contrast to strike a more 'presidential' tone,'' said Frank Sesno, director of the School of Media and Public Affairs at George Washington University. ''If the recent Bloomberg poll is substantiated elsewhere, the narrative will likely shift to Hillary as frontrunner, which will produce some more sharp coverage'--and Trump will never let up in his attacks'--but also more positive coverage that reflects the shifting sands.

Given that poll, which found Clinton with a commanding 12-point lead in the general election, the frontrunner scrutiny won't let up. But increasingly negative coverage of Trump, whose private jet might finally be plummeting back to earth, will likely become a big positive for Clinton.''

SOURCE:

universepolitics.com/...

Link to Article

Archived Version

Mon, 27 Jun 2016 03:44

It sure is amazing how lucky the Clinton's have got when people are going to testify against them and then they die.

Ashe was due in court Monday with his Chinese businessman co-defendant Ng Lap Seng, who is charged with smuggling $4.5 million into the US since 2013 and lying that it was to buy art and casino chips.

Ng was identified in a 1998 Senate report as the source of hundreds of thousands of dollars illegally funneled through an Arkansas restaurant owner, Charlie Trie, to the Democratic National Committee during the Clinton administration. (Ng was not charged with any crime.)

Ng and Trie had visited the White House several times for Democratic fund-raising events and were photographed with then-President Bill Clinton and First LadyHillary Clinton.

One source told me, ''During the trial, the prosecutors would have linked Ashe to the Clinton bagman Ng. It would have been very embarrassing. His death was conveniently timed.''Read the rest at pagesix.com

More about the death below:

DOBBS FERRY, New York '-- A former president of the U.N. General Assembly awaiting trial in a bribery scandal died in a weightlifting accident when a barbell he was lifting from a bench dropped on his neck, an autopsy revealed Thursday.

John Ashe was declared dead late Wednesday afternoon by a paramedic who responded to his Dobbs Ferry home.

Dr. Kunjlata Ashar, Westchester County's medical examiner, said the cause of death '' traumatic asphyxia '' was determined during an autopsy, though she did not perform the procedure herself and did not have additional details. It was deemed an accident based on a combination of information from the autopsy and an investigation by the Dobbs Ferry Police Department, officials said.

The police department said in a statement that the death appears accidental, but provided little information otherwise.

Read the rest http://abc7ny.com/.

Commentscomments

Link to Article

Archived Version

Mon, 27 Jun 2016 17:13

The gunman who slaughtered 49 people at the Pulse nightclub in Orlando was a confused, gay man who drank heavily, a man who claims he was his lover for two months told Univision.

Omar Mateen, the deranged Muslim shooter behind the massacre, held a grudge against Latino men he met at the popular gay club because he felt used by them, the man told the network. ''I've cried like you have no idea. But the thing that makes me want to tell the truth is that he didn't do it for terrorism,'' the man told Univision Noticias anchor Maria Elena Salinas in an exclusive interview on Tuesday. ''In my opinion he did it for revenge.''

Mateen even had a tryst with two men, one of whom later revealed he was HIV positive, the man said.

Univision was unable to independently verify the man's account, but the FBI confirmed to the network that it had met with him.

Orlando nightclub shooting timeline revealed

The man, who did not want his true identity revealed, said he met Mateen last year through a gay dating site and began a relationship soon after.

54 photos view gallery

At least 49 dead in mass shooting at Pulse nightclub in OrlandoHe described Mateen as ''a very sweet guy'' who never showed a violent side. He loved to be cuddled. He was looking for love," he said.

Several clubgoers and other acquaintances said that Mateen was a regular at the club and that he was active on such dating sites.

Mateen was married twice and had a child with his second wife.

Omar Mateen: 911 transcripts show bomb threats, terror pledges

The 29-year-old gunman opened fire with a semi-automatic rifle in Pulse in the early hours of June 12, killing 49 people and wounding dozens more. He was killed in a shootout with police hours later.

''My reaction was that can't be the man I know,'' the stunned former lover told Univision. ''It's impossible that the man I know could do that.''

The man said that Mateen was attracted to Latino men, but felt used and rejected by them after several sexual encounters.

Mateen was especially upset after one tryst with a pair of Puerto Rican men, one of whom later revealed he was HIV positive, he added.

Omar Mateen visited Pulse nightclub hours before mass shooting

''He (Omar) was terrified that he was infected,'' he said. ''I asked him, 'Did you do a test?' Yes. He went to the pharmacy and did the test '... it came out negative but it doesn't come out right away. It takes 4, 5 months.

''When I asked him what he was going to do now, his answer was, 'I'm going to make them pay for what they did to me,''' he added.

Meanwhile, U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch traveled to Orlando on Tuesday to deliver a message of support and $1 million in emergency funds to help cover law enforcement costs.

Lynch met with the relatives of victims and told the gay community, ''We stand with you.''

Tags:omar mateenorlando nightclub shootinglgbt newshate crimesfbimass murdergun violencehiv-aidsSend a Letter to the EditorJoin the Conversation:facebookTweet

Link to Article

Archived Version

Tue, 28 Jun 2016 21:31

Michael Steven Sandford Lead Out of Trump Rally In Vegas

Information has come to light that suspected Assassin Michael Steven Sandford who recently attempted to assassinate Donald Trump at a recent Las Vegas rally, was trained by undercover FBI agents posing as Islamic terrorists, along side Omar Mateen and James Howell.

Recent information has come to light stemming from a recent Fox News Story and interview with James Wesley Howell, that links Omar Mateen, James Wesley Howell and Michael Sandford as members of a large U.S. terror organization that targets emotionally troubled young men and women to commit terrorist acts in the U.S.

Preceding the police shooting of Mateen in Orlando Florida and the arrest of Howell in Santa Monica prior to his participation in a planned attack on the Gay Pride Parade in Hollywood California, Get off the BS learned and reported that both Mateen and Howell had been recruited though an online social media course dubbed, ''Fundamental Islamic Knowledge Seminary'' course.

Fox News recently reported that according to FBI Director James Comey, Mateen ''was a follower of a controversial gang leader-turned-bank robber Marcus Dwayne Robertson, who has been identified by the FBI and Homeland Security as a recruiter for terrorists and for his repeated acts of inciting violence.''

Although Fox News did not report a connection between Mateen, Howell and Sanford, Howell's statements to Santa Monica Police officer's at the time of his arrest and a recent interview at the Los Angeles County Jail with Howell and Brenda Corpian, a reporter for Get off The Bs, have brought some very disturbing facts to light.

''We were all familiar with each other through an online fundamental Islamic knowledge seminary course '' we were recruited through the course and trained together at a camp in Virginia '' we were taught how to shoot and make bombs '' everyone knew their part '' something went wrong'....'', said Howell at the time of his arrest in Santa Monica, CA.

James Howell

Interview with Howell at LACJWhen interviewed at the LACJ (Los Angeles County Jail) by our staff attorney an investigative reporter, Brenda Corpian, Howell further elaborated on his original statements. Brenda was allowed to speak with Howell as a licensed attorney considering representing him.

Brenda: You originally mentioned three other people you went thought training with. However you only mentioned the names of two of the people you trained with. Do you now remember who the third person was?

Howell:''Your guy got that f@#$%d-up. I told the cops what I knew ''I trained with four other people '' not three. We were part of one group '' there were at lest 8 groups that we seen '' maybe more.''

Brenda: Do you know what kind of activities these other groups were being trained for?

Howell: ''I don't know. Probably the same s@#t we were learning '' I mean, we sometimes trained together on some stuff.''

Brenda: What kind of training did you receive at the camp '' what did you train with others to do?

Howell: ''The usual stuff I guess '' making pipe bombs, mixing chemical explosives '' ya know, military s@*t.''

Brenda: James, could you be more specific '' what do you mean by military (expletive)'' were you ever in the military?

Howell: ''No I never made that trip but I have seen a lot of deep s*%t. I think everyone had his or her own thing going on. They taught several of us how to shoot '' others were taught how to blow s**t up. All of us had to take our turns in the gas room'....''

Brenda: The gas room?

Howell: ''Yeah, it was really f@#$%d up. We had to go in to this room with gas masks on and take them off after they shot the gas in '' it was jacked up.''

It appears that Howell and others he was trained with went through an abbreviated version of what the Army dubs basic training. Additionally it appears that selective training was given to others for specific assignments.

Howell and Omar were trained to handle automatic weapons and explosives. Howell witnessed at least five other people being trained to shoot what Howell described as ''long rifles'' '' most likely sniper rifles.

Howell Identifies Sandford '' Suspect In Assassination of Donald Trump In Las Vegas NV.''We all called Dan the chemist. He seemed to get off to making bombs and setting things on fire'....I remember a time one his firecrackers came within inches of blowing some ball bearings through Michael's legs'....man that Brit was pissed,'' said Howell.

Brenda: Brit? Who is Michael?

Howell: ''The guy in Vegas. Weird mother f@$%%r '' we called him the Brit because he was from England or some place like that'...we went and partied one night with him'....he has a nice Beamer.''

Brenda: I am not sure I understand what you mean by 'the guy in Vegas?' Beamer'--do you mean BMW?

Howell: ''The guy they arrested for trying to grab that cops gun to shoot Trump with '-- yeah a BMW '' you know '' beamer. I am in to lowered Honda's and Acura's. I have a sweet ride. If I ever get out of here maybe we can go for a '.....''

Howell definitely made it clear while he was talking to Brenda that he knew Michael Sandford '' recently arrested at a Trump rally for trying to disarm a Las Vegas metropolitan Police officer '' a gun Sandford later claimed to the U.S. Secret Service he would have used to shoot Donald Trump.

Brenda reported that during the time she talked to Howell he seemed scared one moment and at other moments he was flirting with her. It was obvious to Brenda that Howell was very scared of what might happen to him while in custody but tried to add levity to the conversation to appear somewhat tough.

Brenda wrote in her story that, ''I doubt very seriously that the recent reports that Howell is bi-sexual are accurate. The whole time I talked to him his eyes were glued to my breasts''he made no attempt to hide the fact that he was turned on by my chest.''

Marcus Robertson

FBI / Homeland Security Partner With A Radial Islamic TerroristAccording to Howell, he first came in contact with Imam Abu Taubah, AKA Marcus Robertson, a former marine who is the leader of what Howell believed was an ISIS cell group training and operating in the U.S.

Howell, Mateeen and Sandford were allegedly recruited by Robertson through an online fundamental Islamic knowledge seminary course, which Robertson conducts.

''I had no idea that the CIA was involved until I arrived at the camp in Virginia with others to start our training'....I have read about places like the camp'...but it was not what I was expecting'....I don't think anyone else was expecting it either,'' said Howell.

Howell was unsure of exactly how many people were at the camp with him and or what particular missions, if any, the other recruits were being trained for. ''People came in and out. Omar, Dan and me were always together'--we knew what we were suppose to do.''

It appears Howell and his fellow conspirators were told very clearly to ''keep their mouths shut'' about what they were going to do and to not ask others about their assignments '' roles, if any.

Brenda's interview came to an end when someone at the jail abruptly shut off the phones Howell and her were speaking through.

Although it is normal procedure for a client (Howell) and their attorney (Brenda) to talk in privacy in an interview room, the authorities despite Brenda's license to practice law in California, would not allow Brenda to speak with Howell in an attorney/client interview room.

Additionally, the phone interview should not of been monitored, which is obvious it was because after Howell had already described two people and was half way through naming the last name of a third person, the phone system was shut down and Brenda was rudely escorted out of the building.

Use Your Best Judgment Why The Caption Here Does Not Identify Either of These Two Bitches

Senator, Former Clinton Aide and a High Ranking Federal Law Enforcement Agent Have Regularly Met With RobertsonBrenda: You have mentioned Dan, Omar and Michael '' did you recognize anyone else that you may have known previously or seen on TV or read about?

Howell:''They often meet with Abu. They seemed especially interested in Michael. The Senator was often accompanied by a woman who I have seen on television hundreds of times, she doesn'twork for the government anymore but I think her husband does'...'...yeah her name is Hu'...''end of interview.

According to Brenda's report, Howell claims that Robertson was seen several times meeting with a current US Senator, a high ranking member of Homeland Security and was releasing the name of a woman that we have a good idea of her identity from his description of her and what was heard of her name before the interview was abruptly ended.

Frankly, both Brenda and I are not completely convinced that Howell was completely honest with her during her interview with him. However, many things that Howell said are consistent with the recent Fox report concerning Robertson and a 365 USA News report concerning some very strange recruitment activities that are being done by the FBI according to FBI Director James Comey.

However, we are completely convinced that Howell definitely knows Sandford because at the time of her interview with Howell, he mentioned several pieces of information that included specific information concerning the vehicle Sandford drove to Las Vegas which had not yet been reported before Brenda's interview with Howell.

Brenda was concerned that Howell may have embellished part of his story to impress her.

Omar Mateen

This Story Has Been Partially Revealed By Mainstream Media Sources on Numerous Occasions Since 2013We are not the first news source to reveal the questionable activities of Robertson and the FBI. The Fox News article raised a good question as to why Robertson was released from prison early when in fact he was previously identified by the FBI and Homeland Security as a ''Radical Islam'' known to recruit other like-minded individuals.

Additionally, Fox News raised the question of why did Mateen who had been recruited by a fake terrorist group of under cover FBI agents, be let off their hook ten months after he was recruited.

A recent U.S. 365 News article includes an affidavit from a former undercover FBI agent that was verified accurate by James Comey, addresses the FBI's activities of pretending to be radical terrorists who recruit people they believe have radical Islamic beliefs, arming them with guns and explosives, and later busting them prior to their carrying out the missions the undercover operatives assigned them.

Please also consider the first mentioning of the FBI's suspected initial involvement and later ignoring of young terrorists living in the USA, who later committed an act of terror, was first revealed in April of 2013, shortly after the terrorist attack on the Boston Marathon.

The most disturbing part of the former undercover FBI operatives and James Comey's story is that there have never been any reported stories about the alleged arrests of anybody they have baited in to their traps.

Although, it is reasonable to assume any alleged arrests were most likely kept quiet due to the FBI not wanting future targets to be aware of their ongoing undercover sting operations.

If in fact Howell had been trained alongside Mateen and Sanford as he alleged, by under cover agents working for the FBI, why were at least five people involved in the Orlando shooting, the failed attempt of killing Gay Pride parade attendees and the attempt to assassinate Donald Trump, released from the undercover FBI's terrorist trap?

Additionally, what are the missions of at least 100 other young radicals that Howell claims he seen training along side him at what he was told is a CIA training camp in Virginia?

The FBI's story about using undercover agents to pose as radical Islamic terrorists to draw in and bust suspected terrorists sounds plausible on the surface, but unravels quickly when the FBI nor Homeland Security has offered any rational reason why they let Mateen and others who they have claimed their traps snared, out of their control.

On three separate occasions now, although reported by the news and authorities as unrelated, at least three individuals trained by under cover agents for the FBI have committed terrorist acts in the U.S.

Authors Notes:

Folks we are a small blog with an audience of about 48,000 regular visitors a day. Our group is comprised of college-educated individuals, two with licenses to practice law and one who can practice both medicine and law.

A former source of ours assisting us with an article we previously released about Ted Cruz, died under suspicious circumstances in Indiana, three days after releasing a story on his own blog, where he wrote that if his ''story was correct'' he would most likely ''disappear or be found dead.''

Brenda Corpian was found beaten within an inch of her life and left to die in a dumpster 15 hours after her interview with Howell. She is currently heavily guarded by our private security in a hospital ICU with a poor prognosis for recovery.

We believe that she was beaten and disposed of in a trash dumpster (presumably dead by the hands of her assailants) because of her knowledge of the names Howell revealed to her during his interview.

None of us earn any money and or compensation whatsoever from our efforts to promote Donald J. Trump. Our website does not contain any paid advertising on it nor paid affiliate links to other sites with paid advertising.

We do not ask for and or accept donations.

Although we receive hundreds of tips daily with information that is often newsworthy, we rarely ever use any information that does not come from mainstream media sources or from sources that we cannot verify the reliability of the information from.

We will not publish the names Howell revealed to Brenda. The people who Howell identified, especially the woman, are tied to literally hundreds of questionable deaths and suspicious disappearances of people who had associations with them.

If you are a journalist whose identity can be verified as working for a mainstream media source, please contact us for additional information concerning this story.

However disturbing what we have published in this article may be, what we have omitted may be the biggest cover-up concerning government sponsored terror in this country. May God protect us all from the Obama administration.

Notice: for those trying to vet this story, please be advised the name Brenda Corpian and the name of others used to promote this website, our fictitious names.

Related

Link to Article

Archived Version

Wed, 29 Jun 2016 21:07

By Lars Backstrom, Engineering Director

Facebook was built on the idea of connecting people with their friends and family. As we say in our News Feed values, that is still the driving principle of News Feed today. Our top priority is keeping you connected to the people, places and things you want to be connected to '-- starting with the people you are friends with on Facebook. That's why today, we're announcing an upcoming change to News Feed ranking to help make sure you don't miss stories from your friends.

We previously made an update that tries to ensure that stories posted directly by the friends you care about, such as photos, videos, status updates or links, will be higher up in News Feed so you are less likely to miss them.

We've heard from our community that people are still worried about missing important updates from the friends they care about. For people with many connections this is particularly important, as there are a lot of stories for them to see each day. So we are updating News Feed over the coming weeks so that the things posted by the friends you care about are higher up in your News Feed.Will This Impact My Page?Overall, we anticipate that this update may cause reach and referral traffic to decline for some Pages. The specific impact on your Page's distribution and other metrics may vary depending on the composition of your audience. For example, if a lot of your referral traffic is the result of people sharing your content and their friends liking and commenting on it, there will be less of an impact than if the majority of your traffic comes directly through Page posts. We encourage Pages to post things that their audience are likely to share with their friends. As always, Pages should refer to our publishing best practices.

We are always working to improve News Feed so people see the most relevant stories to them, and will continue to make ranking updates and share them here on our News Feed FYI blog.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Wed, 29 Jun 2016 21:08

Posts from your family and friends will now be placed higher in your Facebook News Feed, the social media company said in a blog post Wednesday.

Facebook has struggled in recent months with a decline in "personal" sharing on its platform, as people increasingly flock to competitors like Snapchat. Updating News Feed to highlight status updates and pictures from friends and family may encourage users to share that type of content themselves.

"To help make sure you don't miss the friends and family posts you are likely to care about, we put those posts toward the top of your News Feed," Adam Mosseri, a vice president of product management at Facebook, wrote in the blog post.

"We learn from you and adapt over time. For example, if you tend to like photos from your sister, we'll start putting her posts closer to the top of your feed so you won't miss what she posted while you were away," he added.

Overall, the move highlights what Facebook's most valuable commodity is: you. Without your data -- be it pictures, videos or the written word -- there is no social network.

It's no surprise, then, that the update is sure to have serious consequences for media outlets and businesses that rely on exposure from Facebook.

"We anticipate that this update may cause reach and referral traffic to decline for some Pages," Lars Backstrom, engineering director at Facebook, wrote in a separate post about the change.

Traffic from Facebook to media outlets has already fallen in recent months, following a change on the platform that prioritizes live video.

A major takeaway? You can control what you put on Facebook, but make no mistake: The company, its engineers and its algorithms are in charge of what you see.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Wed, 29 Jun 2016 21:09

Facebook planted a flag Wednesday, declaring that the site will give greater weight to material posted by your friends and deemphasize content published by businesses and media outlets.

The social network approached the issue with a rare bit of candor, stating that the change to its News Feed will likely hurt traffic to external websites.

''We anticipate that this update may cause reach and referral traffic to decline for some Pages,'' Lars Backstrom, engineering director at Facebook, wrote in a blog post.

Adam Mosseri, a vice president of product management at Facebook, doubled down in a statement to reporters.

''I'd expect reach for publishers to go down a small amount but a noticeable amount," he said.

This could have unintended consequences for people who rely on Facebook for news -- and there are a lot of them. A recent report from the Pew Research Center found that 44 percent of Americans get news from Facebook -- a bit more than 142 million people, all told. That same report found that 64 percent of Americans who receive news on social media use only one site. Maybe that's not the best practice, but it is what it is.

Now, as a consequence to prioritizing content from your friends over pages that you "like," Facebook may end up making you less informed about the outside world on balance.

The Huffington Post asked Facebook for more details about what the shift will actually mean. It didn't get very specific.

"Our top priority is keeping you connected to the people, places and things you want to be connected to '-- starting with the people you are friends with on Facebook," a spokeswoman said via email. "One of the most meaningful ways people connect on Facebook is around news stories '-- so news is and remains a valuable part of News Feed."

Is a picture of your nephew getting married "news"? If so, is that more important than a breaking article about a terrorist attack? Who knows? Facebook is willing to guess based on what you've interacted with before. And as of Wednesday, you're more likely to see that news article if a friend posted it instead of a brand.

That seems reasonable, unless your friends don't post news. Or if your friends are all the same political party. While it's still possible to manually shape your feed with the "See First" button, many people passively rely on the site for much of their information about the world. Now, they'll be more reliant than ever on what their friends decide is important.

For that reason, some (like my colleague Emily Peck) welcomed the change as a happy reversion to what Facebook once was -- a place to connect with friends and family, not a news outlet.

Of course, Facebook had transformed into something different recently.

"Measured by web traffic, ad revenue and influence over the way the rest of the media makes money, Facebook has grown into the most powerful force in the news industry," Farhad Manjoo wrote in The New York Times following Wednesday's update.

Facebook's algorithm tweaks always tend to send the media into a frenzy. And yes, that's partially because writers rely on Facebook to reach their audience and get paid.

But Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg has repeatedly said that his company's goal is to "connect the world." As of Wednesday, that means more posts from your friends on the social network and less from other outlets -- for better or worse.

Read the other side of the argument: Facebook Finally Did Something To Make Facebook Better For You

Link to Article

Archived Version

Thu, 30 Jun 2016 14:23

Link to Article

Archived Version

Thu, 30 Jun 2016 14:18

[See NewsBusters for more.] The network newscasts have shown no interest in an ex-Secret Service agent's unflattering portrayal of Bill and Hillary Clinton's time at the White House. Gary Byrne, author of Crisis of Character, appeared on Fox's Hannity, Monday, but has been all but invisible on ABC, CBS and NBC. Talking to Sean Hannity, the 29-year law enforcement veteran revealed, ''She gets angry at things that are policy issues that, you know, take time to fix, and she's got this attitude where she wants things fixed right now, immediately. She screams and yells at people.''

Link to Article

Archived Version

Thu, 30 Jun 2016 14:14

Nigel Farage the leader of the UK Independence Party appeared on CNN Tuesday afternoon to discuss his support of Brexit, but was subjected to almost an interrogation-like interview from their reporter. ''How much damage are you prepared to see,'' CNN's Richard Quest demanded to know, ''How much damage are you prepared to accept before you rebuild the house?''

The interview was combative right from the start with Quest asking Farage about a speech he gave to the European Parliament earlier in the day, ''You were almost gratuitously rude to the parliamentarians. And you enjoyed it!''

Farage explained that they were the ones shouting over him to the point where the president of the body had to quite them down, but Quest was having none of it, ''But the point is, Mr. Farage, it hardly endears you to the very people who are going to have to give their consent to an agreement in two years' time if you are rude to them.''

Quested wanted Farage to help make sense of the whole thing for the American audience, while also fear mongering about the markets, ''How can Britain thrive, I didn't say survive, I say thrive outside of the European Union when the banks are being decimated in the share price and the threats have been very severe? '...And the pound has fallen 13 '' 14 percent. ''

Farage shot back stating:

And FTSE is up 3 percent today, 12 percent up since its lows in February, sterling is marginally lower than it was in February. So can we stop this nonsense about the markets?! You know, the Pound has been in a bear market since July, 2014, fact. Now, American viewers, imagine if NAFTA was a political union. Imagine if a court in Mexico could overrule everything that congress did. Imagine if you had free movement of people with Mexico. How would you feel?

Link to Article

Archived Version

Thu, 30 Jun 2016 14:06

Secretary of State John Kerry said Tuesday that the Obama administration will hold Iran accountable for its sponsorship of terrorism, but at the same time hopes to use the promotion of trade '' like the Boeing deal '' to advance ''transformation'' in the country.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Thu, 30 Jun 2016 13:43

Link to Article

Archived Version

Thu, 30 Jun 2016 05:15

PHOENIX - Amid an ongoing investigation into Hillary Clinton's use of email and hours before the public release of the Benghazi report, US Attorney General Loretta Lynch met privately with former President Bill Clinton.

The private meeting took place on the west side of Sky Harbor International Airport on board a parked private plane.

Former President Clinton was visiting the Phoenix area and arrived to Sky Harbor Monday evening to depart.

Sources tell ABC15 Clinton was notified Lynch would be arriving at the airport soon and waited for her arrival.

Lynch was arriving in Phoenix for a planned visit as part of her national tour to promote community policing.

ABC15 asked Lynch about the meeting during her news conference at the Phoenix Police Department.

"I did see President Clinton at the Phoenix airport as he was leaving and spoke to myself and my husband on the plane," said Lynch.

The private meeting comes as Lynch's office is in charge of the ongoing investigation and potential charges involving Clinton's email server.

The private meeting also occurred hours before the Benghazi report was released publicly involving Hillary Clinton and President Obama's administration.

Lynch said the private meeting on the tarmac did not involve these topics.

"Our conversation was a great deal about grandchildren, it was primarily social about our travels and he mentioned golf he played in Phoenix," said Lynch Tuesday afternoon while speaking at the Phoenix Police Department.

Sources say the private meeting at the airport lasted around 30 minutes.

"There was no discussion on any matter pending before the Department or any matter pending with any other body, there was no discussion of Benghazi, no discussion of State Department emails, by way of example I would say it was current news of the day, the Brexit decision and what it would mean," she said.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Thu, 30 Jun 2016 05:14

Tuesday 28th June 2016

Karen moved to Britain from Germany in the 1970s but since Thursday's vote, she's become terrified as she faced a series of xenophobic attacks.

Please enable Javascript to watch this video

James was joined in studio by Simon Woolley from Operation Black Vote as they discussed the reported rise in race hate crimes since the Brexit vote.

WATCH: James Attacks The Sun's Rhetoric Over Brexit

A heartbreaking call from Karen stopped both men in their tracks as you can see above.

She was in tears from her opening line as she admitted: "I'm so scared now."

From having dog excrement thrown at her door to friends telling her they don't want to see her again, Karen gave a harrowing account of how she now feels unwelcome in the country where she made her home.

"I haven't been out of the house for three days," she sobbed. "My neighbours told me they don't want me living in this road.

"My friend's grandson got beaten up because he had a foreign grandmother.

"I'm so scared, I don't know what's going to happen next."

James tried to reassure her: "You're going to be alright Karen. When people hear stories like yours, they will realise that they have to stand up and be counted."

Simon joined in too, in a bid to put Karen at ease, telling her that her stories broke his heart.

"50 years we've fought for race equality and you have on your programme in 2016, a good woman desperate, in tears because she fears for going out her front door for no other reason than being German."

James then tried to leave Karen with some words to give her strength:

"We're talking about approximately 10-15% of the population. Because they're right in your face, it feels like there are loads more of them than there actually are.

"You might be physically alone, but you are not on your own spiritually, emotionally or politically.

"The huge majority of people in this country, however they voted on Thursday, are with you.

"They are your compatriots and they are your true neighbours."

You can hear the full call here:

Link to Article

Archived Version

Thu, 30 Jun 2016 04:32

[See NewsBusters for more.] The journalists at NBC's Today show on Wednesday offered silence as Senate Democrats held up over $1 billion in Zika funding because of concern for Planned Parenthood. The program never mentioned the awkward development and it's not as though there wasn't time, given the show's four hour length. Despite Tuesday's terrorist bombing in Istanbul, Today still managed four minutes and 34 seconds on not-so important ''summer beauty trends.'' Over on CBS This Morning, co-host Norah O'Donnell noted that ''the funding bill to fight Zika failed yesterday.'' But when it came to a reason, she only vaguely noted, ''Senate Democrats opposed the measure because it did not provide enough spending and included politically motivated language.'' What, exactly, is ''politically motivated language?''

Link to Article

Archived Version

Thu, 30 Jun 2016 04:06

Secretary of State John Kerry faced swift criticism Wednesday for suggesting the terror attack at Istanbul's Ataturk Airport was evidence the Islamic State is getting ''desperate'' '' an assessment one top Republican official said ''defies reality.''

Kerry made the remarks late Tuesday at the Aspen Ideas Festival in Colorado, referring to ISIS by the name Daesh.

Crediting coalition efforts, Kerry said it's been over a year since the group launched a ''full-scale military offensive.''

"Now, yes, you can bomb an airport, you can blow yourself up. That's the tragedy. Daesh and others like it know that we have to get it right 24/7/365. They have to get it right for ten minutes or one hour. So it's a very different scale,'' Kerry said. "And if you're desperate and if you know you're losing, and you know you want to give up your life, then obviously you can do some harm.''

House Homeland Security Committee Chairman Mike McCaul, R-Texas, slammed the secretary's assessment.

''They've said they're on the run for many years, and they're not,'' McCaul told Fox News Wednesday morning. ''I think the airstrikes have ramped up external operations '... This is an unprecedented pace of terror in modern times. And so to say they're on the run '... absolutely defies reality.''

Underscoring Kerry's questionable characterization was news Wednesday that Islamic State militants were pushing back U.S.-trained Syrian rebels in a battle for control of a town on the Iraqi border.

Also on Wednesday, President Obama spoke by phone with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan to express his condolences on behalf of the American people and to reaffirm the solidarity of the United States with Turkey following the terrorist attack, the White House said.

While no terror group has claimed responsibility for the Istanbul attack, Turkish officials told The Associated Press and Reuters that ISIS was the prime suspect. The attack killed at least 42 and injured hundreds, with the body county expected to keep rising. The attack at one of the world's busiest airports was committed by three suicide bombers who opened fire with AK-47s before blowing themselves up.

Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani told Fox News these attacks '' along with those in Paris, Brussels and, most recently, Orlando, Fla. '' are ''following their plan.''

''This isn't accidental,'' he said, adding ''something's wrong'' with the secretary of state's analysis.

Officials inside the Obama administration have given a conflicting picture of ISIS' strength.

What's clear is that the group is under pressure from coalition forces in its central territory of Iraq and Syria, even as it pushes back. The Iraqi government declared victory over the weekend in driving ISIS out of the Iraqi city of Fallujah, and the Pentagon confirmed that Iraqi security forces are in ''100 percent control'' of the city -- while also saying ISIS has not had a ''strategic victory'' in over a year.

The disconnect comes when administration officials discuss ISIS operations and strength outside Iraq and Syria.

Earlier this month, CIA Director John Brennan testified on Capitol Hill that despite progress against ISIS on the battlefield, ''our efforts have not reduced the group's terrorism capability and global reach.''

He described the group as ''resilient'' and said they will wage their terror campaign globally in response.

''The group's foreign branches and global networks can help preserve its capacity for terrorism regardless of events in Iraq and Syria,'' Brennan said. ''In fact, as the pressure mounts on ISIL, we judge that it will intensify its global terror campaign to maintain its dominance of the global terrorism agenda.''

The chilling warning came after Obama said the anti-ISIS campaign ''is firing on all cylinders'' and the group ''is under more pressure than ever before.''

Link to Article

Archived Version

Thu, 30 Jun 2016 03:46

[More in the cross-post on the MRC's NewsBusters blog.]

CNN's Christiane Amanpour took her left-leaning, pro-European Union activism to a new level on 28 June 2016 during an interview of pro-Brexit politician Daniel Hannan. Amanpour, who recently blasted the referendum as an example of "xenophobia", tried to implicate the British member of the European Parliament as somehow partially responsible for supposed post-vote "hate crimes." Hannan didn't take her clear bias sitting down, however: "You guys have been shouting 'racist' so long, you're not listening to what we were actually saying...if I was relying on CNN...I would think that this was nativist vote, a protectionist vote. It's the opposite."

Link to Article

Archived Version

Thu, 30 Jun 2016 03:22

Link to Article

Archived Version

Wed, 29 Jun 2016 21:17

Link to Article

Archived Version

Wed, 29 Jun 2016 20:53

This is viewer supported news

The U.S. Senate is expected to vote as soon as today to set up a federally appointed control board with sweeping powers to run Puerto Rico's economy to help the island cope with its crippling debt crisis. The bill, known as PROMESA, passed the House by a bipartisan vote of 297 to 127. In the Senate, Robert Menendez has led the opposition to the bill. On Tuesday, he waged a four-hour filibuster to protest the bill.

This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.

AMYGOODMAN: Juan, before we move on with the rest of the show, there is a major vote on Puerto Rico in the U.S. Senate today.

JUAN GONZLEZ: Yes, there is. The Senate will'--looks like, will finally vote on what to do on the so-called PROMESA bill. This is the bill that both the Obama administration and Republicans in the House passed, you know, got through the House, initially, a couple of weeks ago, which would establish a means for Puerto Rico to restructure its $72 billion in debt, but would also impose a financial control board'--what I and other people call a colonial control board'--over the commonwealth of Puerto Rico. The Republican Majority Leader Mitch McConnell moved this week to have a cloture vote, which will occur today, because McConnell wants to prevent any amendments on the Senate floor from those who might have problems with the current bill. So he wants to'--he's going to go for a 60-vote cloture vote and then proceed to have a vote on the full bill, because they're trying to rush to get this bill through before the July 1 deadline, in a few days, when Puerto Rico is sure to default on a huge portion of its debt. It has to pay about $2 billion on July 1.

So, yesterday, Senator Bob Menendez did a filibuster. For four hours, he grabbed the Senate floor and continued to condemn the bill, to condemn the efforts to prevent the Senate from having any kind of amendments. But in the process, he also really'--for anybody who watched it on C-SPAN, you got a real lesson on what is the problem and why people are calling this a colonial control bill. For instance, Menendez said that, contrary to what the Obama administration has been saying and what many Republicans in Congress have been saying, the people of Puerto Rico are completely opposed to this bill. There was a recent poll, showed that 69 percent of Puerto Rican voters on the island are opposed to the PROMESA bill, the very bill that the Senate is about to pass, and 54 percent are opposed to any kind of outside control board running the affairs of Puerto Rico for the next five to 10 years there. And so, there's huge opposition on the island to the bill, and yet the Congress is moving forward.

Unfortunately, there's a lot of liberal Democrats that are supporting this bill; some liberal organizations, like Jubilee USA, astonishingly, has come out in favor of the bill, because they're all insisting that this is the only way, as bad as the bill is and the problems that it has, it's the only way for Puerto Rico to be able to restructure its debts and to avoid a rush to the courthouse by bondholders. But what Menendez made clear is that there's going to be a rush to the courthouse anyway, because as the bill passes, the bondholders, many of them, are going to go to court to challenge the constitutionality of the bill. So it's not as if there's not going to be legal challenges on July 1. But Menendez went on for four hours. Bernie Sanders participated for a short time in the filibuster. So did Maria Cantwell. But for the most part, it seems that there's a sufficient number of Democrats and Republicans that will vote to approve this bill today.

AMYGOODMAN: Where did a key player, a key progressive in the Democratic Party, come down? And that is Elizabeth Warren, who was out on the campaign trail this week.

JUAN GONZLEZ: Well, Elizabeth Warren has not said anything. She was critical, initially, of the bill. Elizabeth Warren has not said anything about this. My sense is that she's going to vote for it, as well, unfortunately. There's still a possibility that Bernie Sanders or Menendez could launch another filibuster today in the debate over the cloture vote, the final debate, or the bill itself. But it seems unlikely at this point. And it's astonishing to me how so many liberals in this country, who rail about American aggression abroad, are being so silent over this absolute imposition of colonial control by the United States government over the affairs of Puerto Rico. And Jack Lew, the secretary of treasury, spent almost all day yesterday basically meeting with Democratic senators to convince them, to pressure them to support this bill. So it's going to be a really dark day for the people of Puerto Rico, who are completely opposed to this bill, if the Senate votes today to approve it.

AMYGOODMAN: Well, we'll of course continue to follow this, the issue of Puerto Rico so key.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Wed, 29 Jun 2016 19:41

Cortana, Microsoft's answer to Apple's Siri, is already become more intelligent every day, Nadella said, echoing his recent comments in Slate, where he argued that humans and machines will work together, not against each other.

"With all the abundance we have of computers and computing, what is scarce is human attention and time," Nadella said. "So having the personal digital assistant really helps me regain my time '-- empowers me to get more out of every moment of my life."

Nadella spoke alongside Walter Isaacson, CEO of the Aspen Institute and author of "Steve Jobs," at the Aspen Ideas Festival in Colorado, where speakers covered broad topics like the role of machines in policy and the future of Mars.

The meeting came amid a changing landscape for technology companies. Britain's vote to leave the European Union pressured stocks in the industry, just after Microsoft closed a monster acquisition of social network LinkedIn.

Microsoft's 30-year history in the U.K. means the company will continue to invest in its sizable business there, Nadella said. But Nadella said that technology companies need to make a better case for global trade creating local wealth.

"What happens in Britain, what happens in the world, matters a lot to us in our core business," Nadella said. "The real thing is, 'How do we bring back certainty that global companies and a global economy can thrive in a connected world?'"

Nadella said that Microsoft remains focused on organic innovation and what Microsoft can uniquely contribute to the world as a company. But the LinkedIn deal was "game-changing" because the two firms aligned so closely, he said.

"LinkedIn was an amazing deal for us to do because of their mission," Nadella said.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Wed, 29 Jun 2016 19:12

Global cybersecurity

Global cybersecurity less

SAN ANTONIO -- Did you know San Antonio ranks second only to the nation's capital for cybersecurity resources?

In fact, San Antonio, or "Cybersecurity City USA,'' has a tremendous amount of jobs. The local industry just needs to fill them.

"In Texas last year, there were 40,000 computing jobs that went unfilled. The average salary for those jobs is $89,000. That's more than double the average in the state of Texas,'' Congressman Will Hurd said. ''There's a lot of jobs right here in Texas that we just need to make sure we're educating our kids to take.''

This is the third year for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce's Cybersecurity campaign.

"With about 50 billion devices being connected to the Internet by 2020, that means there's lots of ways that different cybersecurity threats can get in through organized crime or even terrorist organizations," said Belinda Matingou, regional executive director of the Texas Association of Business.

Just one takeaway from Tuesday's Cybersecurity Conference, held at the Embassy Suites in downtown San Antonio, should be that all businesses should already assume that some type of malware is in your network.

"People are being infected, their data is being hijacked and locked down, people are being extorted, Bitcoins is the term that's being floated around," said Lucas McLane, director of security technology for SparkCognition.

Small businesses don't have the same resources as the major financial institutions to protect themselves from hackers. Tuesday's conference aimed to remedy that need.

SparkCognition, for example, uses machine learning to eliminate the need for constant updates in antivirus software. Their software detects and blocks threats automatically.

Security breaches at large corporations can be breaking national news, so imagine the impact on a mom-and-pop shop that likely has fewer resources at their fingertips.

"[San Antonio has the] 24th and 25th Air Force, NSA Texas, then you have some great companies like Rackspace, USAA," Hurd said. "Then you have amazing institutions like UTSA and Texas A&M-San Antonio that are producing great graduates that can handle these issues and you also have them doing great research as well."

San Antonio is surrounded by an ecosystem of cybersecurity agencies serving to protect smaller corporations. In a city on the leading edge of this growing sector, that, in turn, creates more jobs and more resources to turn to.

"When it comes to computer science, when it comes to computing, this is the future. And we need to have more kids that understand these topics so we can have them filling the right kind of jobs," Matingou said.

Matingou added that the need is so great for talent in the cybersecurity field right now that there's about a -6 percent employment rate.

For more information on the U.S. Chamber of Commerce's Cybersecurity campaign, visit the campaign's official website here.

((C) 2016 KENS)

Link to Article

Archived Version

Wed, 29 Jun 2016 15:10

A man carries a EU flag after Britain voted to leave the European Union on Friday. NEIL HALL / Reuters

"There's a lot of talk in England today of having another vote," Kerry said in Aspen. "Cameron said it won't happen, certainly not for about a year or so or whatever. But, a year? It's within a two-year period, so who knows? I can't sit here and tell you I know what's going to happen."

However the idea of a second vote has been dismissed as fundamentally undemocratic by several lawmakers on both sides: The voters have already spoken with a majority of more than 1 million, they say.

"It is unlikely, but not impossible," said Hazell, the University College London academic. "It all depends how the polls move in the next couple of months. If they suggest that enough people think they made a serious mistake, as the consequences of Brexit become clearer, there will be a stronger incentive for the politicians to find a way of backing out."

Another possibility, however, is that there could be a second referendum at the end of Britain's negotiation with the EU, which is likely to last years.

This scenario might see the British government turning back to its citizens after a deal was struck and asking: "This is what life is going to be like under Brexit, do you still want to do it?" according to Fielding.

He agrees with most experts that the EU would hold the power in negotiations. With only two years to strike a deal, the U.K. appears more likely to blink than the remainder of the 27-member bloc. It may be forced to make concessions '-- as it would be far worse off if no post-Brexit relationship was forged.

Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt

has already called for a second vote, but only to decide what sort of post-EU deal the U.K. wants, rather than to cast doubt over the decision itself.In Scotland '-- where most people voted to remain in the EU '-- First Minister Nicola Sturgeon has already said she wants

a second referendum on independence, after the idea was narrowly voted down by the public in Sept. 2014.Sturgeon, who is leader of the Scottish National Party, or SNP, also suggested that her lawmakers may decline to give their legal consent to the referendum decision, but

others have argued this would not be enough to veto the decision.The only thing people seem to agree on is that Britain now navigating uncharted waters.

"I wouldn't write us out of Europe yet, OK?" Tony Blair, who spent 10 years as Britain's prime minister,

told Morning Joe on Tuesday. "I think there's a lot still to come ... I can't see us having another referendum at this point but I wouldn't rule anything out. Let's wait and see."

Link to Article

Archived Version

Tue, 28 Jun 2016 15:46

Ukip leader Nigel Farage was jeered by the European Parliament after he told MEPs that they were "in denial" about Brexit and that they had "never had a proper job before".

His astonishing speech at a special meeting of the European Parliament today ended with boos echoing through the Brussels chamber.

Mr Farage used his speech to declare that Brexit was "a beacon of hope" to other member states but he also infuriated MEPs when he said: "Now, I know that virtually none of you have ever done a proper job in your lives or worked in business or worked in trade or indeed ever created a job. But listen, just listen."

When MEPs turned their backs to him and Martin Schulz, the president of the parliament, intervened, Mr Farage responded: "You're quite right, Mr Schulz. Ukip used to protest against the establishment. Now the establishment protests against Ukip. So something has happened here."

He said he wanted a "grown up and sensible attitude" to negotiating the exit.

"Isn't it funny? When I came here 17 years ago and I said that I wanted to lead a campaign go get Britain out of the European Union, you all laughed at me. Well, I have to say, you're not laughing now, are you?

And the reason you're so upset, the reason you're so angry, has been perfectly clear from all the angry exchanges this morning. You, as a political project, are in denial. You are in denial that your currency is failing.

Just look at the Mediterranean. As a policy to impose poverty and the rest of the Mediterranean, you've done very well. And you are in denial over Mrs Merkel's call last year for as many people as possible to cross the Mediterranean into the European Union. [It] has led to massive divisions within countries and between countries.

But the biggest problem you've got, and the main reason the United Kingdom voted the way that it did, is that you have, by stealth, by deception, without ever telling the truth to the British or the rest of the people's of Europe, you have imposed upon them a political union.

And when the people in 2005 in the Netherlands and France voted against the political union, when they rejected the constitution, you simply ignored them and brought the Lisbon treaty in through the back door."

Mr Farage also warned that the UK would not be the last country to leave the EU.

"What happened last Thursday was a remarkable result. It was a seismic result, not just for British politics, but for European politics but perhaps even for global politics too, because what the little people did, what the ordinary people did, what the people who have been oppressed over the last few years and who have seen their living standards go down [did], they rejected the multinationals, they rejected the merchant banks, they rejected big politics. And they said, actually, we want our country back. We want our fishing waters back. We want our borders back. And we want to be an independent, self-governing, normal nation and that is what we have done and that is what must happen.

And in doing so we offer a beacon of hope to democrats across the rest of the European continent. I will make one prediction this morning; the United Kingdom will not be the last member state to leave the European Union."

Mr Farage had earlier seemed to offer some conciliatory private words to European Commission president Jean-Claude Juncker on Tuesday and received a peck on the cheek in return in the Parliament.

As EU lawmakers gathered to digest Britain's Brexit vote, Mr Farage, who has long used the Brussels legislature as a platform for his campaign to get Britain out, walked over to the European Commission president and spoke to him briefly and apparently amicably.

As Mr Farage made to turn away, Mr Juncker, a former prime minister of Luxembourg with a penchant for warm greetings, pulled Mr Farage toward him and gave him an air-kiss on the cheek.

But things became more heated during the emergency session of the EU when Mr Juncker asked Ukip lawmakers why they had attended the European Parliament meeting to discuss the consequences of the British vote to leave the bloc.

"We must respect British democracy and the way it has expressed its view," Juncker said in a speech to parliament, words that were greeted by rare applause from the Ukip members present.

"That's the last time you are applauding here... and to some extent I'm really surprised you are here. You are fighting for the exit. The British people voted in favour of the exit. Why are you here?" Juncker continued, breaking from his speech text.

Mr Juncker spoke from a desk next to that of the Ukip leader, who followed the largely French and German speech with headphones and with a British flag planted in front of him.

Mr Juncker made clear Britain must go and said it must "get on with it."

He said: "They have expressed their view. Now there have to be consequences."

"I'm accused of being undemocratic, some sort of bureaucrat, a robot. I am recognising this vote and it is being turned against me."

Link to Article

Archived Version

Tue, 28 Jun 2016 15:27

Link to Article

Archived Version

Tue, 28 Jun 2016 11:41

Rude Music - which is owned by Frankie Sullivan, co-writer of the song - filed a lawsuit against Huckabee's campaign on Wednesday for copyright infringement in federal court in Illinois.

The lawsuit charges the former Arkansas governor allowed the Grammy-winning song to be played publicly at a campaign appearance supporting the county clerk who gained national attention after refusing to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples.

"Mr. Sullivan is demanding an amount of money that exceeds the average yearly salary of a hard-working American simply because a snippet of his song was played briefly at a rally," Huckabee spokeswoman Alice Stewart told CNN Thursday. "The campaign offered Mr. Sullivan fair compensation, but that offer was rejected. We refuse to be bullied." RELATED: Band unhappy with use of 'Tiger'Sullivan, a founding member of the band "Survivor," had previously sued Newt Gingrich for using the hit song in his 2012 race for the White House.

The popular song was theme song for the movie "Rocky III" and eventually won a Grammy, according to the lawsuit.

The lawsuit claims Huckabee was aware that he was committing copyright infringement.

"Artists' complaints of candidates' unauthorized use of their songs have become an election-year staple. According to news reports, in 2008 the founder of the band Boston demanded that Mr. Huckabee's presidential campaign stop playing the Boston hit "More Than a Feeling" at his events," the suit said.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Mon, 27 Jun 2016 16:00

Link to Article

Archived Version

Mon, 27 Jun 2016 15:34

In her first election economic speech in Ohio Tuesday, Hillary Clinton warned that a Donald Trump presidency will throw the United States back into a "Trump recession."

But in an interview with "CBS This Morning" co-host Norah O'Donnell, the presumptive Republican nominee dismissed the criticism.

"We're going to put people back to work again, we're not going to allow countries to steal our businesses," Trump said.

PlayVideo

CBSNClinton: Trump will "bankrupt America"Hillary Clinton is hitting Donald Trump on economy. Clinton said in a speech on Tuesday that the presumptive GOP nominee will "bankrupt America."...

Clinton bolstered her argument by claiming that economists all agree that "Trump would throw us back into recession," saying the Independent Tax Policy Center found his tax plan would increase the national debt by more than $30 trillion over 20 years. But Trump believes his economic plans will help create an "absolute unbelievable country" by bringing in "tremendous amounts" of money, jobs and companies.

"It would bring back jobs and it'll bring back business," Trump said. "Companies now are leaving the United States, corporate inversion... We have almost $5 trillion sitting out there where they can't get the money back. They can't bring it in because there's no mechanism to bring it back in and the tax is so high... And yes, the tax is going to be cut from the highest taxed nation anywhere in the world to a fairly low tax - not the lowest in the world, but to a fairly low tax."

If there's one thing the opponents can agree on, it's that he is the "king of debt." Clinton mocked the presumptive GOP nominee's self-declared nickname during her speech, to which Trump responded on Twitter:

"Nobody knows debt better than me. I've made a fortune by using debt and if things don't work out, I renegotiate the debt," Trump said. "Well, you go back and you say, 'hey, guess what? The economy just crashed. I'm going to give you back half.'"

But Trump said that while he likes debt for "my companies," he does not like national debt, which has hit $19 trillion.

"It's going to be very soon $21 trillion... And I will tell you, we are sitting on a time bomb and Hillary Clinton doesn't have a clue. And President Obama has pretty much doubled the debt since he's been in office and somebody's going to pay a big price. We have to start chopping that debt down," Trump said.

Clinton's criticisms of Trump's economic policies came just hours after Federal Reserve Chair Janet Yellen testified in a Senate Banking Committee Hearing. Yellen slammed Trump's proposal to load up on debt and cut it down by making a deal with creditors, warning that it would bring "very severe" consequences.

"I wouldn't renegotiate the debt... If I do a deal in a corporation as an example and if the economy goes bad, I'll often times renegotiate that debt. But that's a different thing, that's just a corporate thing," Trump said of Yellen's criticism. "And other people like me, very big people in the world of business, they do that. No, I wouldn't do that. But I think it could be a good time to borrow and pay off debt. Borrow debt, make longer-term debt."

The Clinton camp has spent $23 million in television advertising in eight battleground states, but Trump has spent none. When asked why he did not fight back, Trump referred to his "good business practices."

"When I spent less money than anybody else and won the primaries-- like in New Hampshire -- I spent a million dollars and a certain opponent spent $8 million and I won in a landslide. Nobody said, 'gee, he did it without spending the money.' That's called good business practices," Trump said. "And by the way, we're raising quite a bit of money. I'm raising it for the party. I'd rather just spend my own money. To me it's simpler. But you don't need to spend... a billion, $200 million. In other words, she's going to spend $300 million a month... I talk to my people all the time and say, 'why do you have to spend a billion dollars?' That doesn't make sense."

Still, Clinton entered June with $42 million in the bank, compared to Trump's $1 million. In the past two presidential elections, the candidate with the larger expenditures - Barack Obama and George W. Bush before that - emerged as the winners. But calling Clinton's cash "blood money," Trump said he did not want to "devote the rest of my life to raising money from people."

"And you know... every time she raises money, she's making deals. Just saying, 'could I be ambassador to this? Could I do that? Make sure my business is taken care of.' I mean, give me a break. All of the money she's raising, that's blood money... Look, I was one of the biggest donors. I gave a lot of money to the party... So I understand the system better than anybody," Trump said. "Look, she's getting tremendous amounts of money from Wall Street. She's going to take care of Wall Street. She's getting tremendous amounts of money from lots of people. She's going to take care of all these people."

(C) 2016 CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Mon, 27 Jun 2016 15:17

Jan Brewer goes berserk on CNN: 'I'm fed up' with being treated like a 'bigot' for backing Trump

Lewandowski gets destroyed on CNN for hyping Trump as Brexit expert: 'He didn't know what it was'

San Francisco man fights eviction after rent skyrockets overnight from $1,800 to $8,000

Trump fan busted for posing as black woman on Twitter to win over minority voters

Frozen yogurt shop scores major backlash after trying to associate with the Duggars

Sorry, Texas secessionists: Why the Lone Star state can't pull off a 'Texit'

US Supreme Court strikes down restrictive Texas abortion law

TV's Mike Rowe questions teen's decision to keep medal after contest controversy

John Oliver uses Brexit as cautionary tale against electing Trump: 'There are no f*cking do-overs'

WATCH: Elizabeth Warren just opened a massive can of whoop-ass on Donald Trump '-- and it's awesome