September 17, 2020 |
News
| No Comments
A coalition of watchdog and advocacy organizations on Thursday released a new report detailing the Trump administration’s nearly two-year war on science and how Congress can fight back.
Produced by 16 groups including the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS), Defenders of Wildlife, and Greenpeace, Protecting Science at Federal Agencies: How Congress Can Help (pdf) argues that while “scientific integrity at federal agencies has eroded” under President Donald Trump, “Congress has the power to halt and repair damage from federal agencies’ current disregard for scientific evidence.”
“It’s so impressive,” UCS’s Michael Halpern wrote in a blog post on Thursday, “that all of these organizations with desperate interests have come together because they recognize the harm Trump administration actions have had on topics as diverse as workplace injuries, reproductive health, the Census, chemical contamination, tipped workers, endangered species, climate change, and air pollution.”
As the report notes, “Federally sponsored scientific research and technology development have brought us the ability to explore outer space, convert sunlight into electricity, build super-computers, predict weather patterns, manufacture self-driving vehicles, and use assisted reproductive technologies to give birth.”
“When political interference occurs—such as politically motivated censorship, misrepresentation of scientific findings, or the suppression of the free flow of information from the government to the public—public health and well-being suffer.”
Click Here: NRL Telstra Premiership—report
However, it continues, “when political interference occurs—such as politically motivated censorship, misrepresentation of scientific findings, or the suppression of the free flow of information from the government to the public—public health and well-being suffer.”
To battle the administration’s attacks on science, the report calls on federal legislators to pass protective laws as well as reveal abuses of scientific integrity and increase accountability for political appointees by holding hearings, requesting investigations, and utilizing congressional subpoena authority.
From the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to the National Park Service (NPS) and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), the report points to examples of bad behavior across the federal government to identify six broad issues, and offers suggestions for tackling them.
“In several recent proposed rules, agencies have failed to uphold their responsibilities to consider relevant evidence and provide the public with necessary information,” the report points out. To combat this, it suggests not only hearings, probes, and subpoenas, but also using the appropriations process to ensure that funds are spent as intended, and considering whether political appointees have a history of undermining science.
SCROLL TO CONTINUE WITH CONTENT
Acknowledging the administration’s efforts to hamstring the president’s science adviser, the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, the President’s Council on Science and Technology, and advisory committees across federal agencies, the report calls for hearings and probes as well as legislation to close loopholes in the Federal Advisory Committee Act.
Considering that “the current administration has filled several key cabinet positions with individuals who lack the bare minimum of relevant and appropriate qualifications,” the report demands that senators use their constitutional advise and consent power to block unqualified candidates. It also recommends various pieces of legislation that aim to improve the hiring processes for civil servants.
“Political appointees are increasingly censoring and suppressing scientific information, as well as deterring federal scientists from communicating openly with the public and the press,” the report warns, imploring members of Congress to strengthen and pass the Science Integrity Act and improve protections for whistleblowers.
The chapter dedicated to whistleblowers explains that “reprisal for whistleblowing unfortunately is real, despite the fact that whistleblowers are often the best, and sometimes the only, pathway toward holding government institutions accountable, ensuring regulatory compliance, and protecting the public’s interest.” Warning against “whistleblower witch hunts,” it outlines ways in which lawmakers can enhance protections.
Although federal agencies are charged with enforcing laws enacted by Congress, the report notes that some “appear to be taking a low-information approach to enforcement: They are both weakening measures that would allow them to collect appropriate information about compliance and ignoring information they have, adopting seemingly willful blindness to violations.”
The report urges lawmakers to “hold oversight hearings and initiate inquiries when a regulatory agency rolls back reporting requirements that advance transparency or displays a substantial drop in penalties or enforcement units.”
Our work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. Feel free to republish and share widely.
September 17, 2020 |
News
| No Comments
Journalists and advocates of press freedoms are once more directing outrage and criticism at Facebook for selectively censoring pages on its platform and refusing to explain the reason behind a decision that appears to many as a clear double standard applied to outlets critical of U.S. foreign policy and corporate interests.
Facebook is under fire for shuttering four pages managed by the Berlin-based news and media company Maffick, after CNN reporters asked the social media giant about Maffick not disclosing that it is partly funded by the Russian government.
CNN held its report—titled “Russia is backing a viral video company aimed at American millennials”—until Friday, when Facebook blocked Soapbox, Waste-Ed, Backthen, and In The Now.
American-Lebanese journalist Rania Khalek, a contributor to Soapbox and In The Now who was interviewed by CNN, outlined the controversy in a lengthy, widely shared series of tweets. Monday morning, Khalek added an update to the Twitter thread:
As CNN outlined in its report, which was updated and corrected on Monday:
“In the Now was originally a television show on RT, hosted by Naouai. It has more than 3 million followers on Facebook,” CNN noted. The other three pages “have more than 30 million video views, though they’ve only been operating for a few months.”
What kind of content did they produce? Khalek offered a number of examples, including:
In an interview with CNN, Maffick chief operating officer J. Ray Sparks emphasized that Maffick is editorially independent from RT—which the U.S. government has forced to register as a foreign agent—and pointed out that it is “standard industry practice” not to disclose ownership of a media producer on a Facebook page.
However, as Kevin Gosztola—who cohosts a podcast with Khalek—noted in an article published Saturday on Shadowproof, “Although Khalek and Sparks detailed their editorial independence at Maffick extensively, [CNN correspondent Drew] Griffin remained incredulous at the reality that officials working at the Kremlin are not dictating what specific stories should be covered.”
“Similarly to NPR, PBS, BBC, DW, CBC, AJ+, and many other media companies, Maffick is supported in part by government funding. Likewise while we haven’t posted funding details on our Facebook pages etc, neither have any of our international peers,” Maffick said in a statement that charges the company was singled out for “one reason and one reason only: The government that helps fund our company is Russia.”
“We did not violate any of Facebook’s policies whatsoever. None of our content promotes disinformation or fake news. Yet CNN pressured Facebook into unprecedented censorship in a desperate attempt to milk ratings by stoking hysteria over Russia,” the statement continues, calling on Facebook to reinstate its pages and “articulate clear, consistent policies and protocols regarding obligatory funding disclosures which will be applied evenly across all pages.”
Click Here: los jaguares argentina
Since Friday, Khalek and others who often linked to her initial thread have turned to another major social media platform—Twitter—to raise alarm about the role of the ASD and the communication CNN subsequently had with Facebook:
Although Facebook’s rules don’t require pages to disclose parent companies, a spokesperson told CNN in a statement that the social media company planned to reach out to Maffick page administrators “to ask that they disclose this additional information and their affiliation with their parent company to get back on the platform.”
The move by Facebook comes after the company temporarily took down one of Khalek’s videos for Soapbox—about “how Israel uses Palestine as a weapons testing laboratory”—in late December, and only restored it after public outcry. Facebook also was intensely criticized last year for censoring the left-leaning Latin American news network teleSUR English, funded by the Venezuelan government and others, as well as a video about Christopher Columbus’ brutal legacy produced by Double Down News.
Our work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. Feel free to republish and share widely.
September 17, 2020 |
News
| No Comments
Two-time F1 world champion Mika Hakkinen is convinced Mick Schumacher will find a seat in Formula 1 “very soon”.
Schumacher’s win in the FIA Formula 2 Championship’s feature race at Monza and another bag of points filled at Mugello has put the 21-year-old in command of junior series’ drivers’ standings with just two four races remaining on the calendar.
The German is considered a prime candidate for a seat at Alfa Romeo Racing for 2021, a promotion that would practically become undoubtable if Schumacher wins the F2 title.
Read also: Schumacher tipped by uncle Ralf to join Hulkenberg at Alfa Romeo
Last Sunday at Mugello, the young charger demonstrated his father’s race winning Ferrari F2004, and the run encouraged Hakkinen to assess the son of his former arch rival, Michael Schumacher.
“It was very nice to see Mick driving his father’s 2004 Ferrari on a demonstration run,” Hakkinen wrote in his Unibet column.
“It reminded us how great those V10 engines sounded and the incredible success that Michael achieved with that car and the others with which he won five world titles.
“It is great to see Mick’s career progressing well, including now leading the Formula 2 Championship, and I am certain he will find a seat in Formula 1 very soon.
“It will be a special moment for him, the Schumacher family and Formula 1 when it happens.”
Another former F1 driver who has been impressed by Schumacher’s progress and believes Schumacher is ready to step up to the next level is Gerhard Berger.
“I think he’s ripe to take the step into Formula 1,” the Austrian told Speedweek. “I like him a lot and slowly he is working his way to the top in every category.
“For me, it is important to see whether a racing driver has fluctuations or a championship profile, that he fights for a title with his head and with stamina, even if he ‘only’ comes second in the end.
“I see that with Mick – his father also had it very strongly.”
Click Here: Putters
Gallery: The beautiful wives and girlfriends of F1 drivers
Keep up to date with all the F1 news via Facebook and Twitter
September 16, 2020 |
News
| No Comments
North Dakota GOP Senate nominee Rep. Kevin CramerKevin John CramerRepublicans prepare to punt on next COVID-19 relief bill GOP senators introduce resolution opposing calls to defund the police Trump tweets spark fresh headache for Republicans MORE on Friday pushed back against sexual misconduct allegations against President TrumpDonald John TrumpSenate advances public lands bill in late-night vote Warren, Democrats urge Trump to back down from veto threat over changing Confederate-named bases Esper orders ‘After Action Review’ of National Guard’s role in protests MORE’s Supreme Court pick Brett Kavanaugh, calling them “absurd” given the circumstances.
Cramer in an interview with a North Dakota radio station compared the allegations from Christine Blasey Ford against Kavanaugh to Anita Hill’s allegations against then-Supreme Court nominee Clarence Thomas in 1991.
“If to the degree there was any legitimacy to Anita Hill’s claims, and she tried and didn’t prevail — Clarence Thomas did and America did — this case is even more absurd because these people were teenagers when this supposed alleged incident took place,” Cramer said on “The Jarrod Thomas Show” in an interview first highlighted by CNN.
ADVERTISEMENT
“These are teenagers who evidently were drunk, according to her own statement. They were drunk. Nothing evidently happened in it all, even by her own accusation. Again, it was supposedly an attempt or something that never went anywhere,” he added.
Ford went public with the allegations Sunday in an interview with The Washington Post, saying Kavanaugh pinned her to a bed and tried to remove her clothes during a party in the early 1980s, when both were in high school.
Kavanaugh has denied the allegations, which have upended his nomination to the Supreme Court and delayed the confirmation process as the Senate Judiciary Committee seeks to speak with both individuals next week.
“You just can’t expect to defame a guy who’s got a stellar record and a stellar, nearly perfect reputation, near as I can tell, character-wise, and be able to be the last word,” Cramer said during the radio interview Friday.
He also bashed the Democrats’ handling of the allegations.
“If all of that is in fact true, the tragedy for her is that her testimony is being used as a political weapon and that even her own wishes, if they’re true, to [Sen.] Dianne FeinsteinDianne Emiel FeinsteinHillicon Valley: Biden calls on Facebook to change political speech rules | Dems demand hearings after Georgia election chaos | Microsoft stops selling facial recognition tech to police Democrats demand Republican leaders examine election challenges after Georgia voting chaos GOP votes to give Graham broad subpoena power in Obama-era probe MORE [D-Calif.] that she didn’t want it out to the public, were denied not by her but by Dianne Feinstein,” he said, referring to the ranking member of the committee.
Feinstein has said that she held onto a letter outlining the allegations because Ford asked to remain anonymous, but that media leaks of the letter’s existence forced her to go public with the letter, though not Ford’s identity.
Feinstein’s office has denied it was the source of the leaks.
Cramer also questioned if the allegations would prevent others from seeking judicial or political appointments.
“Why would any good person ever put themselves forward to be a judge, an appellate court judge, a Supreme Court justice, frankly a member of Congress or the United States Senate or governor or anything else, if this is the new standard? You know, roll out an accusation that no one else can corroborate, and we believe the accuser without appropriate due process,” he said.
Cramer is currently battling Sen. Heidi HeitkampMary (Heidi) Kathryn Heitkamp70 former senators propose bipartisan caucus for incumbents Susan Collins set to play pivotal role in impeachment drama Pro-trade group launches media buy as Trump and Democrats near deal on new NAFTA MORE (N.D.), one of 10 Senate Democrats up for reelection this year in states won by Trump in 2016.
Heitkamp voted for Trump’s first nominee to the Supreme Court, Neil Gorsuch, last year but has not said yet how she will vote on Kavanaugh.
Ford’s lawyer is currently in discussions with the Judiciary Committee to arrange her testimony for next week.
She was initially open to testifying on Monday in a public session, but walked that back, saying she wanted the FBI to investigate her claims before she made an appearance.
Her lawyer told the committee on Thursday that she’d be willing to testify next Thursday if Kavanaugh testified first, was not in the same room as her and she would only be questioned by committee members.
Republicans on the committee put together a counteroffer for her to testify Wednesday and before Kavanaugh.
Click Here: camiseta river plate
September 16, 2020 |
News
| No Comments
Jason Kander, a rising star in the Democratic Party who was considered a front-runner in the Kansas City, Mo., mayoral race dropped out on Tuesday, explaining in a statement that he will seek treatment for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).
“To allow me to concentrate on my mental health, I’ve decided that I will not be running for mayor of Kansas City,” Kander wrote in a Medium post.
Kander, an Afghanistan war veteran who previously mounted an unsuccessful campaign against incumbent Sen. Roy BluntRoy Dean BluntSenate advances public lands bill in late-night vote Hillicon Valley: Biden calls on Facebook to change political speech rules | Dems demand hearings after Georgia election chaos | Microsoft stops selling facial recognition tech to police OVERNIGHT ENERGY: Senate headed for late night vote amid standoff over lands bill | Trump administration seeks to use global aid for nuclear projects | EPA faces lawsuit alleging failure to update flaring requirements MORE (R-Mo.) in 2016, wrote that he felt like he has been running from symptoms of PTSD for years.
ADVERTISEMENT
“I wrote in my book that I was lucky to not have PTSD, I was just trying to convince myself. And I wasn’t sharing the full picture. I still have nightmares. I am depressed,” Kander wrote in the post.
“So after 11 years of trying to outrun depression and PTSD symptoms, I have finally concluded that it’s faster than me. That I have to stop running, turn around, and confront it,” Kander continued. “I finally went to the VA in Kansas City yesterday and have started the process to get help there regularly.”
Kander, who also served as Missouri’s secretary of state until last year, added that he will take a step back from Let America Vote, the organization he founded to battle GOP voter ID laws around the country, but that he plans to resume his political service upon the completion of his treatment.
“I’ll close by saying this isn’t goodbye. Once I work through my mental health challenges, I fully intend to be working shoulder to shoulder with all of you again,” Kander wrote in the post.
Kander’s exit from the Kansas City mayoral race leaves eight candidates battling in a nonpartisan primary campaign, with the primary election set for April 2019. The city’s general election will be held two months later in June.
Click Here: New Zealand rugby store
September 16, 2020 |
News
| No Comments
Michigan attorney general and GOP gubernatorial candidate Bill Schuette on Thursday said that he regrets his “poor attempt” at humor that has surfaced in a clip from a 1989 television interview shows him appearing to try to flirt with the woman setting up the shot.
The clip was resurfaced by a pro-Democratic opposition research group American Bridge, CNN reported.
It appears to show Schuette, then a 35-year-old congressman, appearing to flirt with a woman off-screen as she prepares to produce a television interview.
ADVERTISEMENT
The woman, who is not seen in the clip, asks Schuette to “please move closer” to the lamp on his right.
“I would be happy to move closer to the lamp,” he said while adjusting his tie.
“I will do anything you want. Some things I may not let you run the camera on, but I will certainly happily — ” he continues.
The woman says something about trying to make sure Schuette looks “as good as possible.”
“It’s no easy task. I admire your tenacity,” he said. “I appreciate your spirit of Vincent van Gogh, Rembrandt and Toulouse-Lautrec.”
Schuette’s campaign in a statement obtained by CNN said it was a “poor attempt” at humor and added they don’t know where the clip came from and he doesn’t “recall the apparent interview.”
“That apparently was my poor attempt to be humorous 30 years ago,” he said. “The video, which appears to be edited with only one short portion shown, has been in the public domain for some time.”
“It’s fortunate for me that (his wife) Cynthia came into my life and let me know that I am not a very funny guy, but this is no less embarrassing to me today and I regret it,” he continued.
Schuette, who has been the state’s attorney general for nearly eight years, is running against Democrat Gretchen Whitmer to succeed GOP Gov. Rick Snyder.
A poll released from EPIC-MRA late last month show Whitmer with an 8-point lead.
The RealClearPolitics average of polls shows Whitmer with a 9.2-point lead.
Whitmer, the former Michigan State Senate Minority Leader, said in a statement that everyone who watched the video must have had the “same uncomfortable look on our faces.”
“But even more troubling is the fact that Schuette has spent the past 33 years in office attacking the rights of women and working to take away our access to contraception and health care,” she added.
The Hill has reached out the Schuette for comment.
Click Here: cheap all stars rugby jersey
September 16, 2020 |
News
| No Comments
With the United Nations conference known as COP24 starting next week, Rep.-elect Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) drew attention Monday to a document demanding that government delegates to the summit recognize that the “urgency of the climate crisis requires a just response centered on human rights, equity, and justice.”
Entitled The People’s Demands for Climate Justice and endorsed by groups including 350.org, Corporate Europe Observatory, and Focus on the Global South, the international call presents the following to-do list for governments to implement in order to achieve the kind of bold transformation needed to save planet Earth:
- Keep fossil fuels in the ground.
- Reject false solutions that are displacing real, people-first solutions to the climate crisis.
- Advance real solutions that are just, feasible, and essential.
- Honor climate finance obligations to developing countries.
- End corporate interference in and capture of the climate talks.
- Ensure developed countries honor their “Fair Shares” for largely fueling this crisis.
Specifically, the demands include an immediate ban on new fossil fuel exploration and a moratorium on fracking, as well as a commitment to 100 percent renewable energy by 2030.
The unified call also stresses the need for governments to support commitments to agroecological practices and back other community-led climate solutions. In addition, there must be reparations for those on the frontlines of the climate crisis, and corporations that engaged in misinformation campaigns and used their power to influence climate policy must be held accountable.
“These are the People’s Demands, our call to government delegates, grounded in people’s movements from every continent, that demand with one voice what is our birthright: climate justice,” the groups declare.
SCROLL TO CONTINUE WITH CONTENT
As of this writing, the demands have been supported by over 179,000 signatures spanning 128 countries and 227 organizations.
COP24 will focus on hammering out guidelines for how governments will implement the landmark Paris climate accord, and, as Action Aid, one of the convening organizations behind the vision statement, declares, “If governments don’t agree on strong guidelines for the Paris Agreement this year, our next chance won’t be until 2023. That’s far too late for millions of people around the world, many of whom are already experiencing climate change’s devastation.”
“So right now,” the group adds, “we must demonstrate a groundswell of support for the People’s Demands for Climate Justice—a joint global call to government delegates demanding that this year’s climate talks actually lead to meaningful, just climate solutions.”
Arguing recently that “the tide is turning from Big Polluter obstruction toward people-powered solutions,” Corporate Accountability Europe said, “The People’s Demands are a bold plan to show a united global front demanding climate justice and an end to the harmful impact of Big Polluters. And you’re the key: When thousands of us join together, we’re a force to be reckoned with. “
COP 24, known formally as the 24th Session of the Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), will run from Dec. 2 to Dec. 14 in Katowice, Poland.
Our work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. Feel free to republish and share widely.
September 16, 2020 |
News
| No Comments
After the Guardian sent the punditry into a frenzy on Tuesday by publishing a bombshell report alleging that former Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort secretly met with WikiLeaks founder and editor Julian Assange in the Ecuadorian embassy in London during the 2016 presidential race, journalists and critics were quick to warn against blindly accepting the claims made in the piece due to the story’s scant material evidence, anonymous sources, and explosive political implications.
As independent national security journalist Marcy Wheeler wrote on Twitter, “skepticism” about the Guardian‘s reporting—which was quickly picked up by corporate outlets—”couldn’t be more broad-based” as it brought together journalists and legal experts from an array of political persuasions and opposing views.
While some commentators simply withheld judgment on the report’s veracity in the absence of further corroboration, others argued that there are plenty of reasons to doubt that the story’s central claims are accurate—such as its heavy reliance on anonymous Ecuadorian intelligence officials who may have political motives and an unverified internal document written by Ecuador’s National Intelligence Secretariat (SENAIN), which claims “Paul Manaford [sic]” and “Russians” were well-known guests of the embassy.
As whistleblower advocate Naomi Colvin and others pointed out, official Ecuadorian embassy visitor logs make no mention of any Manafort appearances, let alone the three separate appearances reported by the Guardian.
Instead of citing official logs, the Guardian‘s latest reporting relies heavily on SENAIN’s document, which critics argued is questionable at best given that SENAIN may have political motivations to discredit WikiLeaks for publishing secret agency documents in the past.
“There are genuine grounds to be cautious about the report,” argued The New Republic‘s Jeet Heer. “It is based on anonymous sources, some of whom are connected with Ecuadorian intelligence. The logs of the embassy show no such meetings. The information about the most newsworthy meeting (in the spring of 2016) is vaguely worded, suggesting a lack of certitude.”
“There are so many weird aspects to the Guardian story beyond the fact that it doesn’t describe its sources or show any evidence. But nobody cares. People will claim it’s true or not based solely on whether they want it to be.”
—Glenn Greenwald, The Intercept
As the Guardian reports, “It is unclear why Manafort would have wanted to see Assange and what was discussed.” The only specific details offered are related to the length of the alleged 2016 meeting—”about 40 minutes”—and Manafort’s alleged attire—”sandy-colored chinos, a cardigan, and a light-colored shirt.”
Click Here: racing club camiseta
SCROLL TO CONTINUE WITH CONTENT
For its part, WikiLeaks strongly denied the explosive report on Twitter and said it is “willing to bet the Guardian a million dollars and its editor’s head that Manafort never met Assange.”
The publication also announced on Tuesday that it has launched a “legal fund to sue the Guardian for publishing [an] entirely fabricated story.”
If true, the Guardian‘s report could have major implications for Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia probe, a fact that may explain some of the reactive acceptance of the story by a segment of high-profile analysts, including cable news regulars like Malcolm Nance, who treated the thinly-reported story as a smoking gun:
The alleged 2016 meeting between Manafort and Assange, the Guardian notes, may “come under scrutiny and could interest Robert Mueller… A well-placed source has told the Guardian that Manafort went to see Assange around March 2016. Months later WikiLeaks released a stash of Democratic emails stolen by Russian intelligence officers.”
But the vagueness of the sourcing left many journalists extremely wary of running with such a politically charged story without corroboration beyond an unnamed but supposedly “well-placed” source, an unverified intelligence document, and other anonymous officials.
“There are so many weird aspects to the Guardian story beyond the fact that it doesn’t describe its sources or show any evidence. But nobody cares. People will claim it’s true or not based solely on whether they want it to be,” wrote The Intercept‘s Glenn Greenwald on Twitter.
“Which is true? The Guardian‘s anonymous claims or WikiLeaks’ vehement denials?” Greenwald asked. “You can pick which to believe based on which one most advances your political narrative, or refrain from forming judgments until evidence is available. I’m going to opt for the latter course.”
Our work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. Feel free to republish and share widely.
September 16, 2020 |
News
| No Comments
A decade-long campaign which garnered national headlines in recent months came to fruition on Monday, as Gov. Bill Haslam (R-Tenn.) granted clemency to Cyntoia Brown, a sex-trafficking survivor who has been behind bars for 15 years for murder.
After facing pressure from human rights groups, hundreds of thousands of Americans who signed petitions and wrote letters protesting Brown’s imprisonment, and celebrities who helped bring attention to her case, Haslam announced days before he is to leave office that Brown will be released from prison in August.
On social media, many of Brown’s supporters gave credit to the groundswell of activism on her behalf that gained national attention in recent months, as well as efforts by Tennesseeans who have been fighting for her release for at least a decade.
After thanking Haslam, Brown herself also expressed gratitude to those who have fought for her early release.
“I am thankful for all the support, prayers, and encouragement I have received,” Brown said. “I am thankful to my lawyers and their staffs, and all the others who, for the last decade have freely given of their time and expertise to help me get to this day. I love all of you and will be forever grateful.
“With God’s help, I am committed to live the rest of my life helping others, especially young people. My hope is to help other young girls avoid ending up where I have been.”
Brown was tried as an adult in 2004 after she shot a man who had paid to have sex with her when she was 16 years old. She killed the man after she thought he was reaching for a gun to shoot her. Brown was working for a pimp at the time who had raped her and forced her into prostitution. Before Haslam announced her clemency, she was serving a life sentence and was not scheduled to be eligible for parole until 2055.
SCROLL TO CONTINUE WITH CONTENT
Many of Brown’s supporters expressed hope that her case would bring more attention to the 2,100 inmates who are serving life sentences for crimes they committed as juveniles, as well as the thousands of Americans who are victimized by sex-traffickers every year.
“We need to see this as a national awakening,” J. Houston Gordon, one of Brown’s lawyers, said in a statement.
While celebrating Brown’s early release and applauding the work of activists, writer and organizer Mariame Kaba was among those who hesitated to express full satisfaction with Haslam’s decision, which includes supervised parole for Brown until 2029—meaning by that time, she will have spent 24 years under state control after spending part of her childhood under the control of a sex trafficker.
“That isn’t justice,” Kaba said.
Our work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. Feel free to republish and share widely.
Click Here: gws giants guernsey 2019
September 16, 2020 |
News
| No Comments
Newly-elected Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) wants to offer members of Congress an alternative to the “sugar-coated” junket to Israel the American Israel Public Affairs Committee-affiliated group offers members of Congress by leading a delegation to the West Bank. For a Republican lawmaker, however, giving lawmakers a view of life in the occupied territory is an “exceedingly dangerous” plan that must be stopped.
In letters he sent Thursday to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Democratic House committee heads, Rep. Brian Babin (R-Texas) laid out (pdf) his “extreme concern” with Tlaib’s proposal, first reported by The Intercept in December.
Unlike the rite of passage for new Republican and Democratic congress members that some dub the “Jewish Disneyland trip”—sponsored by American Israel Education Foundation (AIEF)—the proposed congressional delegation by the first Palestinian-American woman to serve in Congress would focus on “Israel’s detention of Palestinian children, education, access to clean water, and poverty,” the news outlet reported at the time.
Her delegation could spotlight Israel’s “segregation” and show “how that has really harmed us being able to achieve real peace in that region,” Tlaib told The Intercept.
“I don’t think AIPAC provides a real, fair lens into this issue,” she addded, as it glosses over “the side that I know is real, which is what’s happening to my grandmother and what’s happening to my family there.”
SCROLL TO CONTINUE WITH CONTENT
Babin’s letters note that Tlaib is a supporter of the boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) movement and accuses her of having “personal vitriol” towards the president. He dismisses her as a “yet unexperienced and overly caustic member of Congress.” He also argues that the “mere prospect” of such a delegation would upend the special relationship between the U.S. and Israel and urges the Democratic leaders to reject any approval for the trip.
According to one Jewish American who walked off his so-called “Birthright” trip, Tlaib’s move should be applauded, as the AIPAC-funded trips normalize “endless Israeli occupation.”
“Tlaib’s trip constitutes a marked shift, and we should welcome it. Congresspeople who join her delegation will see the daily nightmare of the Occupation. They’ll learn that Palestinian voices are not inherently dangerous, and that opposing the Occupation shouldn’t be controversial — it should be a moral imperative,” Elon Glickman, an organizer with IfNotNow, recently argued.
Babin, for his part, has welcomed the internally-condemned decision to move the U.S. Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem and supported legislation including the Israel Anti-Boycott Act, which the ACLU rebuked as “an unconstitutional infringement of core political speech rights.”
Our work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. Feel free to republish and share widely.
Click Here: COLLINGWOOD MAGPIES 2019