…When their dogs started digging insistently at a spot in the woods, villagers in Zavalivka called in the authorities…
Clashes erupt during journalist’s funeral in Jerusalem (VIDEOS)
violence between Palestinians and Israeli security forces
erupted in Jerusalem on Friday during the funeral of Shireen Abu Akleh,
a veteran Palestinian journalist who had worked at Al Jazeera for more
than two decades. The reporter was killed earlier this week under
unclear circumstances during an Israeli military raid in the West Bank.
Israeli police blamed the violence on Palestinian “rioters” who allegedly pelted the hospital compound from which the funeral procession began with stones. Policemen “were forced to act,” Tel Aviv insisted, with security forces deploying crowd control measures to disperse the “rioters.”
from the scene shows Israeli police charging the funeral procession and
beating Palestinians with batons. People carrying the reporter’s coffin
were apparently targeted as well, nearly dropping the casket on the
ground. At least 10 Palestinians were injured in the violence.
Akleh was killed on Wednesday during a military raid on the city of
Jenin in the northern part of the West Bank. The Palestinian authorities
were quick to blame the Israeli forces for her death, claiming the
51-year-old journalist was shot in her head. Another Palestinian
journalist, Ali Samoudi, was reportedly wounded in the back during the
deadly raid on the city. He was hospitalized in stable condition.
Al Jazeera, a state-owned Qatari network, has strongly condemned the killing of the reporter, branding it a “heinous crime” and pinning the blame on Israel for her death.
“We hold the Israeli government and the occupation forces responsible for the killing of the late colleague Shireen,” the network said in a statement, urging an independent and transparent investigation.
Israel has expressed its readiness to conduct a joint probe into the
incident with the Palestinian authorities, it demanded they surrender
the bullet that mortally wounded Abu Akleh. The Palestinian Authority,
however, has rejected the initiative.
On Friday, the Israeli
military released an interim report on the incident. The report,
however, lacked any conclusions, merely stating it was impossible to
determine whether the fatal bullet was fired by Israeli troops or some
obliging the government to pay RUB 3 million to families of wounded
soldiers and RUB 5 million – to those of the servicemen killed in
action. However, Russia’s military leadership files most of its KIAs as
missing, therefore their families will not receive any compensation.
“These grand promises should have had a positive effect on
mobilization because for such money many ruscists are willing to risk
their lives. But these statements are a bitter reality where Russia
files most of the fallen soldiers as missing, so as not to pay
compensation,” the officials note.
Yegor Shkrebets, a conscript who was killed on the Moskva Cruiser
before being officially declared missing by the Russian prosecutor’s
office is a bright example of such practices.
As Ukrinform reported earlier, from February 24 to May 9, the Armed
Forces of Ukraine liquidated about 25,650 (+150) Russian servicemen.
has already received a total of about 32,000 appeals in which the
relatives of Russian soldiers who had gone missing in the war with
Ukraine ask about their fate.
“I would not say that this is such a mass phenomenon at the moment
(for relatives of Russian soldiers to send such inquiries). Indeed, they
were filed en masse in early March, and now it is a routine thing.
Indeed, we received about 12,000 appeals, perhaps even more, to our
hotline, which had been set up exactly for Russian citizens, and more
than 20,000 appeals filed through a chatbot set up on Telegram,”
Asked what the Russians wanted from the Ukrainian authorities, the
official said that they were filing contact information of their loved
ones – husbands and sons who went into Ukraine as part of the invasion
forces – with whom they had lost contact.
“We would sometimes call them and ask why they are not asking their
own authorities the same, and they tell us that they are being lied to.
That is, there is such an understanding. And given such volumes (of
appeals – ed.), I think that in fact this understanding is growing very
strongly in Russia, it just isn’t showing – the same as it was back in
the Soviet Union,” said the adviser.
Comment by tonytran2015: Not everything from Hunter Biden is wrong.
Hunter Biden ripped former President Bill Clinton as an “a–hole” who “looks like s—” in a 2016 email exchange and took aim at multiple Clinton aides in 2015 emails with his longtime business partner Eric Schwerin and Delaware’s now-chief deputy attorney general, Alexander Mackler.
George Woodrow Wilson Jr., 78, formerly of St. Joseph, died on April 14, 2022, in Overland Park, Kan.
Born in New Orleans, George was raised on the south side of Chicago where he was one of the first students to integrate Mt. Carmel High School. During the time at Northern Illinois University, he majored in business; however, he realized that business was not his calling. He would go on to get a degree in anthropology at Wichita State University and his masters at the University of Massachusetts.
His formal education was interrupted when he was called to active duty by the U.S. Navy Reserves. He was a crew member of the ill-fated USS Liberty, which was attacked by Israeli aircraft during the Six Day War in 1967; George throughout his life lamented at the loss of lives. He himself was wounded and received a Purple Heart.
We have discussed the expanding censorship programs at Twitter, Facebook, and other social media. These programs have notably targeted conservative viewpoints on contemporary controversies. Now, LinkedIn has added its company name to this ignoble effort, according to An Air Force veteran whose account was disabled after criticizing the calls for loan forgiveness. The site declared opposing to the Democratic plan for loan forgiveness to be “hate speech.”
Smith is the founder of the non-profit organization Code of Vets, a group created in honor of her father who died at 57 after years of struggling with post-traumatic stress disorder. Like many Americans, she opposed the loan forgiveness calls from Democratic members and has shared her own use of military service to help pay for college.
Smith posted her take on student loan forgiveness on vasrious social media platforms.
“I am not responsible for your student debt. I grew up in poverty in NC. Ate from a garden, name was on community Angel tree for Christmas, bought clothes from yard sales & if I was lucky, on a rare occasion Sky City. I joined the Air Force then went to college. I made it happen.”
LinkedIn then disabled or restricted her account as well as her Code of Vets account. LinkedIn told Smith in an email that the Code of Vets post “goes against our policy on hate speech,” according to a screenshot she shared on Twitter.
LinkedIn has not responded to media inquiries, which is typical of social media companies. The company simply said that she can appeal.
If this is the entirety of the posting, it is hard to imagine a more glaring example of bias and censorship. Some in the company simply supports loan forgiveness and declared opposition to the Democratic plan to be “hate speech.”
Both public and private censorship leads to an insatiable appetite for silencing those with opposing views.
This is why I have described myself as an Internet Originalist:
The alternative is “internet originalism” — no censorship. If social media companies returned to their original roles, there would be no slippery slope of political bias or opportunism; they would assume the same status as telephone companies. We do not need companies to protect us from harmful or “misleading” thoughts. The solution to bad speech is more speech, not approved speech.
If Pelosi demanded that Verizon or Sprint interrupt calls to stop people saying false or misleading things, the public would be outraged. Twitter serves the same communicative function between consenting parties; it simply allows thousands of people to participate in such digital exchanges. Those people do not sign up to exchange thoughts only to have Dorsey or some other internet overlord monitor their conversations and “protect” them from errant or harmful thoughts.
Social media companies seem to have written off conservatives and others with dissenting views. They have also readily embraced censorship as a noble task. Indeed, after the old Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey was criticized for his massive censorship efforts, Twitter replaced him with CEO Parag Agrawal who has expressed chilling anti-free speech sentiments. In an interview with Technology Review editor-in-chief Gideon Lichfield, he was asked how Twitter would balance its efforts to combat misinformation with wanting to “protect free speech as a core value” and to respect the First Amendment. Agrawal responded;
“Our role is not to be bound by the First Amendment, but our role is to serve a healthy public conversation and our moves are reflective of things that we believe lead to a healthier public conversation. The kinds of things that we do about this is, focus less on thinking about free speech, but thinking about how the times have changed.
One of the changes today that we see is speech is easy on the internet. Most people can speak. Where our role is particularly emphasized is who can be heard. The scarce commodity today is attention. There’s a lot of content out there. A lot of tweets out there, not all of it gets attention, some subset of it gets attention.”
He added that Twitter would be “moving towards how we recommend content and … how we direct people’s attention is leading to a healthy public conversation that is most participatory.”
“Can you provide a definition for the word ‘woman’?” Blackburn asked.
“Can I provide a definition?” Jackson repeated the question.
“Mmhmm, yeah,” Blackburn confirmed.
“I can’t,” Jackson replied.
“You can’t?” Blackburn asked.
“Not — in this context, I’m not a biologist,” Jackson laughed.
“So you believe the meaning of the word ‘woman’ is so unclear and controversial that you can’t give me a definition?” Blackburn continued to press.
“Senator, in my works a judge, what I do is I address disputes,” Jackson pushed back, suggesting that she could only provide a decision based on arguments and the law. “If there is a dispute about a definition, people make arguments and I look at the law and I decide, so — I’m not —”
“The fact that you can’t give me a straight answer about something as fundamental as what a woman is underscores the dangers of the kind of progressive education that we are hearing about,” Blackburn continued.
Blackburn then pivoted to address the controversy surrounding the NCAA swimming championships and the fact that Penn State’s transgender swimmer Lia Thomas — who is still biologically male — was allowed to compete against biological women. Thomas ultimately won first place in the 500-yard freestyle, fifth place in the 200-yard freestyle, and eighth place in the 100-yard freestyle.
Russia’s most prominent opposition figure Alexei Navalny has been given nine years in a “strict regime penal colony” in a fraud case rejected by
supporters as fabricated.
Navalny was detained when he returned to Russia last year, after surviving a poisoning he blamed on the Kremlin…
There aren’t many ways to make something as objectively awful as civil asset forfeiture worse, but the FBI has found a way to do it. As it stands now, forfeiture allows law enforcement to take cash and property from people under the (unproven) theory that it was illegally obtained. The rest of the process does nothing to prove the theory. The burden of proof is often shifted to people who had their stuff taken by law enforcement and the process of seeking the return of property is so expensive and counterintuitive, most people just take the L and move on.
The FBI wants to make asset forfeiture even shittier. It’s rolling out what appears to be a pilot program in Charlotte, North Carolina — supposedly a major hub on the East Coast drug distribution chain. Behold these (also unproven) claims the FBI has deployed to justify its new forfeiture ride-along program.
The FBI Charlotte Field Office is offering cash rewards for tips that help agents intercept drug trafficking shipments through Charlotte. With multiple interstates running directly through the Queen City, the route is appealing to traffickers who deliver their products and transfer the cash proceeds up and down the East Coast. While law enforcement agencies are effective at intercepting many of the shipments, the FBI recognizes the value the public can offer to our investigations.
Did you get that? Multiple interstates leading to a large city is all the “evidence” the FBI needs to call literally any city with a network of accessible roads a hotspot for drug trafficking activity. Everything is a hub and every road is an artery. That’s how the interstate highway system works. And because it works, every road must be a drug trafficking route and every city must be simultaneously a source for drug distributors and the home to thousands of drug customers.
All of North Carolina is suspect, according to the FBI. To clean up this southeastern drug paradise, the FBI is asking the public to contribute to its government theft program.
If a drug/cash shipment is successfully seized, the tipster could receive up to 25% of the seized money. FBI Charlotte will use the Department of Justice Asset Forfeiture Program to pay tipsters. Currently, the new program is only active in the Charlotte metro area with plans to expand across North Carolina in the future.
The FBI has set up an SMS accessible tip line in addition to its normal field office phone numbers. Tipsters who know where some drug cash might be found can directly profit from providing information that points agents in the direction of seizable property.
Unlike other tip lines with reward offers like CrimeStoppers, there’s no need to wait around to see if the tip results in arrests or convictions. The civil asset forfeiture process doesn’t require arrests and convictions, only nebulous accusations about the cash itself, which is named as the “defendant” in forfeiture proceedings as though it committed criminal acts all by itself.
And while it might be tempting to flood the tip line with bogus reports, keep in mind making false statements to federal agents is a federal crime, one that can lead to real, in-fucking-federal-prison sentences. It isn’t like filling out a false police report, which may lead to little more than a few months of probation and local cops treating future reports as highly suspect. Federal crimes are no joke and the FBI loves to catch people lying because it allows the DOJ to add to its prosecutorial wins even when agents are unable to find evidence of any actual criminal activity.
The hard rule (DON’T!) about talking to federal agents without a lawyer present applies here as well. Think about it. You provide a tip, thinking you’re doing a good deed by sending agents to seize the ill-gotten gains of an alleged criminal enterprise. But if any entity is capable of ensuring no good deed goes unpunished, it’s the FBI.
Agents may decide the submitted tip indicates the tipster is involved in drug trafficking or, at the very least, may be able to provide even more tips on criminal activity. This may lead to some in-person “interviews” with agents who — as noted above — can always accuse a tipster of lying if they believe they’re not being fully honest about their relationship to the seized cash or the people who formerly possessed it. They may also attempt to pressure a tipster into becoming a federal snitch and make their lives miserable if they refuse to play ball.
No good can come of this. No good comes from civil asset forfeiture and this invitation for the public to skim the federal government’s take makes it much, much worse. If the FBI’s going to be this stupid, it’s time for federal lawmakers to take this abusable revenue stream away from it by requiring forfeitures to be tied to convictions.