Tag Archives: ban
It has taken way too long for this to happen. The immediate impact of this is likely to be domestic, cutting the legs out from under the right-wing fake news sites and hate sites. This will target foreign as well as domestic terrorist recruiting.
Web giants YouTube, Facebook, Twitter and Microsoft will step up efforts to remove extremist content from their websites by creating a common database.
The companies will share ‘hashes’ – unique digital fingerprints they automatically assign to videos or photos – of extremist content they have removed from their websites to enable their peers to identify the same content on their platforms.
“We hope this collaboration will lead to greater efficiency as we continue to enforce our policies to help curb the pressing global issue of terrorist content online,” the companies said in a statement on Tuesday.
Tech companies have long resisted outside intervention in how their sites should be policed, but have come under increasing pressure from Western governments to do more to remove extremist content following a wave of militant attacks.
YouTube and Facebook have begun to use hashes to automatically remove extremist content.
But many providers have relied until now mainly on users to flag content that violates terms of service. Flagged material is then individually reviewed by human editors who delete postings found to be in violation.
Twitter suspended 235,000 accounts between February and August this year and has expanded the teams reviewing reports of extremist content.
Each company will decide what image and video hashes to add to the database and matching content will not be automatically removed, they said.
The database will be up and running in early 2017 and more companies could be brought into the partnership.
The European Union set up an EU Internet Forum last year bringing together the internet companies, interior ministers and the EU Counter-Terrorism Coordinator to find ways of removing extremist content.
CNN Host calls BS on Trumpazoid. Funny how nobody is talking about the other terrorist who was a right wing Trumpazoid freak.
In a fine bit of election year electioneering, the US House has passed a bill limiting confederate flag displays…
A year after America suddenly and overwhelmingly began unraveling itself from the Confederate flag, here’s more evidence our relationship with it is ending.
On Thursday, the House of Representatives — including 84 Republicans — voted to make it illegal to drape or hoist the flag prominently in national veterans’ cemeteries, including over mass graves. Those who want to mark their ancestors’ spot with a Confederate flag could do so with a small one, but only on two days a year: Memorial Day and Confederates Memorial Day.
It’s unclear whether this new limitation on the Confederate flag is actually going to become law, since it hasn’t yet passed the Senate. But the House tends to be the more populist chamber of the two, and as such, a reflection of what the rest of America is thinking.
“Over 150 years ago, slavery was abolished,” said Rep. Jared Huffman (D-Calif.) who proposed the amendment. “Why in the year 2016 are we still condoning displays of this hateful symbol on our sacred national cemeteries?” The Hill’s Christina Marcos reports that no one spoke in opposition to it.
But many Republicans voted against it — 159, in fact — while about half as many (84) voted for it. And if Democrats have their way, the Confederate flag will be a campaign issue in the fall.
It’s no coincidence this comes after a racially motivated shooting in Charleston, S.C., nearly a year ago that killed nine black church members and spurred a shift in how Americans — and especially Southern Republican politicians — view the flag’s meaning. While acknowledging its symbolism of the South’s heritage, for the first time many prominent Republicans also acknowledged its ties to racism.
“That flag, while an integral part of our past, does not represent the future of our great state,” said South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley (R), who led the charge.
Some years ago, I had a friend who was a gunsmith. He loved to tinker and try modifications to weapons. He came up with a machine pistol, capable of firing 1300 rounds per minute. The difference between his new gun and everything else on the market at that time, was a unique compensation system he invented, which vastly reduced recoil – meaning the gun on full auto didn’t pull off target as it was fired. He thought the Military would jump all over it, so he made two copies and tried to sell it to them. There were several other potential customers in Federal Law Enforcement he demonstrated the weapon to. The post-Vietnam Military wasn’t interested in small, handheld weapons. The Law Enforcement agencies went nuts, even though the weapon could never be sold legally to the public – and had it banned from production in the US and banned for export. The rationale was that if a bad guy ever got hold of one of them, because of it’s small size and conceal ability, rate of fire, and accuracy he would be virtually unstoppable. The two prototypes were destroyed.
I think this gun should be banned. First, from a Law Enforcement standpoint a Cop will never know whether that Cell Phone a suspect has is really a Cell Phone – resulting in numerous killings of innocent people. Next, something like this provides the conceal-ability which would allow a John Hinckley character, who shot President Reagan to get close enough undetected to assassinate a political figure. Hinckley used a .32 Caliber which is significantly smaller. The inventor is lying in the below article about the effectiveness of the .380 round. It is, in terms of destructive power, only a step or two below that of a 9 mm. Generally it is used in small, semiautomatic handguns, which don’t have the accuracy or range of bigger guns due to the barrel length.
I’ve seen some pretty crazy stuff out there, including laptops which convert into sub-machine guns. But those types of systems are no available to the general public, and require stringent licensing.
This is absolutely STUPID nuts.
Its creator wanted a more discreet firearm to carry around.
This is not a smartphone. This is a gun.
It’s the Ideal Conceal, a .380-caliber pistol that folds up into a box shape. The creator designed the firearm to look like a phone so people could carry it around in public without attracting attention.
Here’s what it looks like when it’s ready for action:
Note – there appears to be capability to mount an internal laser sight on the front.
Ideal Conceal’s website explains the logic behind the $395 gun: “Smartphones are EVERYWHERE, so your new pistol will easily blend in with today’s environment. In its locked position it will be virtually undetectable because it hides in plain sight.”
The website also advises folks to check local concealed carry laws before purchasing the firearm.
Kirk Kjellberg, CEO of Minnesota-based company Ideal Conceal, told a local news outlet that he came up with the concept for the pistol after a boy in a restaurant noticed he was carrying a concealed gun. Kjellberg has a concealed carry permit and a firearm license, he told The Huffington Post, but he added that it’s still “pretty embarrassing when people stare at you.”
“A little child, a boy about 7, saw me, and said, ‘Mommy, Mommy, that guy’s got a gun!’ And the whole restaurant of course turns and stares at you. And I thought, there’s just got be something better,” said Kjellberg, per NBC affiliate KARE in Minneapolis.
Critics of the gun have pointed out that it could pose a security risk in public places like airports, according to KARE. But Kjellberg insists the gun is meant for people concerned about their own personal safety.
“We don’t want anything sinister to go on with it,” Kjellberg told KARE. “It’s just made for mainstream America, not criminal enterprise.”
He told HuffPost that the gun, which holds two rounds, isn’t very powerful. “If you’re going to try to hurt somebody, it will probably take more firepower,” Kjellberg said.
In recent years, police have shot and killed several people carrying items mistaken for guns. In January, police in Las Vegas shot and killed an unarmed man carrying a cell phone that looked to police like a firearm.
Calling the Confederate flag an “insensitive symbol” he personally finds offensive, NASCAR chairman Brian France said the sport will be aggressive in disassociating the symbol from its events.
“We want to go as far as we can to eliminate the presence of that flag,” France told The Associated Press on Saturday. “I personally find it an offensive symbol, so there is no daylight how we feel about it and our sensitivity to others who feel the same way.
“We’re working with the industry to see how far we can go to get that flag to be disassociated entirely from our events.”…
My…My…My…Put that in your “Daisy Dukes”
The “Flag battle” erupts again. This one seems a rather sensible approach, which is that you can’t use public facilities, such as light poles to fly the confederate flag. Otherwise, people can carry the flag, hang it from private buildings, or display it any way they like…
Sensible in that the government shouldn’t be providing a resting place to celebrate the confederate flag, any more than it should for the Nazi Flag, or the Rising Sun.
Of course, being sensible doesn’t mean it won’t cause a firestorm – especially here in the lower Shenandoah Valley where two of the icons of the confederate cause in Virginia are buried, and pro-confederate history and sentiments run deep.
A rural Virginia city where Robert E. Lee and Thomas “Stonewall” Jackson are buried voted to limit the flying of the Confederate flag on poles on several downtown streets.
The 4-1 vote Thursday night by the Lexington City Council allows only the Virginia, U.S. and city flags to be displayed. Personal displays of the flag are not affected.
About 100 people led by the Sons of Confederate Veterans rallied before the vote. They then showed up in force to speak to city council to dissuade them from enacting the ordinance.
Some residents complained that the flag is a symbol of the South’s history of slavery and shouldn’t be endorsed by the city.
After the vote, the Sons said they would legally challenge the flag ban in the city of 7,000.
And American custom in hte poor balck community, and certain white communities has been to give their children unusual first names. All of us are familiar with the Teshawn, Teneishas, and Teydakadoodlediddleers by now. On the flip side of that racial coin Rapper Frank Zapper named his daughter Moon Unit, and there are a plethora of other unusual names hung on the kids of media stars.
New Zealand, along with a few other countries have decided to ban certain children’s names. I’m not sure whether it’s down to Tom, Dick, or Harry for the boys – but something is afoot here –
Celebrities with a penchant for weird baby names (looking at you, David and Victoria Beckham) should avoid having kids in New Zealand.
The country’s Registrar of Births, Deaths and Marriages has been cracking down on parents who get too creative when naming their kids, Australia’s Herald Sun reports.
The list of weird names for kids that are banned by New Zealand’s names registrar has grown to include Lucifer, Duke, Messiah and 89. Also not approved: Bishop, Baron, General, Judge, King, Knight and Mr., names that were all said to be too similar to titles.
The letters, C, D, I and T were also rejected as first names, the Herald Sun says.
As well, the agency has refused to allow names involving asterisks, commas, periods and other punctuation marks.
And three different sets of Kiwi parents wanted to name their children Lucifer, only to have the name choice nixed.
In 2008, New Zealand’s names registrar drew international attention when it approved such non-traditional names as Benson and Hedges for a set of twins, as well as the boys names of Violence and Number 16 Bus Shelter.
But New Zealand isn’t the only country to ban wacky names for kids, the Toronto Globe and Mail reports.
In Sweden, name choices are subject to a naming law. While Lego and Google have been approved as names for children, Superman, Metallica and Elvis, and the name Brfxxccxxmnpcccclllmmnprxvclmnckssqlbb11116, pronounced Albin, were not approved.
In 2007, a judge in the Dominican Republic submitted a proposal to ban names that are either confusing or gave no indication of gender, such as the names Qeurida Pina (Dear Pineapple) and Tonton Ruiz (Dummy Ruiz), according to the Globe and Mail.
Can you imagine what football teams would look like if we did that in the US?
“Bob Jones goes back for a pass, Bob Jones puts a hard rush on from the corner. The pass is up! Bob Jones has caught it! Bob Jones tackles him at the 30!”
Hmmmm… I guess a case of be careful what you wish for.
For different reasons, I think the Governor is right on this one. As Governor, he shouldn’t be in the business of regulating what people propose. It’s regulating Free Speech if he does that. Essentially anyone can propose any idiotic thing they want (a Dirty Diaper License plate for instance)…
Getting the State DMV or Legislature to accept it… Is a whole different story.
With that said, however – that doesn’t let Barbour off the hook for his close ties with neo-confederate and white supremacist groups.
Haley Barbour doesn’t think Mississippi’s legislature will approve the Sons of Confederate Veterans’ proposed license platehonoring Ku Klux Klan leader Nathan Bedford Forrest—but he’s not going denounce the proposal. The state’s NAACP has called on Barbour to do so, the AP reports, but when asked about it, the governor replied, “I don’t go around denouncing people. That’s not going to happen.” Pressed further, he added, “I know there’s not a chance it’ll become law.”
Needless to say, the NAACP wasn’t satisfied with the response. “I find it curious that the governor won’t come out and clearly denounce” the proposal, the group’s Mississippi president said. “As the head of the state, he shouldn’t tap dance around the question.” The incident comes just months after Barbour sparked controversy by saying that he didn’t remember segregated Mississippi as being “that bad.” For more on the license plate controversy, click here.
Wow… Now Iranian State TV has banned cooking shows showing folks how to cook a hamburger or a pizza… Now you got the kiddies hooked on those golden arches – and mom and dad on that General Tso’s Chicken…
How you going to keep them home?
I guess the Revolution will not be televised.
A state-owned news website says Iran’s broadcasting authority has banned Iranian TV channels from showing cooking programs that present recipes for foreign cuisine.
Jamejamonline reported late Saturday that the deputy head of Iran’s state broadcasting company, Ali Darabi, announced the ban during a visit to one of the country’s 30 state-run TV channels.
Some cooking programs on Iranian stations present recipes for foreign cuisine, such as Italian and French.
The ban is seen as part of a nationalistic campaign increasingly pushed by Iran’s government in recent years.
Pizza, pasta and Western fast foods like hamburgers and hot-dogs are popular in Iran, and Tehran boasts many restaurants that serve Western or Asian food.
In quite possibly the stupidest move since the Volstead Act – Oklahoma Republicans managed to pass a referendum banning the State Judicial considering International, or Sharia Law in the decision of any cases.
Why is it stupid? The same nutcase Republicans are arguing that our country was founded on “christian principles” and thus is subject to christian law.
In order to be Constitutional – the Oklahoma proposed Amendment would have to ban ALL Religious Law – not just that of one religion based on conservative racism.
As to the ban on other aspects of International Law – Oklahoma is landlocked, so nobody gives a flock.
An Oklahoma City federal judge Monday ruled against a voter- approved restriction on Islamic law.
In a 15-page order, U.S. District Judge Vicki Miles-LaGrange continued to keep the restriction out of the Oklahoma Constitution. Her ruling was a victory for an Oklahoma City Muslim leader who had complained his constitutional religious rights were in jeopardy.
“While the public has an interest in the will of the voters being carried out … the Court finds that the public has a more profound and long-term interest in upholding an individual’s constitutional rights,” the judge wrote.
At issue was a constitutional amendment that forbids state courts from considering or using international law or Sharia law. The amendment describes Sharia law as Islamic law based on the Quran and the teaching of Mohammed.
Oklahomans on Nov. 2 approved the amendment — in State Question 755 — with 70.08 percent of the vote. Muneer Awad, 27, an American-born Muslim, sued two days later. The judge on Nov. 8 blocked the state Election Board from certifying the SQ 755 results.
The order Monday continues the freeze on those results.
The order is a preliminary injunction, not a permanent one. Still, the state Election Board could appeal now.
The state attorney general’s office was considering its options, a spokesman said. A key supporter of the measure, state Sen. Anthony Sykes, R-Moore, said, “I was disappointed but not surprised. We look forward to working with the AG’s office on it.”
Awad is executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations in Oklahoma. “It is another positive step,” he said after the ruling.
“The initial filing of the lawsuit was a rough time,” Awad said, “But we’ve noticed since then a tremendous outpouring of support from Muslims and non-Muslims. We are confident we have supporters who want to see this amendment fail. It’s not just about the Muslim community. It’s about Oklahoma. The nation — the world — is watching.”
Imad Enchassi, president of the Islamic Society of Greater Oklahoma City, said, “Justice has been served.”
In Monday’s order, the judge wrote that Awad “has made a strong showing that State Question 755’s amendment’s primary effect inhibits religion and that the amendment fosters an excessive government entanglement with religion.”
The judge rejected the state’s argument that the amendment is a broad ban on state courts applying the law of other nations and cultures regardless of what faith they may be based on.
She wrote, “The actual language of the amendment reasonably … may be viewed as specifically singling out Sharia law, conveying a message of disapproval of plaintiff’s faith.”
The judge wrote: “This order addresses issues that go to the very foundation of our country, our (U.S.) Constitution, and particularly, the Bill of Rights. Throughout the course of our country’s history, the will of the ’majority’ has on occasion conflicted with the constitutional rights of individuals, an occurrence which our founders foresaw and provided for through the Bill of Rights.”
Quoting from a 1943 U.S. Supreme Court decision, she wrote, “One’s right to life, liberty, and property, to free speech, a free press, freedom of worship and assembly, and other fundamental rights may not be submitted to vote; they depend on the outcome of no elections.”
The judge said any harm to the state in delaying certification of the results is minimized because the amendment “was to be a preventative measure and the concern that it seeks to address has yet to occur.”
Legislators called the measure the “Save Our State” amendment. The measure’s principal author, former state Rep. Rex Duncan, a Republican, has called it a “pre-emptive strike … against a growing threat.”
Critics of Sharia law contend it could be used as a defense in state courts to such barbaric practices as marital rape.
Another Republican appointed Judge…
Another dirty deal.
Martin Feldman was a Reagan Appointee to the Federal Court.
Martin Feldman, who ruled against Barack Obama’s moratorium, accused of conflict of interests
Yesterday, a Louisiana-based judge Martin Feldman ruled that Barack Obama’s six-month drilling moratorium in the Gulf was unjustifiedbecause it assumed that all deepwater drilling was as dangerous as BP’s.
The White House promised an immediate appeal.
Meanwhile environmental groups have said Feldman’s ruling may have to be rescinded because of the possible conflict of interests.
Feldman’s most recent financial disclosure forms show that he was paid dividends from his shares in Transocean, the firm that owned the Deepwater oil rig that exploded in April killing 11 oil workers, prompting America’s worst environmental disaster.
The forms, which relate to the calendar year 2008, also show that he sold shares in Halliburton, which was also involved in the disaster.
Feldman’s other interests included Ocean Energy, Quicksilver Resources, Prospect Energy, Peabody Energy, Pengrowth Energy Trust, Atlas Energy Resources, and Parker Drilling. Read the rest of this entry »
Old joke from the Civil Rights Era –
1 black person on a street corner is trouble
2 black people on a street corner is a conspiracy
3 black people on a street corner is a crime
4 black people on a street corner is a riot.
They have virtually no black folks in Arizona – so Hispanics are just going to have to do.
HB 2281 outlaws curriculum that is anti-American and that advocates the violent overthrow of the U.S. government (I imagine there is a Tea Bagger exemption?).
The bill creates a mechanism by which books will be judged to be in compliance. American Indian and African American classes are exempted. The clear target is the Tucson Unified School District’s Mexican American Studies (MAS) program. The Arizona Department of Education has “has begun telling principals to remove teachers who speak English with an accent from classes with students who are still learning English.”
Arizona’s Superintendent for Public Instruction, Tom Horne is on record claiming that only things from Western Civilization (Greco-Roman) should be taught in Arizona schools. Pre- Colombian Indigenous knowledge from this continent – the foundation for the highly successful MAS program – is considered outside of Western Civilization.
Well, this should quiet down all the racial tension in Arizona: Gov. Jan Brewer has signed a bill designed to outlaw the Tucson school district’s ethnic studies program—just hours after UN human rights experts issued a report condemning that very law. The measure is the brainchild of Arizona schools chief Tom Horne, who believes that the Mexican-American studies classes taught in Tucson high schools teach Latino students to resent white people. “It’s just like the old South, and it’s long past time we prohibited it,” Horne, a Republican running for Attorney General, tells the AP.
He’s pushed for the law since 2006, when he heard that a Hispanic activist had told a class that “Republicans hate Latinos.” The law bans any classes designed to promote solidarity among a particular ethnic group. Tucson’s schools offer Mexican-American, African-American and Native-American studies programs, but district officials say they think all are in compliance with the law.