Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Wed Oct 10th, 2018 at 10:47:36 PM EST
In the words of Yvette Carnell to her audience, American black descendants of slaves (d.o.s.), regarding "Bill Cosby, Brett Kavanaugh and the End of American Elitism":
The elite. We have to talk about the elite in this country and we have to talk about sort of what I feel is, not only what we should derive and what we should not derive from them, who they are. There is an erasure of sorts about what it means to be American blackf d.o.s. when we talk about elite groups and how we just give ourselves over to them in some type of shared solidarity. You know how I feel about solidarity.
I found Yvette's channel when researching "Black Panther" film reviews. I previously posted here a link to this episode, because I took it to admit truly divergent interest in the outcome of a yet another symbolic trial of the capitalists' hierarchy and value system. Carnell's antagonism toward attitudes and relationships in the US that condone moral relativism --iniquity geared to wealth, credit-- is unequivocal. Her political perspective from "the bottom of the well" echoes Derrick Bell, one among many around the world who the cypher Obama duped. He is no d.o.s., but he played one for MSM."Nothing in your experience speaks to my experience,"
Upon reflection I realized "accessability" barriers such as sound, length, and idiomatic speech (non-standard US-English) might deter some eurotrib readers' interest in this discursion on mores. So I transcribed the first hour. I selectively edited grammar and repetitive substance for brevity. It's still a long read. The transcript below is annotated with hotlinks to empirical facts to which Carnell refers in this and previous episodes as well as seminal iconography that is relevant to the moment. Familiarity with US pop culture, propagated from US Anglo Disease, forms a critical foundation for interpreting her political rhetoric, or "outsider art."
Twice a week Carnell selects current event from which to lecture, in remedial fashion, about non-negotiable criteria for solidarity with American d.o.s. That should be a transactional alliance of diverse ethnic groups rather than token offerings to civil rights martyrs. Now, I've little reason to expect that "1%" running Europe's nations will have greater success ordering migrants' claims on the credibility of their wealth positions. But here I am, cloaked in the mystique.
said Ms Carnell.
Mon Sep 10th, 2018 at 05:42:00 PM EST
Social Media Executives Testify on Russian Interference in U.S. Elections is C-SPAN's title for the hearing in which Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey and Facebook Chief Operating Officer Sheryl Sandberg appeared before the US Senate Intelligence Committee last week. Colin Stretch, VP & General Counsel, Facebook, Sean Edgett, Acting General Counsel, Twitter, and Richard Salgado, Dir. of Law Enforcement and Information Security, Googgle appeared for US Senate Judiciary Committee questions last October. Mark Zuckerberg, CEO, Facebook, has since reluctantly and alone responded to questioning about the company's data marketing and security policies from a joint session of US senate Judiciary and Commerce, Science and Transportation Committees, the US House Committee on Energy and Commerce, and EU Parliament
Chairman Burr, Vice Chairman Warner, Ms Sandberg, and Mr Dorsey began proceedings with opening statements (00:02:00 - 00:31:00), here omitted. Video recorded playback of opening remarks, prepared statements or transcripts of those bromides and platitudes have been archived by various publishers. The format of the hearing was divided into "seven-minute question re-rounds" allocated to committee members. The first segment of sworn testimony is here transcribed to emphasize that since public hearings in 2017 so-called tech companies, incorporated in the USA, fully co-operate with the federal government in telecommunication surveillance, the development of ad hoc US censor codes, as well as the arrests and prosecutions of suspected code offenders.
Lest you imagine immunity among foreign and "foreign-born" correspondents with whom US American citizens communicate, reconsider. Look to the intellectual and instrumental defenses of civil liberties granted by your own governments. How disorderly and lively are "democratic" institutions in your community?
Sun Jul 29th, 2018 at 04:43:04 PM EST
taunts "EU-3" dominion. GOOG buries lede under senators' endorsement of US move to Jerusalem -- last year.
Sen. Cruz Leads Letter Urging Britain, France, and Germany to Deepen Cooperation Against Iran, Warning On Sanctions, 26 July 2018
U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) along with nine senators sent a letter this week to the ambassadors of the EU3 - Britain, France, and Germany - calling on their governments to deepen Transatlantic cooperation against Iran and warning against efforts to evade U.S. sanctions, which are set to be re-imposed in the coming weeks. The letter was signed by Sens. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), Mike Lee (R-Utah), Tom Cotton (R-Ark.), David Perdue (R-Ga.), Ben Sasse (R-Neb.), Steve Daines (R-Mont.), Mike Enzi (R-Wyo.), Mike Rounds (R-S.D.), and Dan Sullivan (R-Ala.).
: Download it before your copy disappears from Mr Cruz's senate website!)
Did you know US federal laws establish all the authorities and obligations of an international treaty? Assure the constitutional integrity of each of the twenty-seven member states? And obviate the premise of their unanimity in establishment of a league of nations, such as the EU? I didn't.
What will the "progressives" and reformers say?
That is sooo archaic!
No. Their voices will rise in unison: Which one is my senator?
Fri May 25th, 2018 at 09:31:26 PM EST
Thank you for your confidence.
Tue May 1st, 2018 at 06:51:16 PM EST
The Questions Mueller Wants to Ask Trump About Obstruction, and What They Mean
Correlation in search of causation, it's a new board game.
Sat Apr 14th, 2018 at 07:33:20 PM EST
6 November 2017, I did write.
The headline topic "Extremist Content and Russian Disinformation Online" is pretext to secure far more ranging cooperation from these publishers to police "user content", eg. number of cell text message responses to a posted solicitation, and legal identity of "users", eg. "beneficial owner of a (shell) corporation". In general, Democratic Party members were preoccupied with instances of suspected Russian "meddling and interference" such as false voter instructions; Republican Party members were skeptical of witnesses' claims in terms of operating capacities and technical expertise to avoid first amendment violations.
Approximately five months later comes news of US gov, Department of Homeland Security, request for proposals from private-sector firms to undertake surveillance of "social media communications," or "Media Monitoring Services," on behalf of US gov [1
to monitor traditional news sources as well as social media, identify any and all media coverage related to the Department of Homeland Security or a particular event. Services shall provide media comparison tools, design and rebranding tools, communication tools, and the ability to identify top media influencers.
The US federal government is preparing a secret list of individual domestic and foreign suspects (persons of interest) committing "influence" with a telecommunications device. One could characterized this project as "democratizing" a state's police apparatus.
The agency's requirements list for an applicant's consideration is formidable and precisely directed to configuring database reporting capabilities to the preferences of "users" employed in the obscure National Protection and Programs Directorate (NPPD) of DHS and its subdivisions. These are the Office of the Under Secretary (OUS), the Office of Cybersecurity and Communications (CS&C), the Office of infrastructure Protection (IP), the Federal Protective Service (FPS), the Office of Biometric Identity Management (OBIM) and the Office of Cyber and Infrastructure Analysis (OCIA).
One may note analogous, historical attempts by nation-state ray-geems to secure the obedience of constituents to legitimate public enterprise. None of that portends successful condition of freedom from arbitrary prosecution by the state, which is paradoxically us.
Sat Apr 14th, 2018 at 06:43:57 PM EST
Early last year, ahead of A Trip to the Woodshed, so-called leaders and pioneers in social media journalism began to promote an organizational effort to provide media consumers (or cucumbers) "to create educational resources." By 2 February 2018, GOOG corp-com announced that the company would will now add notices below videos uploaded by "broadcasters" who receive some level of government or public funding. To fight propaganda, YouTube will now label state-funded news broadcasts in the U.S.
"Our goal is to equip users with additional information to help them better understand the sources of news content that they choose to watch on YouTube," explained Geoff Samek, Senior Product Manager YouTube News, in the company's blog post.
Corp-com cautioned, labelling "will initially appear only to users in the U.S., and it may not always be accurate." So. How's this public-private-partnership censor feature working out? Let's look at a bit of 14 April reportage by "broadcasters" that receive some level of funding from governments that bombed Syria this morning.
Fri Apr 6th, 2018 at 08:29:01 PM EST
Given the tenor of the times, I thought it prudent to "re-gift" a bit of wisdom that my child (formerly known here as the Militant Electrician) shared with me. You see? It is possible to think new thinks about old dilemmas. She's at first year university now, and I'm a bit surprised about what she's got up to. I mean, it's not like we whiled away the years bloviating about western epistemology and comparative religion over Monopoly® boards. After all, she has accepted employment in laboratory husbandry (ahem) at school in order to fund the occasional journey by Greyound® bus line to civilization as we knew it. You see? No one is free, yet every one is free.
Thu Mar 29th, 2018 at 05:06:19 AM EST
App Makers Settle Privacy Class Action for $5.3 Million
A federal judge on Tuesday [27 MARCH 2018] finalized a $5.3 million deal to settle claims that Twitter, Instagram and other app makers uploaded Apple device users' personal data without consent.
Lead plaintiff Marc Opperman sued Apple and 17 app developers in March 2012 in one of five consolidated class actions. The plaintiffs claimed Apple allowed app makers to swipe their contacts data, including email addresses, from iPhones and other devices without permission.
The eight respondents identified in the article are Twitter, [Facebook subsidiary] Instagram, Yelp, Foursquare,Foodspotting, Gowalla, Kik Interactive and Kong Technologies<, which acquired the social media app Path in 2015.
In July 2016, U.S. District Judge Jon Tigar certified a nationwide class of 480,000 Apple device users for claims against Apple and Path. But last year, Tigar denied class certification for claims of false advertising against Apple, finding little evidence that Apple extensively touted data security in its marketing and advertising.
Despite Apple's much touted defense in 2016 for refusing an FBI demand for it to decode firmware-encrypted data stored in a San Bernardino murderer's iPhone. At the time
Apple corp-comm stated, "From the beginning, we objected to the FBI's demand that Apple build a backdoor into the iPhone because we believed it was wrong and would set a dangerous precedent. As a result of the government's [motion for] dismissal, neither of these occurred." Within a month of filing its lawsuit, the FBI however either succeeded on its own or employed a third-party to "unlock" data stored in the specific iPhone or Apple's proprietary server equipment
("the Cloud"). That news evidently provoked the added complaints against Apple's misrepresentation(s) about software security features and services (firmware and proprietary operating system API) installed on its devices. For Apple also had published a letter of assurance
to its customers that tied quality control of its products to their political interests in preventing unlawful search or seizure of such (licensed) property.
The government is asking Apple to hack our own users and undermine decades of security advancements that protect our customers -- including tens of millions of American citizens -- from sophisticated hackers and cybercriminals. The same engineers who built strong encryption into the iPhone to protect our users would, ironically, be ordered to weaken those protections and make our users less safe.
Mon Mar 19th, 2018 at 10:13:24 PM EST
Draft Agreement on the withdrawal of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland from the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community, pp 130
PARTS TWO CITIZENS' RIGHTS, FOUR TRANSITION, and FIVE FINANCIAL PROVISIONS are wholly [G] green, provisionally agreed.
For your convenience, below are listed only those divisions of the draft [W] white (proposed) and [Y] yellow (pending emendments). Breaks in a series indicate passages of the draft text that are otherwise highlighted [G].
The "transition" or "implementation" period still terminates 31 December 2020. Notice that jurisdiction and data sharing issues are particularly contentious, but financial settlement is not. PART SIX is the subdivision including
the DRAFT PROTOCOL ON IRELAND/NORTHERN IRELAND, the negotiators agree that a legally operative version of the "backstop" solution for the border between Northern Ireland and Ireland, in line with paragraph 49 of the Joint Report, should be agreed as part of the legal text of the Withdrawal Agreement, to apply unless and until another solution is found. The negotiators have reached agreement on some elements of the draft Protocol. They further agree that the full set of issues related to avoiding a hard border covered in the draft reflect those that need to be addressed in any solution. There is as yet no agreement on the right operational approach, but the negotiators agree to engage urgently in the process of examination of all relevant matters announced on 14 March and now under way.
Fri Mar 2nd, 2018 at 01:47:28 AM EST
The decision: New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (1964)
Petitioners: The New York Times Company, a New York corporation which publishes the New York Times (NYT), a daily newspaper, and four individual petitioners who were officers of the Committee to Defend Martin Luther King (Ralph Abernathy, S.S. Seay, Sr., Fred Shuttlesworth, and Joseph Lowery) which purchased NYT publishing services
Respondent: L. B. Sullivan, one of the three elected Commissioners of the City of Montgomery, Alabama
Respondent, an elected official in Montgomery, Alabama, brought suit in a state court alleging that he had been libeled by an advertisement in corporate petitioner's newspaper, the text of which appeared over the names of the four individual petitioners and many others. The published advertisement
: "Heed Their Rising Voices"
The political activity
: Protest of MLK's arrest and solicitation of funds from anyone receiving the NYT to pay for MLK's legal defense against two counts of felony perjury
A jury in the Circuit Court of Montgomery County awarded him [SULLIVAN] damages of $500,000, the full amount claimed, against all the petitioners, and the Supreme Court of Alabama affirmed. The advertisement included statements, some of which were false, about police action allegedly directed against students who participated in a civil rights demonstration and against a leader of the civil rights movement; respondent claimed the statements referred to him because his duties included supervision of the police department. The trial judge instructed the jury that such statements were "libelous per se," legal injury being implied without proof of actual damages, and that, for the purpose of compensatory damages, malice was presumed, so that such damages could be awarded against petitioners if the statements were found to have been published by them and to have related to respondent.
Happy Black History Y3 D60
The US Supreme Court reversed the decisions of Alabama appellate courts. Who has benefited? Surely los negros
, the blacks, were vindicated. Who else benefited? The New York Time Company in defense of publishing that "black" advertisement, the Pentagon Papers
in 1971, and "investigative journalists" purporting to "shield" authoritative sources of true and false information [1
] from prosecution by US Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald, 2004-2006 [2
]. Who else? Anyone to this day who expects model principles set forth to defend publishing, anyone who agitates for freedom to telecommunicate
political speech to known and unknown recipients.
Sun Feb 18th, 2018 at 07:12:04 AM EST
Special Counsel Robert Mueller announced the indictment by grand jury of Internet Research Agency (IRA), incorporated in Russia, its subsidiaries and thirteen named employees of the firms. Full text of the indictment is here or there.
The list of charges are:
1. Conspiracy to defraud the United States
"by impairing, obstructing, and defeating the lawful functions of the Federal Election Commission (FEC), the US Department of Justice (DOJ), and the US Department of State (State) in administering federal requirements for disclosure of foreign involvement in certain domestic activities."
2. Conspiracy to commit Wire Fraud and Bank Fraud
3-8. Aggravated identity Theft
It's here for cross-reference to observations last year that memorialized civic disorientation and disbelief following the DNC "hack" incident and Mr Trump's election. These were a wave of moral panic to proscribe "offensive" opinions, "fake news", "hate speech", and "Russian" propaganda and interrogation by US senators of "social media" publishers' business practices LQD: Censorship and A Trip to the Woodshed, respectively. Accordingly, the indictment of the Internet Research Agency ("IRA"), incorporated in Russia, relates broadcast speech (internet publication) soliciting political activity (thought or performance) of any "real" US person to illegal "foreign involvement in certain domestic activities."
A sophisticated but no less atavistic redoubt of red-baiting tactics
Count 1 is an array of criminal activities designed to "defraud" the US. Each US agency is the key relating IRA activities to its table of possible criminal charges relating to disclosure. Thus, the Special Counsel advances IRA's purported illegal "political activity" in the USA ("electioneering") under FARA, across FEC purview.
The indictment's token for an instance of IRA non-disclosure is "persona". Never mind that aliases, pseudonyms, brands, and atavars are recognizable "terms of art", that anonymity for public internet exchange is customary and protected by common law. "False persona" and "US persona" and "online persona": Repetition of the token dramatizes IRA "use of stolen US identities", as if possessed by a patent intent to conceal the foreign origin of the firm's work product (speech). This spiritual offense is more odious to um persons or ah entities who Mr Mueller represents than the sorcery marshaled to contract or stimulate political activity from "real" US ahm persons present in the USA. This offense evidently obstructs, impairs, and defeats US federal regulation of commerce everywhere and ultimately administration of electoral requirements within the USA.
That's not all: "others known and unknown to the Grand Jury, knowingly and intentionally conspired to defraud the United States." (p 5) These persons are named "co-conspirators" in the indictment. Their origins are not disclosed as in "Another co-conspirator who worked for the ORGANIZATION traveled to Atlanta, Georgia from approximately November 26, 2014 through November 30, 2014." The IRA reimbursed the co-conspirator's travel expenses. The indictment is larded with trivial incidents like this, one may suppose, to demonstrate at least productive tax-payer dollars.
From this premise flow the remaining criminal charges against foreign defendants and commentary lifted from Democratic Party senators' testimonies in the Judiciary Committee, Crime and Terrorism Subcommittee hearings.
Thu Feb 1st, 2018 at 09:40:57 PM EST
Ireland's Pink and Yellow Imperialism
Now that they have their piece of bourgeois respectability in their pocket (the marriage certificate) - why should they care about world peace? Why should they object to their hero leading Ireland into present and future wars? We can only conclude that the LGBT lifestyle - in Ireland at least - is now a firm part of the structure.
And the structure is imperialism - the western kind - the never ending, "permanently structured" kind. The western war against the world - for economic gain - that has lasted for centuries and which destroyed Ireland - now has Ireland's backing. It now has a fig leaf shaped like a shamrock and colored like a rainbow.
Varadkar didn't phrase it like this. In his deceitful words: "a Europe worth building is a Europe worth defending". And in doublespeak Orwell would be proud of - he sold the the concept of a European "army" as being anti-American.
BLM for White Folks May Mean Becoming Just Folks
In part what I'm talking about is our inherited puritanism, but I'm reluctant to call it that. For the most part, anybody who acknowledges our puritan inheritance also shares the shallow and self-congratulatory opinion that "thank god we're beyond all that, our sexuality freed, our right to have guilt-free fun."
On the contrary. Among the many reasons people ought to refrain from joining the hysteria of the Me Too movement is its complete acceptance of the dominant attitude towards the body and toward sex, unchanged despite the "sexual revolution," the multibillion dollar Internet pornography industry, the almost ceaseless appeals to our sexual nature to sell us everything, saturating TV and movies, magazine covers, the Internet. The young woman of today is arguably worse off than the maidens of pre-birth control yore who lived under the double standard that held what was good for the gander was fatal to the reputation of the goose.
I had wondered if anyone besides myself and Bruce Dixon were at all alarmed by the latest iteration of testing that divert any doubts about surrendering to the spoils of a truly democratic civilization, one's navel.
Is it suitable for public consumption in war, if not peace?
Fri Nov 3rd, 2017 at 11:46:42 PM EST
31 October 2017, the US Senate Judiciary Committee, Crime and Terrorism Subcommittee (running time: 03:00:00) met with Colin Stretch, VP & General Counsel, Facebook, Sean Edgett, Acting General Counsel, Twitter, and Richard Salgado, Dir. of Law Enforcement and Information Security, Googgle, in a hearing of "Extremist Content and Russian Disinformation Online." What follows is this author's transcription of the chairman's opening remarks and ten minutes, the saddest ten minutes, of the interrogatory which followed. May it be a lesson for us all.
Sat Oct 21st, 2017 at 05:38:04 PM EST
This essay is appropriately titled as the survey of actions therein are limited to state authorities, law and law enforcement, to punish (proscribe, abridge, or "chill") individual, personal conduct.
Censorship in the Digital Age
British Home Secretary Amber Rudd recently announced that citizens that view too much extremist material online could face up to 15 years in jail. Rudd related...
Thu Sep 14th, 2017 at 10:00:12 PM EST
Now, I will relate how I came upon the Democratic Party's faux accompli. US press rarely or never cites the bill number of legislation which they are paid to promote. If it did, people might read the actual text.
Enemy of the People has been atwitter since Wednesday about Mr Sander's bold action, popularity, and political acumen despite partisan rivalry in repealing or reforming the PPACA. He promised in a NYT OpEd to introduce Wednesday, 13 September 2017.
On Wednesday I will introduce the Medicare for All Act in the Senate with 15 co-sponsors and support from dozens of grass-roots organizations. Under this legislation, every family in America would receive comprehensive coverage, and middle-class families would save thousands of dollars a year by eliminating their private insurance costs as we move to a publicly funded program.
So. I went looking for the text of Mr Sander's "Medicare-for-All" bill.
Tue Aug 22nd, 2017 at 11:28:10 PM EST
I did write
In the USA,the convicted person doesn't "appeal" the sentence. The convict's complaint addresses the injury (certain death) resulting from defective "due process" at trial e.g. errors in findings of fact (evidence) or findings of law (procedure) that preclude an exculpatory verdict. The remedy sought is a new trial.
Following is an example of those principles invoked by the petition, MARCELLUS WILLIAMS, Petitioner, v. STEVE LARKIN, Superintendent, Potosi Correctional Center, Respondent (pdf), reported today
Whether the governor of Missouri is or is not a lawyer is irrelevant. The same, Mr Eric Grietens, confidently stated the certainty of harm to Mr Williams commanded by sentencing. "A sentence of death is the ultimate, permanent punishment. To carry out the death penalty, the people of Missouri must have confidence in the judgment of guilt. In light of new information, I am appointing a Board of Inquiry in this case." That is to investigate findings of fact.
Tue Aug 22nd, 2017 at 06:31:45 PM EST
The United Kingdom triggered Article 50 on 29 March 2017. What has happened since then on the EU side?
29 April 2017, the European Council at EU27 published European Council (Art. 50) guidelines for Brexit negotiations (HTML)
3 May 2017, the European Commission published recommendation, organizing a negotiating task force and citing establishing law, delivered to the Council.
22 May 2017, the Council published authorisation for the opening of the Article 50 negotiations with the UK and EU agenda of priorities.
19 June 2017, the first round of negotiation with the UK concluded with agreement of the parties to Terms of Reference for the Article 50 TEU Negotiations (pdf)
The United Kingdom, and the European Commission, representing the EU, share the understanding that the following, elements will guide the negotiations under Article 50 of the Treaty of the European Union
- Indicative dates for first sessions have been agreed as per paragraph 9 below . Each round will include discussion of each of the issues set out in Paragraph 3.
- Indicative dates are:
- Second round: w/c 17 th July
- Third round: w/c 28 th August
- Fourth round: w/c 18 th September
- Fifth round: w/c 9 th October
But you'd never know it to judge from Anglo-american press reporting on the series of non sequitors representing participation by UK gov't. agents in these A50 negotiations with the EU or their agreed, scheduled agenda.
Front paged - Frank Schnittger
Fri Aug 18th, 2017 at 12:58:34 PM EST
I have for many years @ eurotib.com promoted PACER (Public Access to Court Electronic Records) URL and search to provide subscribers primary source material which may or may NOT validate Anglo-merican reportage.
I've no idea whether national or EU gov't. provides similar public access to records of court proceedings in situ. eurotrib.com comment history does not obtain.
I had last promoted PACER 10 May 2009.
Wed Aug 2nd, 2017 at 03:08:54 PM EST
5. The Financial Action Task Force
Thirty-seven member and observer states constitute FATF. You may compare this cohort listing to the disjunctive table in Wikipedia's flawed article, "Legality of bitcoin by country or territory", wherein editors cite, for example, US Internal Revenue Service treatment of property. Hold that thought and ask yourself, "SELF, does my government tax this property yet?"
by gmoke - Jul 4
by Oui - Jul 9