LEGISLATIVE PROPOSAL: SUPPORT AND DEMAND EQUALITY FOR ALL FLORIDIANS!

THE FLORIDA DEMOCRATIC LEAGUE SUPPORTS THE EQUALITY FOR ALL FLORIDIANS ACT!

Let’s promote and protect equality in Florida the right, fair, and equitable way. The Equality for All Floridians Act legally safeguards equality rights for all Floridians 24/7 statewide.

Familia 01


WE AGREE. Floridians deserve equality. But we also understand that equality can only be achieved by protecting ALL Floridians equally! Equally means NO special benefits, unequal protections, unfair advantages, or downright undemocatic public policies. The Equality for All Floridians Act promotes true equality in Florida the fair, unbiased, nondiscriminatory way.


What does the Equality for All Floridians Act say?
Here’s its full text:

EQUALITY FOR ALL FLORIDIANS ACT

Continue reading

OUTRAGEOUS! U.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE ATTACKS JOURNALISTS, PUBLISHERS, AND FREEDOM OF THE PRESS

Published on Thursday, May 23, 2019 by Common Dreams

‘This Is About Attacking Journalism,’ Warn Press Freedom Defenders as DOJ Hits Assange With New Espionage Charges

“This is about retaliation for publishing evidence of U.S. war crimes and other crimes by the most powerful nation on Earth.”

Assange protesta 00
Placards and messages in support of Julian Assange sit outside Ecuadorian Embassy stands in South Kensington on April 5, 2019 in London, England. (Photo: Jack Taylor/Getty Images)

By 

IN AN UNPRECEDENTED move that journalists and press freedom defenders denounced as “the most significant and terrifying threat to the First Amendment in the 21st century,” the Trump Justice Department announced Thursday that a federal grand jury charged WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange with 17 new counts of violating the Espionage Act.

“This is no longer about Julian Assange: This case will decide the future of media.”

—Edward Snowden, American whistleblower

This is about attacking journalism and the public’s right to information about war crimes done in their name with their dollars,” The Intercept‘s Jeremy Scahill said in a series of tweets. “This is about retaliation for publishing evidence of U.S. war crimes and other crimes by the most powerful nation on Earth. It’s a threat to press freedom. That’s why you should care.”

Ben Wizner, director of the ACLU’s Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project, explained in a statement what sets these charges apart from past U.S. government legal actions targeting journalists and publishers.

“For the first time in the history of our country, the government has brought criminal charges against a publisher for the publication of truthful information,”Wizner said. “This is an extraordinary escalation of the U.S. government’s attacks on journalism, and a direct assault on the First Amendment.”

Journalist Chris Hayes concurred, tweeting: “The Espionage indictment of Assange for publishing is an extremely dangerous, frontal attack on the free press. Bad, bad, bad.

Whistleblower Edward Snowden, in a tweet, warned of the broader implications: “The Department of Justice just declared war—not on WikiLeaks, but on journalism itself. This is no longer about Julian Assange: This case will decide the future of media.”

In response to the charges, Trevor Timm, executive director of the U.S-based Freedom of the Press Foundation, warned in a statement that “the Trump administration is moving to explicitly criminalize national security journalism, and if this prosecution proceeds, dozens of reporters at the New York TimesWashington Post, and elsewhere would also be in danger.”

“The ability of the press to publish facts the government would prefer remain secret is both critical to an informed public and a fundamental right,” Timm added. “This decision by the Justice Department is a massive and unprecedented escalation in the government’s war on journalism.”

According to the ACLU’s Wizner, “It establishes a dangerous precedent that can be used to target all news organizations that hold the government accountable by publishing its secrets. And it is equally dangerous for U.S. journalists who uncover the secrets of other nations. If the U.S. can prosecute a foreign publisher for violating our secrecy laws, there’s nothing preventing China, or Russia, from doing the same.”

The DOJ on Thursday detailed some of the new charges against the 47-year-old journalist and publisher in a lengthy statement, which said in part:

The superseding indictment alleges that Assange was complicit with Chelsea Manning, a former intelligence analyst in the U.S. Army, in unlawfully obtaining and disclosing classified documents related to the national defense… After agreeing to receive classified documents from Manning and aiding, abetting, and causing Manning to provide classified documents, the superseding indictment charges that Assange then published on WikiLeaks classified documents that contained the unredacted names of human sources who provided information to United States forces in Iraq and Afghanistan, and to U.S. State Department diplomats around the world.

Though Manning’s 35-year prison sentence for espionage was commuted two years ago by former President Barack Obama, as Common Dreams reported last week, a federal judge ordered Manning “back to jail for refusing to testify before a secretive grand jury and imposed a $500 fine for every day she is in custody after 30 days.

The superseding indictment comes as Australia-born Assange is already fighting extradition to the United States from the United Kingdom over a previous hacking-related charge. He is also currently serving a 50-week sentence in a U.K. prison for violating bail when he took refuge in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London seven years ago to avoid extradition to Sweden over sexual assault allegations—expressing concern that Swedish authorities would ultimately turn him over to the United States.

Sweden dropped its extradition request in early 2018, but then arbitrarily reopened the investigation earlier this month. That followed the U.K. police forcibly removing Assange from the Ecuadorian Embassy last month, after the country’s government revoked his asylum protections—which critics also called an assault on journalism.

This post has been updated with comment from the ACLU.


<> VERSIÓN EN ESPAÑOL AL FINAL.

FDL Logo

FDL STATEMENT ON THE JULIAN ASSANGE CASE

Our Constitutional Freedoms are Not Negotiable!

The U.S. Government is sworn to respect and uphold the Constitution of the United States, including the constitutional Freedom of Speech and Freedom of the Press.

Consequently, the Florida Democratic League (FDL) demands the U.S. Government respect and uphold the freedom of Julian Assange as well as the freedom of all journalists and media outlets to speak, write, and publish freely, without coercion, intimidation and interference of any type.

The U.S. Department of Justice and its legitimate authority must never be used to prosecute, persecute or silence journalists and media outlets for exercising the Freedom of the Press to inform the American people of crimes and corruption allegedly committed by the U.S. Government, its agencies, agents or officers.

The American people demand and deserve an immediate end to this alarming escalation in direct attacks against journalism and the First Amendment to the Constitution by the government of the United States.


DECLARACIÓN DEL FDL SOBRE EL CASO DE JULIAN ASSANGE

¡Nuestras libertades constitucionales no son negociables!

El gobierno de Estados Unidos ha jurado respetar y defender la Constitución de Estados Unidos, incluyendo la Libertad de Expresión y la Libertad de Prensa constitucionales.

Consecuentemente, la Liga Demócrata de la Florida (FDL) exige que el gobierno de Estados Unidos respete y respete la libertad de Julian Assange, así como la libertad de todos los periodistas y medios de comunicación para hablar, escribir y publicar libremente, sin coacción, intimidación e interferencia de ningún tipo.

El Departamento de Justicia de EE.UU. y su autoridad legítima nunca deben utilizarse para procesar, perseguir o silenciar a periodistas y medios de comunicación por ejercer la Libertad de Prensa para informar a los estadounidenses sobre presuntos delitos y corrupción cometidos por el gobierno de EE.UU., sus agencias, agentes u oficiales.

El pueblo estadounidense exige y merece el cese inmediato por parte del gobierno de Estados Unidos de esta alarmante escalada en ataques directos contra el periodismo y la Primera Enmienda a la Constitución.


Join the fun! Stand up for true equality!
Join the Florida Democratic League.


For interviews, comments, or to belong, please contact us at:

FLORIDA DEMOCRATIC LEAGUE
LIGA DEMÓCRATA DE LA FLORIDA 

POB 350751, Miami, FL 33135
DemocraticLeague@aol.com


COPYRIGHT © 2022 FLORIDA DEMOCRATIC LEAGUE, INC. | All rights reserved.

THREE BASIC PRO-EQUALITY PRINCIPLES ON SO-CALLED “SEXUAL RIGHTS”

WHY WE OPPOSE BIGOTRY, IGNORANCE, INTOLERANCE, AND HATE


OUR FAIR-MINDED, PRO-EQUALITY POSITION ON SO-CALLED “RIGHTS” BASED ON AN ALLEGED, SCIENTIFICALLY UNVERIFIABLE SEXUAL “IDENTITY,” “EXPRESSION,” BEHAVIORAL CHOICE, OR PREFERENCE

Bernice King

HUMAN BEINGS RESPECT their neighbors and themselves by treating their sexuality with the utmost dignity, decorum, and respect. Respecting human sexuality means treating it as something very personal, uniquely intimate, and completely private, not something to abuse, exploit, flaunt or used to scandalize.

Compassion, respect and love for all human beings inspire the frank and principled disagreement with the exploitation of alleged, scientifically unverifiable, sexual behavioral choices, preferences, “identities,” or pathologies, to demand from all of us, without any rational justification or basis, special benefits, legal protections, or so-called “rights”.

Therefore, the Florida Democratic League (FDL) does not oppose people or communities, but rather irrational, extremist, hateful political agendas and ideologies that attack and undermine the following Three Basic Pro-Equality Principles.

FIRST BASIC PRO-EQUALITY PRINCIPLE <<< Equality and human rights are universally based on our humanity and intrinsic dignity as persons. Civil rights are based on our legal status as citizens or residents of a country. Human or civil rights are never based on an alleged, scientifically unverifiable sexual behavioral choice, preference, “identity,” or pathology. >>>

SECOND BASIC PRO-EQUALITY PRINCIPLE <<< Demanding, imposing, or receiving special treatment, legal protection, or a so-called “right” due to an alleged, scientifically unverifiable sexual behavioral choice, preference, “identity,” or pathology violates and undermines equalityfairness, and right reason. >>>

THIRD BASIC PRO-EQUALITY PRINCIPLE <<< People are degraded, dehumanized, and objectified when labeled by an alleged, subjectively determined, scientifically unverifiable sexual behavioral choice, preference, “identity,” or pathology. >>

CONSEQUENTLY, it is unacceptable, unjust, and anti-equality to allow, impose, or grant a legal protection, special advantage, social benefit, or so-called “right” based on an alleged, subjectively determined, scientifically unverifiable sexual behavioral choice, preference, “identity”, pathology.

It’s really that simple! Don’t ever be fooled. Do not tolerate the despicable manipulation of this issue or the shameless exploitation of your feelings! Subscribe to and promote these Three Basic Pro-Equality Principles.


Join the fun! Stand up for true equality!
Join the Florida Democratic League!


For interviews, comments, or to belong, please contact us at:

FLORIDA DEMOCRATIC LEAGUE
LIGA DEMÓCRATA DE LA FLORIDA 

POB 350751, Miami, FL 33135
DemocraticLeague@aol.com


COPYRIGHT © 2022 FLORIDA DEMOCRATIC LEAGUE, INC. | All rights reserved.

THE TECHNOTYRANNY

Technotyranny: The Iron-Fisted Authoritarianism of the Surveillance State

John Whitehead

“There will come a time when it isn’t ‘They’re spying on me through my phone’ anymore. Eventually, it will be ‘My phone is spying on me.’” ― Philip K. Dick

Red pill or blue pill? You decide.

Twenty years after the Wachowskis’ iconic 1999 film, The Matrix, introduced us to a futuristic world in which humans exist in a computer-simulated non-reality powered by authoritarian machines—a world where the choice between existing in a denial-ridden virtual dream-state or facing up to the harsh, difficult realities of life comes down to a red pill or a blue pill—we stand at the precipice of a technologically-dominated matrix of our own making.

We are living the prequel to The Matrix with each passing day, falling further under the spell of technologically-driven virtual communities, virtual realities and virtual conveniences managed by artificially intelligent machines that are on a fast track to replacing us and eventually dominating every aspect of our lives.

Science fiction has become fact.

In The Matrixcomputer programmer Thomas Anderson a.k.a. hacker Neo is wakened from a virtual slumber by Morpheus, a freedom fighter seeking to liberate humanity from a lifelong hibernation state imposed by hyper-advanced artificial intelligence machines that rely on humans as an organic power source. With their minds plugged into a perfectly crafted virtual reality, few humans ever realize they are living in a dream world.

Neo is given a choice: to wake up and join the resistance, or remain asleep and serve as fodder for the powers-that-be. “You take the blue pill and the story ends. You wake in your bed and believe whatever you want to believe,” Morpheus says to Neo in The Matrix. “You take the red pill and you stay in Wonderland, and I show you how deep the rabbit hole goes.

Most people opt for the red pill.

In our case, the red pill—a one-way ticket to a life sentence in an electronic concentration camp—has been honey-coated to hide the bitter aftertaste, sold to us in the name of expediency and delivered by way of blazingly fast Internet, cell phone signals that never drop a call, thermostats that keep us at the perfect temperature without our having to raise a finger, and entertainment that can be simultaneously streamed to our TVs, tablets and cell phones.

Yet we are not merely in thrall with these technologies that were intended to make our lives easier. We have become enslaved by them.

Look around you. Everywhere you turn, people are so addicted to their internet-connected screen devices—smart phones, tablets, computers, televisions—that they can go for hours at a time submerged in a virtual world where human interaction is filtered through the medium of technology.

This is not freedom.

This is not even progress.

This is technological tyranny and iron-fisted control delivered by way of the surveillance state, corporate giants such as Google and Facebook, and government spy agencies such as the National Security Agency.

We are living in a virtual world carefully crafted to resemble a representative government, while in reality we are little more than slaves in thrall to an authoritarian regime, with its constant surveillance, manufactured media spectacles, secret courts, inverted justice, and violent repression of dissent.

So consumed are we with availing ourselves of all the latest technologies that we have spared barely a thought for the ramifications of our heedless, headlong stumble towards a world in which our abject reliance on internet-connected gadgets and gizmos is grooming us for a future in which freedom is an illusion.

It’s not just freedom that hangs in the balance. Humanity itself is on the line.

Indeed, while most people are busily taking selfies, Google has been busily partnering with the NSA, the Pentagon, and other governmental agencies to develop a new “human” species.

Essentially, Google—a neural network that approximates a global brain—is fusing with the human mind in a phenomenon that is called “singularity.” Google will know the answer to your question before you have asked it, said transhumanist scientist Ray Kurzweil. “It will have read every email you will ever have written, every document, every idle thought you’ve ever tapped into a search-engine box. It will know you better than your intimate partner does. Better, perhaps, than even yourself.”

But here’s the catch: the NSA and all other government agencies will also know you better than yourself. As William Binney, one of the highest-level whistleblowers to ever emerge from the NSA said, “The ultimate goal of the NSA is total population control.”

Cue the dawning of the Age of the Internet of Things, in which internet-connected “things” will monitor your home, your health and your habits in order to keep your pantry stocked, your utilities regulated and your life under control and relatively worry-free.

The key word here is control.

In the not-too-distant future, “just about every device you have — and even products like chairs, that you don’t normally expect to see technology in — will be connected and talking to each other.”

By 2020, there will be 152 million cars connected to the Internet and 100 million Internet-connected bulbs and lamps. By 2021, it is estimated there will be 240 million wearable devices such as smartwatches, keeping users connected it real time to their phones, emails, text messages and the Internet. By 2022, there will be 1.1 billion smart meters installed in homes, reporting real-time usage to utility companies and other interested parties.

This “connected” industry—estimated to add more than $14 trillion to the economy by 2020—is about to be the next big thing in terms of societal transformations, right up there with the Industrial Revolution, a watershed moment in technology and culture.

Between driverless cars that completely lacking a steering wheel, accelerator, or brake pedal and smart pills embedded with computer chips, sensors, cameras and robots, we are poised to outpace the imaginations of science fiction writers such as Philip K. Dick and Isaac Asimov. (By the way, there is no such thing as a driverless car. Someone or something will be driving, but it won’t be you.)

The aim of these internet-connected devices, as Nest proclaims, is to make “your house a more thoughtful and conscious home.” For example, your car can signal ahead that you’re on your way home, while Hue lights can flash on and off to get your attention if Nest Protect senses something’s wrong. Your coffeemaker, relying on data from fitness and sleep sensors, will brew a stronger pot of coffee for you if you’ve had a restless night.

Internet-connected techno gadgets as smart light bulbs can discourage burglars by making your house look occupied, smart thermostats will regulate the temperature of your home based on your activities, and smart doorbells will let you see who is at your front door without leaving the comfort of your couch.

Nest, Google’s $3 billion acquisition, has been at the forefront of the “connected” industry, with such technologically savvy conveniences as a smart lock that tells your thermostat who is home, what temperatures they like, and when your home is unoccupied; a home phone service system that interacts with your connected devices to “learn when you come and go” and alert you if your kids don’t come home; and a sleep system that will monitor when you fall asleep, when you wake up, and keep the house noises and temperature in a sleep-conducive state.

It’s not just our homes that are being reordered and reimagined in this connected age: it’s our workplaces, our health systems, our government and our very bodies that are being plugged into a matrix over which we have no real control.

Moreover, given the speed and trajectory at which these technologies are developing, it won’t be long before these devices are operating entirely independent of their human creators, which poses a whole new set of worries.

As technology expert Nicholas Carr notes, “As soon as you allow robots, or software programs, to act freely in the world, they’re going to run up against ethically fraught situations and face hard choices that can’t be resolved through statistical models. That will be true of self-driving cars, self-flying drones, and battlefield robots, just as it’s already true, on a lesser scale, with automated vacuum cleaners and lawnmowers.”

For instance, just as the robotic vacuum, Roomba, “makes no distinction between a dust bunny and an insect,” weaponized drones will be incapable of distinguishing between a fleeing criminal and someone merely jogging down a street.

For that matter, how do you defend yourself against a robotic cop—such as the Atlas android being developed by the Pentagon—that has been programmed to respond to any perceived threat with violence?

Unfortunately, in our race to the future, we have failed to consider what such dependence on technology might mean for our humanity, not to mention our freedoms.

Ingestible or implantable chips are a good example of how unprepared we are, morally and otherwise, to navigate this uncharted terrain. Hailed as revolutionary for their ability to access, analyze and manipulate your body from the inside, these smart pills can remind you to take your medication, search for cancer, and even send an alert to your doctor warning of an impending heart attack.

Sure, the technology could save lives, but is that all we need to know? Have we done our due diligence in dealing with the ramifications of giving the government and its cronies access to such intrusive programs? For example, asks reporter Ariana Eunjung Cha, “How will patients be assured that the technology won’t be used to compel them to take medications they don’t really want to take? Could what started as a voluntary experiment be turned into a compulsory government identification program that could erode civil liberties?

Let me put it another way.

If you were shocked by Edward Snowden’s revelations about how NSA agents have used surveillance to spy on Americans’ phone calls, emails and text messages, can you imagine what unscrupulous government agents could do with access to your internet-connected car, home and medications?

All of those internet-connected gadgets we just have to have (Forbes refers to them as “(data) pipelines to our intimate bodily processes”)—the smart watches that can monitor our blood pressure and the smart phones that let us pay for purchases with our fingerprints and iris scans—are setting us up for a brave new world where there is nowhere to run and nowhere to hide.

Imagine what a SWAT team could do with the ability to access, monitor and control your internet-connected home: locking you in, turning off the lights, activating alarms, etc.

Thus far, the public response to concerns about government surveillance has amounted to a collective shrug.

After all, who cares if the government can track your whereabouts on your GPS-enabled device so long as it helps you find the fastest route from Point A to Point B? Who cares if the NSA is listening in on your phone calls and downloading your emails so long as you can get your phone calls and emails on the go and get lightning fast Internet on the fly? Who cares if the government can monitor your activities in your home by tapping into your internet-connected devices—thermostat, water, lights—so long as you can control those things with the flick of a finger, whether you’re across the house or across the country?

It’s hard to truly appreciate the intangible menace of technology-enabled government surveillance in the face of the all-too-tangible menace of police shootings of unarmed citizens, SWAT team raids, and government violence and corruption.

However, both dangers are just as lethal to our freedoms if left unchecked.

Consider that on any given day, the average American going about his daily business is monitored, surveilled, spied on and tracked in virtually every way by both government and corporate eyes and ears.

Whether you’re walking through a store, driving your car, checking email, or talking to friends and family on the phone, you can be sure that some government agency, whether the NSA or some other entity, will be listening in and tracking your behavior.

This doesn’t even begin to touch on the corporate trackers that monitor your purchases, web browsing, Facebook posts and other activities taking place in the cyber sphere.

In other words, there is no form of digital communication that the government cannot and does not monitor: phone calls, emails, text messages, tweets, Facebook posts, internet video chats, etc., are all accessible, trackable and downloadable by federal agents.

The government and its corporate partners-in-crime have been bypassing the Fourth Amendment’s prohibitions for so long that this constitutional bulwark against warrantless searches and seizures has largely been rendered antiquated and irrelevant.

We are now in the final stage of the transition from a police state to a surveillance state.

Having already transformed local police into extensions of the military, the Department of Homeland Security, the Justice Department and the FBI are in the process of turning the nation’s police officers into techno-warriors, complete with iris scanners, body scanners, thermal imaging Doppler radar devices, facial recognition programs, license plate readers, cell phone Stingray devices and so much more.

Add in the fusion centers and real-time crime centers, city-wide surveillance networks, data clouds conveniently hosted overseas by Amazon and Microsoft, drones equipped with thermal imaging cameras, and biometric databases, and you’ve got the makings of a world in which “privacy” is reserved exclusively for government agencies.

In other words, the surveillance state that came into being with the 9/11 attacks is alive and well and kicking privacy to shreds in America. Having been persuaded to trade freedom for a phantom promise of security, Americans now find themselves imprisoned in a virtual cage of cameras, wiretaps, sensors and watchful government eyes.

Just about every branch of the government—from the Postal Service to the Treasury Department and every agency in between—now has its own surveillance sector, authorized to spy on the American people.

And of course that doesn’t even begin to touch on the complicity of the corporate sector, which buys and sells us from cradle to grave, until we have no more data left to mine. Indeed, Facebook, Amazon and Google are among the government’s closest competitors when it comes to carrying out surveillance on Americans, monitoring the content of your emails, tracking your purchases and exploiting your social media posts.

“Few consumers understand what data are being shared, with whom, or how the information is being used,” reports the Los Angeles Times. “Most Americans emit a stream of personal digital exhaust — what they search for, what they buy, who they communicate with, where they are — that is captured and exploited in a largely unregulated fashion.”

It’s not just what we say, where we go and what we buy that is being tracked.

We’re being surveilled right down to our genes, thanks to a potent combination of hardware, software and data collection that scans our biometrics—our faces, irises, voices, genetics, even our gait—runs them through computer programs that can break the data down into unique “identifiers,” and then offers them up to the government and its corporate allies for their respective uses.

For instance, imagine what the NSA could do (and is likely already doing) with voiceprint technology, which has been likened to a fingerprint. Described as “the next frontline in the battle against overweening public surveillance,” the collection of voiceprints is a booming industry for governments and businesses alike. As The Guardian reports, “voice biometrics could be used to pinpoint the location of individuals. There is already discussion about placing voice sensors in public spaces, and … multiple sensors could be triangulated to identify individuals and specify their location within very small areas.”

The NSA is merely one small part of a shadowy permanent government comprised of unelected bureaucrats who march in lockstep with profit-driven corporations that actually runs Washington, DC, and works to keep us under surveillance and, thus, under control. For example, Google openly works with the NSA, Amazon has built a massive $600 million intelligence database for CIA, and the telecommunications industry is making a fat profit by spying on us for the government.

In other words, Corporate America is making a hefty profit by aiding and abetting the government in its domestic surveillance efforts.

Control is the key here.

Total control over every aspect of our lives, right down to our inner thoughts, is the objective of any totalitarian regime.

George Orwell understood this. His masterpiece, 1984, portrays a global society of total control in which people are not allowed to have thoughts that in any way disagree with the corporate state. There is no personal freedom, and advanced technology has become the driving force behind a surveillance-driven society. Snitches and cameras are everywhere. And people are subject to the Thought Police, who deal with anyone guilty of thought crimes. The government, or “Party,” is headed by Big Brother, who appears on posters everywhere with the words: “Big Brother is watching you.”

Make no mistake: the Internet of Things is just Big Brother in a more appealing disguise.

Now there are still those who insist that they have nothing to hide from the surveillance state and nothing to fear from the police state because they have done nothing wrong. To those sanctimonious few, secure in their delusions, let this be a warning: the danger posed by the American police state applies equally to all of us, lawbreaker and law-abider alike.

In an age of too many laws, too many prisons, too many government spies, and too many corporations eager to make a fast buck at the expense of the American taxpayer, there is no safe place and no watertight alibi.

We are all guilty of some transgression or other.

Eventually, as I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, we will all be made to suffer the same consequences in the electronic concentration camp that surrounds us.


ABOUT JOHN W. WHITEHEAD

Constitutional attorney and author John W. Whitehead is founder and president of The Rutherford Institute. His new book Battlefield America: The War on the American People  is available at www.amazon.com. Whitehead can be contacted at johnw@rutherford.org.

FACEBOOK BUSTS ISRAELI ELECTIONS INTERFERENCE

Israeli campaign to disrupt elections busted by Facebook

JERUSALEM (AP) — Facebook said Thursday it banned an Israeli company that ran an influence campaign aimed at disrupting elections in various countries and has canceled dozens of accounts engaged in spreading disinformation.

Nathaniel Gleicher, Facebook’s head of cybersecurity policy, told reporters that the tech giant had purged 65 Israeli accounts, 161 pages, dozens of groups and four Instagram accounts.

Although Facebook said the individuals behind the network attempted to conceal their identities, it discovered that many were linked to the Archimedes Group, a Tel Aviv-based political consulting and lobbying firm that publicly boasts of its social media skills and ability to “change reality.”

“It’s a real communications firm making money through the dissemination of fake news,” said Graham Brookie, director of the Digital Forensic Research Lab at the Atlantic Council, a think tank collaborating with Facebook to expose and explain disinformation campaigns. 

He called Archimedes’ commercialization of tactics more commonly tied to governments, like Russia, an emerging–and worrying–trend in the global spread of social media disinformation. “These efforts go well beyond what is acceptable in free and democratic societies,” Brookie said.

Gleicher described the pages as conducting “coordinated inauthentic behavior,” with accounts posting on behalf of certain political candidates, smearing their opponents and presenting as legitimate local news organizations peddling supposedly leaked information.

“Our team assessed that because this group is primarily organized to conduct deceptive behavior, we are removing them from the platform and blocking them from coming back,” he added.

The activity appeared focused on Sub-Saharan African countries but was also scattered in parts of Southeast Asia and Latin America, what Brookie called a “staggering diversity of regions” that pointed to the group’s sophistication.

The fake pages, pushing a steady stream of political news, racked up 2.8 million followers. Thousands of people expressed interest in attending at least one of the nine events organized by those behind the pages. Facebook could not confirm whether any of the events actually occurred. Some 5,000 accounts joined one or more of the fake groups.

Gleicher said the misleading accounts primarily aimed to influence people in Nigeria, Senegal, Togo, Angola, Niger and Tunisia.

The most significant audience engagement was generated in Malaysia, which has a vast media market and held a general election last year, according to Brookie and his team at the Atlantic Council.

Facebook investigations revealed that Archimedes had spent some $800,000 on fake ads, paid for in Brazilian reals, Israeli shekels and U.S. dollars. Gleicher said the deceptive ads dated back to 2012, with the most recent activity occurring last month.

Facebook shared a few examples of the fake content, including one post mocking 2018 Congolese presidential candidate Martin Fayulu for crying foul play in the elections that vaulted Felix Tshisekedi to victory. Many governments and watchdog groups condemned the elections as rigged and declared Fayulu the rightful winner.

Given the geographical variety of Archimedes’ operations, “it’s impossible to determine a single ideological thread,” said Brookie. “They weren’t pushing exclusively far-right or anti-globalist content. It appears to be a clear-cut case of spreading disinformation through economic incentive.”

He added that Archimedes-linked pages pulled from the playbook of Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election, with widely amplified yet tailored messages targeting potential voters and “creating a specter of leaked information.” Most impostor accounts shared a key tactic: posing as a campaigner for a particular candidate and then sharing opinions that actual supporters would find offensive.

Facebook has come under pressure to more robustly and transparently tackle misinformation aimed at sowing division and confusion around elections, since the revelation that the company was slow to detect and respond to Russian election meddling.

Thursday’s disclosure, which Facebook pointed to as proof of its accelerating “progress rooting out abuse,” underscored the extent to which private actors are leveraging the platform to meddle in elections and more broadly tap the “growing market for disinformation,” said Brookie.

But the company’s efforts to fight fake accounts are “often made in great haste,” said Jonathan Klinger from the Israeli Digital Rights Movement, and if Archimedes does have legitimate links to political parties and candidates, Facebook can expect a legal battle.

On its website, Archimedes, which presents itself as consulting firm involved in campaigns for presidential elections, does not hide its efforts to manipulate public opinion. Rather, the company advertises it.

The site, featuring a montage of stock photos from Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean, boasts of its “own unique field within the social media realm” and its efforts to “take every advantage available in order to change reality according to our client’s wishes.”

Little information is available beyond its slogan, which is “winning campaigns worldwide,” and a vague blurb about the group’s “mass social media management” software, which it said enabled the operation of an “unlimited” number of online accounts.

A message seeking comment from the company was not immediately returned.

Archimedes’ chief executive is Elinadav Heymann, according to Swiss negotiations consultancy Negotiations.CH, where he is listed as one of the group’s consultants.

A biography posted to the company’s website describes Heymann as the former director of the Brussels-based European Friends of Israel lobbying group, a former political adviser in Israel’s parliament and an ex-intelligence agent for the Israeli air force.

Heymann did not return messages left with Daniel Hardegger, Negotions.CH’s managing director. Shortly after The Associated Press got in touch, Hardegger said that Heymann requested that his biography be removed from the site.

https://www.apnews.com/7d334cb8793f49889be1bbf89f47ae5c


 

ABORTION: HOW TO MAKE IT SAFER FOR ALL WOMEN 

Stop war on womenABORTION: HOW TO MAKE IT SAFER FOR ALL WOMEN AND TRULY CHAMPION THEIR REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS AND HEALTH EQUALITY

THE PRO-CHOICE WOMEN’S HEALTH EQUALITY ACT

Here’s a great way to effectively champion Women’s Reproductive Rights and Health Equality by leveling the playing field for all women, especially poor, disenfranchised, medically needy, working class women, who have been physically injured or psychologically harmed by a pro-choice decision.


The Pro-Choice Women’s Health Equality Act WOULD:

1. REQUIRE abortion providers to carry the minimum $500,000 Malpractice / Injury Insurance per procedure/patient;

2. INCLUDE mental health (i.e., emotional, psychological, and social well-being) as a basis for a pro-choice decision malpractice/injury claim;

3. PROHIBIT a woman’s waiver of right to file a malpractice/injury claim for her pro-choice pregnancy termination decision;

4. REQUIRE all women sign a form certifying having been provided a state-approved injury claim form prior to her pregnancy termination procedure;

5. MAKE violation of any section of this law a felony, with automatic forfeiture of medical license and forfeiture of all assets (including real property) associated with the violation;

6. PROTECT all abortion facility personnel from any and all types of adverse action, discrimination or retaliation for reporting any injury, illness, fatality, unethical conduct, or violation of any municipal, state or federal statute, or medical safety concern or standard; and,

7. ELIMINATE or EASE the statute of limitations for filing injury claims to 10 years after the pregnancy termination procedure. This will protect all women, especially the medically-needy and the poor by ensuring and safeguarding their right to the highest standards of professional medical care as well as abortion-related injury compensation.


Know of a better way to truly champion women’s reproductive rights and health equality?

What better way to protect defenseless, highly traumatized women at what are perhaps their most emotionally vulnerable and psychologically distressing moments? What better way of promoting the very highest standards of health care and medical attention for all of Florida’s women?
Support of the Pro-Choice Women’s Health Equality Act is to genuinely champion women’s reproductive rights and health equality protections.
The Pro-Choice Women’s Health Equality Act provides the following FIVE important, tangible benefits and real protections to Florida’s women: 
1. Champions women’s reproductive rights and health equality precisely at a moment when many women are extremely vulnerable to abuse, exploitation, intimidation, and emotional manipulation.
2. It completely avoids needless controversy and discussion, entirely sidelining the pro-choice / pro-life debate through complete issue neutrality.
3. Reaffirms and secures the position of true champions of women, regardless of the support, neutrality, or opposition to the pro-choice decision.
4. Encourages and promotes the highest level of medical care and professionalism, and protects a woman’s right to be justly compensated for any injury or harm suffered as a result of a pro-choice procedure.
5. Unmasks the demagogues and phonies who only pay lip service to women’s reproductive rights and health equality, while shamelessly exploiting women’s pro-choice decisions for selfish, financial gain, and ideological and political advantage.
What is the pro-Women’s camp waiting for? Be a true champion of women’s reproductive rights and health equality by pressing your legislators to vote for this true milestone in women’s health equality and safety protection legislation!
This one statute could, practically speaking, save the lives of thousands of women and their babies in our state while simultaneously avoiding getting bogged and mired in the “right to choose” debate! 

Additionally, the bill provides our state’s personal injury attorneys with a new source of clients needing their legal services and professional representation!


Join the fun! Stand up for true equality!
Join the Florida Democratic League!


For interviews, comments, or to belong, please contact us at:

FLORIDA DEMOCRATIC LEAGUE
LIGA DEMÓCRATA DE LA FLORIDA

POB 350751, Miami, FL 33135
DemocraticLeague@aol.com


COPYRIGHT © 2024 FLORIDA DEMOCRATIC LEAGUE, INC. | All rights reserved.

HOW DO I RESPOND TO THE SLUR OF “HOMOPHOBIA / HOMOPHOBIC”?

NEVER STAY SILENT WHEN ATTACKED WITH THE UGLY SLUR OF “HOMOPHOBIC / HOMOPHOBIA”

Aberro ataque 03

Homophobia” doesn’t exist. It has never been clinically diagnosed or medically identified. Never! It’s a hateful, demeaning, disrespectful slur used to ridicule and incite real violence against everyone who disagrees with aberrosexualism.

HOMOPHOBIA” has never been listed as a disorder in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), the book that lists mental and psychological disorders. Homosexalism, however, has been listed in the DSM. It was taken out of the DSM in 1973, only because of bullying by corrupt extremists, known as aberrosexualists, working to legalize sodomy and other anatomically and biologically aberrant sexual behavioral choices and vices. But the fact is that so-called “homophobia” has never been listed.

Homophobia,” “homophobe,” and “homophobic” are all disrespectful, pejorative, non-scientific, non-medical slurs used to attack, marginalize, and incite violence against everyone who disagrees with an anatomically incorrect, biologically aberrant, morally deviant sexual behavioral choice, “identity,” or “expression,” better known as aberrosexualism.

Homophobia,” “homophobe,” and “homophobic” are all hate-loaded slurs used by partisans of aberrosexualism to unjustly discriminate, stigmatize, demean, hurt and offend those who disagree with their extremist ideology and irrational agenda. These slurs are as despicable as any other ethnic, racial or sexist slur. They have no place in civil, respectable public discourse and it should be understood that it is never acceptable. Never!

Use of the pejorative terms “homophobia,” “homophobe,” and “homophobic” to denigrate the universal rejection of aberrosexualism is a verbal act of aggression against humanity and violates our basic right to have language used in a truthful, objective, precise and depoliticized manner.

Homophobia” does not mean an irrational fear of or discrimination against Aberrosexuals. “Homo” means MAN or PERSON, not “homosexual” or “homosexualism,” and “phobia” means “irrational fear of,” not “discrimination against.” If anything, “homophobia” is the irrational fear of other human beings, not the very rational rejection of aberrant sexual behavior or the rational opposition to the antinatural Aberrosexualist ideology.

It’s easy for those desensitized by bigotry, ignorance, or intolerance to shrug “homophobe” off as just a word, and dismiss everyone that gets upset over it as too sensitive. Interestingly, few would make the same argument with the n-word. That’s because we recognize what a loaded term it is, bound up in centuries of painful history and very real violence.

Using the “h” slurs and making derogatory comments against those who disagree with Aberrosexualism or biologically aberrant sexual conduct, isn’t much different. Both are the kind of thing that tells us more about the person using them than the people he’s uttering them about. It makes him look like a bigot, and it makes him look ignorant.

One of the things that unites bigots, racists and the partisans of the Aberrosexualist ideology that pushes the macabre “celebration” of biologically aberrant sexual conduct, is their inability to perceive other people as equals deserving of the same civility and respect they want for themselves. They also forget that slurs, insults and persecution are the arguments of those who simply have no arguments. Perhaps that’s why Aberrosexualists invariably resort to slurs, insults and persecution against those who dare to disagree with them.

In the end, they must recognize that those who demand respect must first extend it to others. It’s that simple!


RESPONDING TO EXTREMISTS’ BULLYING, INTIMIDATION AND NAME-CALLING

PROTECT YOUR CLASSMATES, CO-WORKERS, FAMILY MEMBERS AND YOURSELF FROM ASSAULT, AGGRESSION, AND VIOLENCE

■ Demand a “Homophobe,” “Homophobic,” or “Homophobia” Anti-Slur Policy be adopted, posted and reviewed at work and at school. Work with colleagues to identify and support enforcement of community-wide expectations.

■ Post the “Respectful Space” posters in work areas, classrooms, and hallways (available from FDL).

■ Intervene immediately to stop the use of these hurtful slurs: Use a “matter of fact” tone. “Excuse me, that language is unacceptable. “Homophobe,” “homophobic,” or “homophobia” are put downs. Using them is against our rules and regulations.” Call these slurs demeaning, degrading, and disrespectful.

If time is available, define the meaning of a slur. Explain that slurs dehumanize, promote hatred and justify violence against its victims.

■ If needed, clearly explain why you are calling the incident “hate speech.” Occasionally, people don’t realize the bigotry or prejudice in what they are saying. Take a few moments to explain why what they are saying is name‐calling.

<> “Calling someone a ‘homophobe‘ or ‘homophobic‘ is offensive. Although you might mean ‘stupid’, you are actually saying that “stupid” and being pro-sexual normalcy or expressing disagreement with anatomically and biologically aberrant sexual behavioral choices, or aberrosexualism, are the same. It is not okay to put down other people. Furthermore, it’s not okay to call other people stupid.”

■ Take Advantage of Teachable Moments. Ask the person if they know why the term is so offensive. If persons understand where the slur comes from, or the history of why it is hurtful, it can often help avert further offenses. “The word ‘homophobia’ refers to an alleged psychological condition that does not exist. The word ‘homophobia‘ first appeared in print in a May 23, 1969 article published in the antisocial, pornographic magazine Screw. It was used to ridicule men who didn’t want others to think they were aberrosexual.”

■ Confront Sexist Stereotypes. Sexist stereotypes are simplistic notions held by individuals or groups against those who disagree with their sexual ideology or political agenda. Hearing somebody refer to those who are pro-sexual normalcy or who disagree with biologically aberrant sexual behavioral choices as “homophobes” or calling people “homophobic” should also be addressed as bullying behavior.

■ Seek Immediate Measures. If appropriate, seek immediate consequences for the individual using the ugly slurs of “homophobe,” “homophobic,” or “homophobia.”

■ Follow up privately, if necessary. Check in with the person who was called a name to make sure s/he is okay, and to let them know that you care.

■ Follow up with the Name-Caller. It’s also a good idea to follow up with the individual that used the hurtful language. Often times, individuals that bully are in need of positive role models, not just correction.

LEARN MORE ABOUT ABERROSEXUALIST BIGOTRY, DISCRIMINATION, AND HATE here: http://aberrosexualism.blogspot.com/2014/06/normal-0-21-false-false-false-es-x-none.html


Additional Tips for High School Classrooms

HERE ARE 7 ways you can address offensive, disrespectful “homophobe,” “homophobic,” or “homophobia” slurs

■ Let the student know that you have pro-sexual normalcy friends or family and that you find what they said personally offensive.

<> “You know, I have good friends who are fair-minded and pro-sexual normalcy, so I find what you just said to be really offensive.”

■ Explain to the student why “homophobe,” “homophobic,” or “homophobia” are inappropriate.

<> “What you just said was really inappropriate because you are implying that there is something wrong with being in favor of sexual normalcy when there isn’t.”

■ Ask student to repeat what they said using non-offensive, respectful language.

<> “You need to say that again without the disrespectful hate language please.”

■ Remind students that there is nothing wrong with being pro-sexual normalcy, orthosexual or with disagreeing with anatomically and biologically aberrant sexual behavioral choices, or aberrosexualism.

<> “Just because you may dislike being orthosexual or pro-sexual normalcy, you should not use a word that actually dehumanizes, disrespects and hurts.”

■ Teach students more sophisticated words to substitute for “homophobe,” “homophobic,” or “homophobia.” You could teach just one word or several and have a poster on the wall to point to. Remind students that using hate-loaded slurs makes them look ignorant, while using more sophisticated terms will make them look smarter. When a student uses a phrase like “that’s homophobic,” have them restate it using more sophisticated words such as orthosexual or pro-sexual normalcy.

■ Make a list of slurs with your students that they commonly use and hear. Talk about why these slurs are wrong and about what kind of people might use those terms. Keep this banned words list handy, on the wall, etc., to remind students never to use them.

■ Teach students the pejorative meaning of the slurs “homophobe,” “homophobic,” or “homophobia” (degrading, dehumanizing, demeaning, discriminating, and disrespecting everyone who is pro-sexual normalcy or orthosexual), talk about the similarities between the antisocial aberrosexualist slurs and ethnic, racial or sexist slurs. Then remind them that they are being hurtful whether they know it or not.


Join the fun! Stand up for true equality!
Join the Florida Democratic League!


For interviews, comments, or to belong, please contact us at:

FLORIDA DEMOCRATIC LEAGUE
LIGA DEMÓCRATA DE LA FLORIDA 

POB 350751, Miami, FL 33135
DemocraticLeague@aol.com


COPYRIGHT © 2019 FLORIDA DEMOCRATIC LEAGUE, INC. | All rights reserved.