Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
PeoViejo
PeoViejo's Journal
PeoViejo's Journal
November 30, 2013
Debris contaminated with radioactivity being burned all over Japan
November 29, 2013
Nov 29 2013
Human Rights, Immigration
”“I feel devastated. I’d rather die than go back. If they can take my body and bury it, that would be the only thing. I’m not going back, I’m telling you. There’s nothing there for me.” He said.
Theresa May’s response? She had officers draw up an ‘end of life’ plan for Muazu, and kept full steam ahead with the deportation.
As Simon Parker reports for openDemocracy:
“As Muazu’s physical and mental health deteriorated doctors declared him medically unfit for detention, but the Home Office refused to release him. Following legal challenges, the High Court and the Court of Appeal declared Muazu’s detention lawful and that the Home Office had the right to remove a man who its own staff accepted was close to death and for whom an ‘end of life plan’ had been drawn up.”
Theresa May is currently modelling herself as the Iron Lady of immigration. She claims she wants “to create here in Britain a really hostile environment for illegal migration”. But today, she was not tough on illegal immigration. She condemned a starving man to death – either during his long journey home, or once he has arrived.
Lord Roberts of Llandudno, a long term advocate of Muazu’s case, came out with an unusually strong condemnation of May’s actions today.
“Isa Muazu’s removal from the UK and potential death on a flight or upon arrival in Nigeria is not only a tragedy but an end to the UK’s reputation as a country with humane, civilised, just policies and government,”“
Theresa May Deports Dying Man in the Dark of Night and Shames a Nation
http://www.scriptonitedaily.com/2013/11/29/theresa-may-deports-dying-man-in-the-dark-of-night-and-shames-a-nation/
Nov 29 2013
Human Rights, Immigration
”“I feel devastated. I’d rather die than go back. If they can take my body and bury it, that would be the only thing. I’m not going back, I’m telling you. There’s nothing there for me.” He said.
Theresa May’s response? She had officers draw up an ‘end of life’ plan for Muazu, and kept full steam ahead with the deportation.
As Simon Parker reports for openDemocracy:
“As Muazu’s physical and mental health deteriorated doctors declared him medically unfit for detention, but the Home Office refused to release him. Following legal challenges, the High Court and the Court of Appeal declared Muazu’s detention lawful and that the Home Office had the right to remove a man who its own staff accepted was close to death and for whom an ‘end of life plan’ had been drawn up.”
Theresa May is currently modelling herself as the Iron Lady of immigration. She claims she wants “to create here in Britain a really hostile environment for illegal migration”. But today, she was not tough on illegal immigration. She condemned a starving man to death – either during his long journey home, or once he has arrived.
Lord Roberts of Llandudno, a long term advocate of Muazu’s case, came out with an unusually strong condemnation of May’s actions today.
“Isa Muazu’s removal from the UK and potential death on a flight or upon arrival in Nigeria is not only a tragedy but an end to the UK’s reputation as a country with humane, civilised, just policies and government,”“
November 27, 2013
Peace, Love and Pepper Spray. Amber Lyon with We are ChangeCT
November 26, 2013
Florida Secretary Of State Criticized For New Directive On Absentee Ballot Voting
""While a voter must return an absentee ballot to the supervisor in order for it to be counted, a voter may instead elect to vote in person by delivering the absentee ballot to the voter's precinct or an early voting cite to be cancelled," he wrote.
Some county officials in Florida told the Tampa Bay Times Herald that the new directive will suppress voter turnout, as it keeps elections officials from setting up absentee dropoff sites in more convenient locations.
Pinellas County Supervisor of Elections Deborah Clark said that she has used dropoff sites since 2008, and is worried that the new directive will make it difficult for many to vote in the upcoming special election for the late Rep. C.W. Bill Young's seat in the 13th district.
"The potential effect on voters is that it reduces opportunities for them to return their ballots," Clark told the Times Herald. "This is not promoting ballot accessibility. I'm very worried about this. I'm just stunned.""
More Voter Supression in Florida
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/florida-secretary-of-state-issues-directive-on-absentee-ballot-votingFlorida Secretary Of State Criticized For New Directive On Absentee Ballot Voting
""While a voter must return an absentee ballot to the supervisor in order for it to be counted, a voter may instead elect to vote in person by delivering the absentee ballot to the voter's precinct or an early voting cite to be cancelled," he wrote.
Some county officials in Florida told the Tampa Bay Times Herald that the new directive will suppress voter turnout, as it keeps elections officials from setting up absentee dropoff sites in more convenient locations.
Pinellas County Supervisor of Elections Deborah Clark said that she has used dropoff sites since 2008, and is worried that the new directive will make it difficult for many to vote in the upcoming special election for the late Rep. C.W. Bill Young's seat in the 13th district.
"The potential effect on voters is that it reduces opportunities for them to return their ballots," Clark told the Times Herald. "This is not promoting ballot accessibility. I'm very worried about this. I'm just stunned.""
November 21, 2013
by Kevin Mathews
September 15, 2013
7:00 am
"In these two cases, Facebook personnel explained that the boycott pages did not meet the Terms of Service since they did not represent a person or corporate entity. “To protect people from spam and other unwanted content, we restrict pages that represent ideas or positions – rather than discrete entities – from publishing stories to people’s News Feeds,” said a spokesperson.
Surely the nearly one million BP boycott fans wouldn’t consider updates from the page “unwanted,” particularly when they chose to follow the page in the first place. They’re calling for protection from oil spills, not spam. By claiming that corporate pages fit in well on Facebook, but anti-corporate pages have no place, the site’s stance is quite clear.
As civil rights activist Audre Lorde wrote, “The master’s tools will never dismantle the master’s house.” Perhaps we’ve been naïve to believe that using a platform created by a corporate entity would help activists to break free from corporate oppression. While moving away from Facebook seems inevitable for some activists, it’ll certainly have some consequences for at least the short term. Because Facebook is so ubiquitous and its members tend to check in multiple times a day, it makes reaching a wide audience fairly simple."
Read more: http://www.care2.com/causes/how-facebook-may-secretly-foil-your-activist-plans.html
How Facebook May Secretly Foil Your Activist Plans
by Kevin Mathews
September 15, 2013
7:00 am
"In these two cases, Facebook personnel explained that the boycott pages did not meet the Terms of Service since they did not represent a person or corporate entity. “To protect people from spam and other unwanted content, we restrict pages that represent ideas or positions – rather than discrete entities – from publishing stories to people’s News Feeds,” said a spokesperson.
Surely the nearly one million BP boycott fans wouldn’t consider updates from the page “unwanted,” particularly when they chose to follow the page in the first place. They’re calling for protection from oil spills, not spam. By claiming that corporate pages fit in well on Facebook, but anti-corporate pages have no place, the site’s stance is quite clear.
As civil rights activist Audre Lorde wrote, “The master’s tools will never dismantle the master’s house.” Perhaps we’ve been naïve to believe that using a platform created by a corporate entity would help activists to break free from corporate oppression. While moving away from Facebook seems inevitable for some activists, it’ll certainly have some consequences for at least the short term. Because Facebook is so ubiquitous and its members tend to check in multiple times a day, it makes reaching a wide audience fairly simple."
Read more: http://www.care2.com/causes/how-facebook-may-secretly-foil-your-activist-plans.html
November 17, 2013
Bloomberg takes his secrets with him...
I know it's not the best source..
http://nypost.com/2013/11/07/bloomberg-giving-nypd-bodyguards-jobs-to-keep-their-mouths-shut/
November 2, 2013
Becoming a Geisha
Profile Information
Member since: Sun Oct 6, 2013, 12:02 PMNumber of posts: 2,178
