#Received & Responded 22 April 2024 | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

anxious-witch · 5 months ago

Text

Results and analysis of this survey I did few months ago about the perception of Eurovision among young people. I know some people were interested so here it is. I couldn't post it sooner so it wouldn't look like I plagarised a random tumblr account so! Here we go. These are more or less directly translated from the research part of my thesis.

I apologize for any mistakes made since the whole thing, including graphs and tables were originally in croatian, and given tumblr format, it's bound to be messy.

The age of the participants was 18+ due to ethical rules, but most of the them are young people in the age bracket 18-35, precisely because the opinion of young people who cannot physically be present at the event itself is often ignored. The research question was "How do young people perceive Eurovision?", and the goal of the research was "To see what kind of view young people have of Eurovision, and what they consider its most important aspect, entertainment, politics or something else entirely."

Considering all of the above, the participants, who were 559 in total, were asked 22 questions through an anonymous online survey that was conducted in the period from March 21, 2024 to April 5, 2024.

From this, three hypotheses were distinguished before the actual research;

H1: Young people view Eurovision more politically than the older generation.

H2: Young people focus more on the performance and the message of the song than on the quality of the vocals.

H3: Young people think that Eurovision is a competition for the audience, not for the jury, and that the winner should be decided by the audience.

For the sake of transparency, most of the data is expressed in percentages and due to the amount of data, some of the questions are additionally crossed referenced and compared to see how they interact.

Graph 1 shows the age of the participants, which was important for determining the dominant age group. As can be seen on the graph, the largest number of respondents are aged 18-24, followed by 25-35, which corresponds to the aim of the research, as the focus was on the opinion of young people about Eurovision.

Graph 2 shows the gender of the participants, in which it can be seen that the largest number of them were women, over 65%. The data on the second largest group of respondents was unexpected, as over 20% of them declared themselves non-binary. This percentage was certainly contributed by the fact that the respondents received the survey via social networks, especially Tumblr, and considering that the topic is Eurovision, which is known for its openness towards the LGBT community. Men made up less than 10% of respondents, and the Other category referred to respondents who either did not want to share information about their gender identity, or their gender identity was not part of the first three categories.

Table 2(changed it to graph here because of tumblr) shows the countries from which the participants come from, and this answer to this question was open, that is, the participants had to write it themselves. To make it easier to navigate through so many different answers, they are presented in a table.

Table 2 shows that the majority of respondents are from the UK, Finland, and Germany. USA and Croatia. The number of responses from Finnish respondents is at least partly caused by last year's competition, where their representative was the crowd favorite. As for the large number of respondents from the USA, it can be assumed that with the inclusion of voices from the rest of the world, they became more active in the Eurovision virtual spaces last year.

Graph 3 shows the answers to the question "Are you part of the LGBT community", where participants could answer with "Yes", "No" or "Other" in case they did not want to declare themselves.

As shown in Graph 3, it can be seen that the percentage of respondents who are part of the LGBT community is also influenced by the collection of data from social networks where the LGBT identity is more pronounced, but it does not deviate much from the Eurovision name "Queer Olympics". This is also important information that can be obtained through an anonymous survey, as most of the previous research was conducted on respondents from live events, so this question was often avoided due to doubts about the sincerity of the answers. Thus, over 80% of respondents identify themselves as part of the LGBT community, which confirms previous research on the importance of connecting with other queer people through ESC as an event.

Graph 4 shows the answers to the question "Do you watch Eurovision" where there were three answers; "Yes", "No" and "Ocassionally".

According to Graph 4, it can be seen that the majority of respondents (over 70%) watch Eurovision regularly, while another 23% watch it occasionally, probably depending on external factors. Only 6% of respondents do not watch Eurovision at all, which is logical in the context of solving the questionnaire about Eurovision itself.

Graph 5 shows the three associations the participants had to Eurovision. Sets of three words each were divided into positive, negative and mixed associations, and for the sake of simplicity of presentation, thus entered in the graph. It should be noted here that the majority of respondents still have positive associations related to Eurovision, while slightly less than 17% have negative associations, and only slightly less than 2% have mixed associations. It is also important to note that each association was separated before sorting, so it is possible that someone had both positive and negative associations that were added to one or the other, but if the separate ones were not in a mixed category, then they were not added.

The full question for participants was to choose from 30 songs in the last 10 years (with 3 answers offered for each year) who they thought won that year. The real winners each year are highlighted in yellow in Table 3.

Regarding the recognition of winners in the last ten years, Table 3 shows that the majority of respondents knew the winners. However, it should be taken into account that these are respondents who mostly follow Eurovision regularly, and for this reason every artist who was not the winner that year and has more than 10% of the votes is relevant. This group includes Zlata Ognevich from 2013, Dami Im from 2016, but also Sergey Lazarev from 2016 (most likely because the predictions were in favor of Russia that year, and Austria was the original audience favorite), Kristian Kostov from 2017, and Käärijä from It will be in 2023. Therefore, it is important to look at this table with the predictions of the winners for each year, and to compare it with the difference between the votes of the jury and the audience, but every passing of 10% in this survey is significant.

The full question for the participants was; Did the backstage content (i.e. preparties, interviews, socializing between contestants that is published on social networks) influence their decision on who they voted for. Answers were offered on a scale from "It had a lot of influence" to "It had no influence at all".

Considering the fact that Eurovision organizers invest a lot of money and time in the organization of content even before the competition itself, especially in their famous preparties, it is relevant to see that according to Graph 6, as many as 37% of respondents admit that watching this content directly affects who they vote for, although it is to a lesser extent. Of course, it should be taken into account that 31% of respondents are not influenced by this content at all in their decision to vote, but if we add neutral respondents and respondents who were not influenced by this content, we get about 53%. On the other hand, the total number of respondents on whom the content had an impact in general is about 47%, which means that the content is still quite relevant and good marketing for Eurovision itself, but also for the contestants.

The question for the participants was what they perceive as the main point of Eurovision. Answers to this question were offered, but respondents could also add their own answer. The responses "A mixture of more than the above" and "Political/economic gain" were written by respondents.

According to graph 7, most participants believe that the main point of Eurovision is entertainment (36.31%), and almost the same number think that the main point is for the competing countries to unite around something fun through the competition. While only about 8% of people think that the political and economic part is the main point of the competition. Considering the age of the respondents and the fact that many say that Eurovision is a very political event, it seems that most still focus on the main point as a kind of entertainment and unity between countries.

Graph 8 shows the answers to the question "What should voting look like?".

The answers confirm one of the set hypotheses, which is that young people think that deciding on the Eurovision song should have primarily been the decision of the viewers who vote, and not the jury. It should be noted that the answers offered to this question were "Only viewers should be able to vote", "It should be half-and-half", "There are different winners for the jury and the audience" and "I don't know/Neutral/On my own". In other words, the answer that both of them vote, but that the votes of the audience have more weight, is the answer that 20.57% of respondents wrote under "Other" in different forms.

The question shown in Graph 9 was what participants think the current Eurovision slogan is. There the answer was open and they had to write it themselves. Graph 9 shows that the majority of participants know the Eurovision slogan, which coincides with the number of respondents who regularly watch ESC. It is important to note that for the first time the slogan is the same as last year, which certainly contributed to the respondents' accurate recall of the slogan, which was the goal of the organizers when they decided on this move.

The question presented in Graph 10 logically follows on from the previous one, where participants had to answer which slogan they think best describes the idea/meaning of Eurovision as a brand. In Graph 10, it can be seen that the majority of respondents also agree that the current, permanent slogan of the ESC is the most suitable for representing Eurovision as a brand. Here the answers were already offered, and the slogans offered to the respondents were those that had been used in the last ten years, most of which alluded in some way to community. "United by music", however, incorporates both music and togetherness in one slogan, and it seems that it is precisely because of this that it is memorable and easy to associate with Eurovision.

In Graph 11, participants were supposed to express their general opinion about ESC. Here the answers were also offered on a scale from "Very positive" to "Very negative".

In Graph 11, it can be seen that the opinion of the respondents is mostly positive, over 50%, and even 22% of them are neutral about the view of ESC. Given that these are respondents who mostly watch Eurovision regularly, the assumption would be that their opinions are more polarized, either to one side or to the other. However, through the questionnaire, it can be seen that respondents gravitate more towards "predominantly positive/negative" when the more accurate answer would probably be "strongly positive/negative" when comparing their answers with the other associations and answers provided. When the divisions are narrowed down to positive/negative/neutral, the ratio of positive view of ESC is even more prevalent, and despite a lot of talk about political aspects and contest rigging, less than 1% of respondents have a very negative opinion about Eurovision.

In this question, participants had to answer what they consider the most important part of the contestant's performance, which is shown in Graph 12. This question touches on another hypothesis, and from the answers received, that hypothesis can neither be fully confirmed nor rejected. The answers confirm that the performance is a very important aspect, as predicted in the hypothesis, but the second most important aspect for the respondents is the melody of the song itself, which we assumed would not be so important and that the message of the song would be more important, which is not the case with the respondents . It should also be noted that the answers to this question were again only semi-structured and the respondents could write their answers. "A mixture of all of the above" and "Be a special feeling" are answers that were not offered, but were included by the respondents themselves as their answers.

Graph 13 shows participants' answers to the question of whether they prefer competitors from neighboring countries. Answers were offered on a scale from "Yes, I strongly prefer songs from neighboring countries" to "No, I never have a preference for songs from neighboring countries".

This question was relevant due to the media's frequent reference to the preferential voting of certain countries for their neighbors. The respondents show that this is a rare case, and that only about 11% of them had preferences for neighboring countries. This also coincides with the selection of the song for its performance, as most of the similarities between neighboring countries come through the melody of the song.

This question showed for how many participants the contestant changed their view of the country they represented, which is shown in Graph 14. The offered answers to this question were only "Yes" or "No". There are several studies on Eurovision as a mega-event and an event through which better diplomatic relations can be achieved. (Zahavi, Ariely, 2024) It can be seen that here the distribution of influence is more balanced, but almost 60% of respondents, most of whom regularly watch the ESC claim that their view of at least one of the countries has changed by watching their performance at the ESC. In other words, the large investment of countries in their representatives has its purpose.

This question is a continuation of the previous one, that is, if one of the contestants changed their opinion about a country, was it a positive or negative change of view. Answers are offered on a scale from "Strongly positive" to "Strongly negative".

As can be seen from the presentation on Graph 15, if the 42% of respondents who were not influenced by the competitors are put aside, the positive influence prevails again. However, it is important for which countries there are which impressions, for which reason these data were compared with the following question, which was: "If this influenced your opinion about a certain country, for which country was it?" Then we divided the countries that were repeated the most and compared the positive/negative impressions. For the sake of clarity, strongly positive/negative and mostly positive/negative are added together in the same column and put in percentages.

In Table 5, the data on the positive/negative opinion and on the countries for which the participants changed their opinion are cross-referenced. From Table 5, it can be seen that Slovenia and Finland are the countries most often cited by respondents as those whose opinion has changed to a positive one. Also, a large number of respondents left the country for which they had a positive change of opinion unspecified. It is important to add the popularity of Finnish and Slovenian competitors from last year to the very context of the analysis. As for the negative impression, it is evident that Israel is in the lead, even though 4.29% is still much lower than 11.45%, which is the biggest positive impression, that is still important data. It is an important fact that despite the large investment, Israel has such a negative level of impression, especially as the main sponsors of the ESC. However, this can be added to the hypothesis that young people still see Eurovision through its political aspect, and that the recent conflict between Israel and Palestine has only increased this negative view.

Graph 16 shows the answers to the question of how many respondents discovered a performer through Eurovision, and that they continued to listen to him after Eurovision. From Graph 16, it is clear that this was exactly the case for over 90% of respondents. The answers offered were only "Yes" or "No".

Table 6 shows which performers the participants continued to listen to after Eurovision. The answer to this question was free, and most respondents answered with more than one contractor.

These answers also confirm that positive impressions about the country are closely related to its representatives and fans who follow them even after Eurovision. Here again, you can see the huge influence of the Finnish and Slovenian representatives from last year, who greatly raised positive impressions for those countries. Måneskin also greatly raised the rating of Italy after his victory in 2021, but it should be taken into account that after a few years, fans of a band or an artist have a smaller association of them with that country. It should also be noted that many of the aforementioned artists are not winners, and many of them were not even in the top 3 at Eurovision itself. From this, it can be concluded that there is a difference in what is considered a Eurovision song, and what the interviewees consider in their everyday life to be the songs they want to listen to.

Graph 17 shows the answers to the question about what the participants think about the direct passage of the "Big Five" to the finals. Answers were offered on a scale from "Strongly positive" to "Strongly negative".

From the answers shown in Graph 17, when separating the answers into only positive and negative views about having a direct passage to the final, it is evident that about 55% of respondents have a negative opinion about it, and slightly less than 40% a neutral opinion. This confirms again that the majority of young people do not have a positive opinion about the privileged position of some countries, which is a direct influence of politics.

Graph 18 shows the answers to the question "Do you plan to boycott watching Eurovision this year" with the answers offered "Yes", "No" and "Maybe/I haven't decided yet." Here, of course, it was meant boycotting specifically because of the participation of Israel and the current conflict between them and Palestine.

The question about boycotting Eurovision was deliberately put last, so as not to affect associations and positive and negative impressions. The question could have been more properly asked in the form "Are you planning to watch Eurovision this year" as the word boycotting still came out as suggestive. As can be seen from the responses from Graph 18, more than 50% of the respondents said that they would boycott Eurovision, which does not fit in with the majority's positive impressions about the event itself, which we analyzed in the previous responses. In any case, this supports the hypothesis that young people view the ESC more politically than the older generation, as the majority of younger respondents were more inclined to answer the question about boycotting in the affirmative.

However, it was interesting to compare some of the responses with the respondents' decision to boycott. That is why in Table 5 we have combined the data of the General opinion on Eurovision presented in Graph 11 and the data from Graph 18 on boycotting watching the ESC.

Table 8 shows that almost 30% of participants with a positive opinion of Eurovision planned to boycott watching because of Israel's participation, while only slightly less than 10% of those with a negative opinion planned the same. It can be seen that this trend continues with other answers as well. The fact is that a positive opinion about Eurovision prevails among respondents, but almost 10% more of those with a positive opinion plan to boycott than those who plan to watch. For the same reason, data on respondents' viewing consistency were combined with their response on boycotting in Table 9.

Table 10 compares the age of the participants with their answers about boycotting. The percentages were taken from the number of each of the age groups, and not the total sum, as there were the most respondents in the first two groups, that is, from 18-24 and from 25-35. Nevertheless, this table is important to us because we can see a reconfirmation of our hypothesis that young people look at Eurovision more politically than the older generation.

Now, this is of course, very, very brief look into the whole thesis, without literature citation to back it up and without discussion because it's already way too long. That said, I don't wish to imply that people who said they are boycotting on the survey lied about it, I just thought it was an important look into why someone with generally good opinion on the event would decide to boycott and if age had anything to do with it.

If anyone has any questions, regardless if it has to do with smth being translated confusingly or about the data itself, please let me know! Also consider that this data, while it was overwhelming done via tumblr, also took participants via facebook and instagram and ofc people I know irl and people those people know, so this is not only tumblr mentality reflected either. Hope this satisfied everyone's curiosity!

#eurovision #survey #käärijä #joker out #putting it in the tags if anyone who saw it there the first time wants to read it #y'all!!! I am graduating on the 10th I am shaking fr

71 notes · View notes

the-garbanzo-annex-jr · 7 months ago

Text

Along the lines of two billboards placed earlier in the month on I-275 highway—west of Dearborn, Mich.—by the local branch of the Zionist Organization of America, a new sign was placed on US-23 near Ann Arbor on April 22, calling for the University of Michigan to “Stop Jew Hatred on Campus.”

It comes in the wake of threats, harassment, intimidation and discrimination against Jewish students at the public institution.

“The university has failed to respond to concerned students, parents and alumni who have contacted U of M, urging that it take action to stop violations of their own code of conduct and infractions of the law. We put up the billboard in hopes of getting their attention,” said Sheldon Freilich, president of ZOA-Michigan. “It’s time for enforcement—there must be serious consequences for those breaking the law and inciting antisemitism.”

Following the Hamas terrorist attacks in Israel on Oct. 7, ZOA-Michigan said it has received numerous complaints from U of M students who fear for their safety. The situation has been exacerbated, it added, by pro-Hamas demonstrations on campus and in campus buildings calling for the end of Israel and the genocide of Jews, often punctuated by Nazi symbols and slogans.

In the weeks leading up to finals and graduation, antisemitic hostilities have reached a dangerous pitch.

Senior Salma Hamamy, a 22-year-old Palestinian American and the president of Students Allied for Freedom and Equality (SAFE), stated on her Instagram page on March 22: “Until my last breath, I will utter death to every single individual who supports the Zionist state. Death and more. Death and worse.”

She was arrested in November at an anti-Israel sit-in at the office of the university’s president, Santo Ono, and in February was part of a stand-off with riot police near Detroit at a campaign event for U.S. President Joe Biden. This week, she was one part of the pro-Palestinian and pro-Hamas activists that set up a tent encampment on school grounds.

In January, the University of Michigan honored Hamamy and SAFE with the 2024 Spirit of MLK Jr. Award for “exemplifying Dr. King’s leadership and extraordinary vision.”

In the last two months alone, two federal civil-rights complaints have been filed against U of M for failing to safeguard Jewish students.

#u of m #university of michigan #salma hamamy #spirit of mlk jr award #safe #dearborn #dearborn michigan

60 notes · View notes

sa7abnews · 4 months ago

Text

U.S. Has Never Apologized to Somali Drone Strike Victims — Even When It Admitted to Killing Civilians

New Post has been published on https://sa7ab.info/2024/08/06/u-s-has-never-apologized-to-somali-drone-strike-victims-even-when-it-admitted-to-killing-civilians/

U.S. Has Never Apologized to Somali Drone Strike Victims — Even When It Admitted to Killing Civilians

The American military has been carrying out a continuous military campaign in Somalia since the 2000s, launching nearly 300 drone strikes and commando raids over the past 17 years.

In one April 2018 air attack, American troops killed three, and possibly five, civilians with a pair of missiles. A woman and child were among the dead, according to a U.S. military investigation, but the same report concluded their identities might never be known.

Last year, my investigation for The Intercept exposed the details of this disastrous attack. The woman and child survived the initial strike but were killed by the second missile. They were 22-year-old Luul Dahir Mohamed and her 4-year-old daughter, Mariam Shilow Muse.

Related Secret Pentagon Investigation Found No One at Fault in Drone Strike That Killed Woman and 4-Year-Old

For six years, the family has tried to contact the U.S. government, including through an online civilian casualty reporting portal run by U.S. Africa Command, or AFRICOM, but they have never received a response. “They know innocent people were killed, but they’ve never told us a reason or apologized,” Abdi Dahir Mohamed, one of Luul’s brothers, told me last year. “No one has been held accountable.”

A new report by the Center for Civilians in Conflict, or CIVIC, shared exclusively with The Intercept, underlines what Mohamed told me: Civilian victims and survivors of U.S. drone strikes in Somalia say that attaining justice in the form of official acknowledgment, apologies, and financial compensation would help them move on from the trauma they experienced.

But after almost 20 years of drone strikes, even in cases in which the Pentagon has admitted to killing innocent people, the U.S. has failed to apologize to any Somali survivors, much less offer amends.

“The civilians we interviewed described not only devastating physical harm, like deaths and injuries, but also significant economic burdens and long-lasting psychological trauma,” Madison Hunke, CIVIC’s U.S. program officer, told The Intercept. “Most respondents agreed that justice comes down to a perpetrator of harm being held accountable for their actions and the victims being treated with the dignity they deserve.”

CIVIC interviewed 38 individuals who identified as civilian victims of U.S. airstrikes in Somalia, as well as eight civil society experts who work with or represent the injured and survivors. Twenty-seven of the 38 lost a family member in an attack. Many spoke of justice in terms of U.S. accountability, including acknowledgment of the deaths, apologies, and financial amends, specifically a Somali custom known as diya (blood money) which is traditionally used to resolve disputes.

“For me, justice would mean the U.S. talking and sitting with the families of the civilian victims harmed in its airstrikes,” one interviewee told CIVIC. “Then the U.S. should financially compensate those families. That kind of move would eventually heal the wounded hearts.”

After more than 17 years of drone strikes and ground attacks in Somalia, the U.S. has carried out 288 declared strikes. AFRICOM claims to have killed just five civilians in that period, including Luul and Mariam. (The military has never referred to the mother and daughter by name.) Airwars, the U.K.-based airstrike monitoring group, says the real number may be more than 3,000 percent higher.

Following The Intercept investigation last year, two dozen human rights organizations — 14 Somali and 10 international groups — called on Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin to compensate Luul and Mariam’s family. This year, Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., and Reps. Sara Jacobs, D-Calif.; Ilhan Omar, D-Minn; Barbara Lee, D-Calif.; and Jim McGovern, D-Mass., joined the effort.

“The Department of Defense is currently reviewing this matter, and we will not comment further at this time,” Pentagon spokesperson Lisa Lawrence said of the case.

The Defense Department’s response has compounded the trauma suffered by survivors, says Clare Brown, the deputy director of Victim Advocates International, an organization that supports victims of international crimes that is representing the families of Somali drone strike victims, including Luul’s.

“The silence of AFRICOM and the U.S. Department of Defense towards the families has been really hurtful,” Brown told The Intercept. “As their lawyers, we know that there are discussions and even possibly some movement happening behind the scenes — but no one has reached out or spoken to the families.” Brown and other lawyers are the families’ only source of information. “It’s upsetting for them to feel like passive observers in this process they are actually at the center of,” Brown said.

The forms of harm chronicled in the CIVIC report include the death of a relative, physical injury, property damage, and economic hardship experienced by victims and survivors of U.S. drone strikes.

Fourteen interviewees reported that they or family members experienced ongoing psychological trauma because of the attacks. “A considerable amount of time has elapsed since the incident, but I still experience nightmares,” one man whose sister was killed in a strike told CIVIC. “The incident and the gruesome details of what happened to her deeply affect me.”

CIVIC’s research found that a majority of civilian victims and survivors indicated a preference for individual amends like condolence payments or financial assistance over community-level compensation, such as improving local infrastructure. “The report is a good reminder that we can’t know what justice means to people unless we ask them,” said Brown. “The U.S. should also be proactively trying to have these conversations with communities affected by drone strikes — and hopefully this report will create the impetus for them to find ways to do that.”

CIVIC’s report includes 11 recommendations for the U.S. government, including adoption of a comprehensive approach to accountability and amends, prioritization of individual amends to victims and survivors of attacks, and the utilization of $3 million authorized annually by Congress for ex gratia payments to victims and survivors of civilian harm.

In April, one year past its congressionally-mandated deadline, the Pentagon released its 2022 annual report on civilian casualties. It concluded that U.S. military operations in 2022 killed no civilians, and also noted that the Defense Department did not make any ex gratia payments to civilians harmed in its operations in 2022 or the families of those killed in strikes from previous years. This follows a single ex gratia payment made in 2021 and none issued in 2020.

It’s impossible to know if any payments to survivors were made last year because the Defense Department missed its May 1 deadline for releasing its 2023 civilian casualty report. Lawrence told The Intercept that the Pentagon is still reviewing data and expected the overdue report to be released “in the near term.”

In the meantime, Somali survivors continue to wait, wondering if the Pentagon will ever apologize for killing their relatives.

“Since 2020, when Congress first authorized the $3 million annually for ex gratia, the Department has reported just one single payment of just a few thousand dollars has been made, and that’s despite the many credible cases of harm the DoD has already publicly acknowledged,” CIVIC’s Hunke told The Intercept. “The U.S. has the tools it needs to make these payments, so it’s a question of political will.”

“The lack of payments in Somalia, as well as in other places like Iraq and Syria, speaks volumes about the DoD’s commitment to meaningfully respond to harm caused by its operations,” Hunke said. The post U.S. Has Never Apologized to Somali Drone Strike Victims — Even When It Admitted to Killing Civilians .

#National Security

0 notes

scj-seouljames · 4 months ago

Text

Shincheonji Bible Seminar in France, Fire in the World of European Churches… Pastor's "Hope for Continuous Exchange of Teachings"

Lee Seung-joo, the tribe leader of Simon tribe said, "My life of faith has completely changed before and after I learned Revelation after listening to Chairman Lee Man-hee's word 28 years ago," at Shincheonji's '2024 Continental Shincheonji Bible Seminar' that was held locally at the invitation of European pastors on the 15th.

Shincheonji Church of Jesus held a Bible seminar in Europe following the Philippines in April. 1,000 pastors who were curious about Revelation attended this Bible seminar. Local pastors listened to the word with a smile, responding with "Amen" to the revealed word being testified.

"The more I testify about this word, the more spirits change and their lives of faith have been restored," tribe leader Lee said. "Don't you want to become the Europe that acts according to God's will and where believers’ lives of faith and churches are restored? If you understand Revelation and testify it according to the Bible, believers’ lives of faith and churches will be restored and certainly revived," the tribe leader stressed to the participants.

He explained that the book of Revelation is a prophecy, and because we cannot know the meaning of prophecies until the physical reality appears, no one could know it for more than 2,000 years since it was recorded. He also said that we can know when the author of Revelation tells us.

"If you look at Rev 22:8 and Rev 22:16, there is a pastor who receives a revelation directly from Jesus, and when the revelation regarding this pastor is fulfilled, it has been promised that he must go to the churches and testify after he has seen and heard at the place of the event," tribe leader Lee said. "Chairman Lee is a pastor who has seen and heard at the place of the event in person, and testifies when Jesus fulfills Revelation. Because he has seen and heard in person, there is power and vitality in his word testifying what he saw," he emphasized.

Then, he showed a video of Chairman Lee giving a lecture at the 'Shincheonji Bible Seminar, Testimony on the Fulfilled Realities of Revelation', held for pastors at Shincheonji Peace Institute in Cheongpyeong, Gyeonggi-do, on the 8th.

Chairman Lee said in the video, "It is recorded in Revelation that there are those who believed then betrayed, destroyers who destroy and make others betray, and a savior who appears after," adding, "When the physical reality appears, I see it, hear it, and deliver it."

"This person (Chairman Lee) has mastered Revelation. It means that I know all the physical realities of Revelation. It is not a small matter," he said. "Blessed are those who believe and keep Revelation. No matter how much good you have done, you will not be able to go to heaven if you add to or subtract from Revelation. You need to know who you are in Revelation," he emphasized.

"Before the time of Jesus' second coming, those born of God's seed and those born of the weed lived their lives of faith together, but at the time of the harvest, they are divided into those who are harvested and those who are not harvested. The harvest that is to be fulfilled at the second coming of Jesus is promised in Rev 14," said tribe leader Lee.

He then explained, "Then who are we as testified in the Bible? You need to know yourself through the word."

Tribe leader Lee asked back, "Shouldn't pastors learn about the harvest and be harvested, and teach all the church members about it?" He also emphasized, "The contents of the new covenant that we will keep are well recorded in Revelation. Let's fully learn and understand the word of Revelation and keep them."

In addition, he said, "If you want to restore faith in this era and recreate spirits, so that the church is revived and all the continents in Europe are united by the word of God, learn Revelation now and become pastors who testify Revelation."

"We are one in the Lord. God and Jesus are one, and there is only one Bible. If we enter the Bible of Jesus and God, we can become one. I pray that this opportunity will restore the faith of Europe and be re-created," he said.

318,034 people from Shincheonji have started its revealed life of faith by listening to the word over the past three years. As such, Shincheonji has held unprecedented 100,000-member graduation ceremonies three times, with a 103,764-member graduation ceremony in 2019, a 106,186-member graduation ceremony in 2022, and a 108,084-member graduation ceremony in 2023, and they will hold a grand graduation ceremony this fall with 110,000 graduates.

For more information, please visit: https://www.youtube.com/@ShincheonjiChurch_en

#church #shincheonji #south korea #religion #peace #bible #revelation #christianity #seouljames #seminar

1 note · View note

united-states-on-grafa · 6 months ago

Text

Bitfarms (NASDAQ:BITF) addresses unsolicited acquisition proposal from Riot Platforms

Full story: https://grafa.com/news/bitfarms--nasdaq-bitf--addresses-unsolicited-acquisition-proposal-from-riot-platforms-228667

Bitfarms (NASDAQ:BITF), a global Bitcoin vertically integrated company, has confirmed receiving a takeover proposal from Riot Platforms (NASDAQ:RIOT) on April 22, 2024.

Riot proposed to acquire 100% of Bitfarms' common shares at a price of $2.30 per share, payable in cash and Riot common stock.

However, a special committee of Bitfarms' board, composed solely of independent directors, reviewed the proposal and determined it significantly undervalued the company and its growth prospects.

The special committee sought customary confidentiality and non-solicitation agreements to advance discussions meaningfully, but Riot did not respond.

Meanwhile, Bitfarms has received additional unsolicited expressions of interest, with each party agreeing to customary Non-Disclosure Agreements.

As a result, the special committee is conducting a comprehensive review of strategic alternatives to ensure maximum shareholder value.

These alternatives include continuing to execute the company’s business plan, a strategic business combination, other strategic transactions, or a potential sale of the company.

#News #Business #Strategic #Nasdaq #Bitcoin

0 notes

thewahookid · 7 months ago

Text

Little children, do not be afraid...

April 22, 2024

Dear Family of Mary!

April 25, 1998

"Dear children!

Today I call you, through prayer,

to open yourselves to God

as a flower opens itself

to the rays of the morning sun.

Little children, do not be afraid.

I am with you

and I intercede before God

for each of you

so that your heart receives

the gift of conversion.

Only in this way, little children,

will you comprehend the importance

of grace in these times

and God will become nearer to you.

Thank you for having responded to my call.

In Jesus, Mary and Joseph!

Cathy Nolan

Mary TV. Inc. | www.marytv.tv

#love #jesus loves you #jesus christ #blessed mother mary #mary #peace #prayer #medjugorje

0 notes

xtruss · 8 months ago

Text

NYC Jails Flagrantly Deny Young People’s Legal Right To Education

New Court Filings Say That the City is Violating an Eight-Year-Old Court Order Mandating Access to Education for People Under 22.

— Akela Lacy | April 4, 2024

A View of the New York City Jails on Rikers Island, seen from a departing flight from LaGuardia Airport on Dec. 10, 2022, in Queens, N.Y. Photo: Andrew Lichtenstein/Corbis via Getty Images

Last June, New York City Mayor Eric Adams Spoke to Graduates at Rikers Island who received their high-school-equivalence diplomas while serving in jail.

“When you get your diplomas today,” Adams told the graduates, “I want you to stand up, lean back, be firm and strong and say, ‘I got this. When does the hard part start? I’m finished with the hard part. Now I’m moving forward to my destiny on what I want to accomplish.’”

The group represented the successful fruits of a law that guarantees access to education to people incarcerated in city jails. The success stories, however, are only part of the picture.

Other young people incarcerated in New York jails said in court filings that they’ve been repeatedly denied their legal right to education and that the city has failed to comply with a 2016 court order requiring education access for people between 18 and 21 held in in Department of Correction custody. In filings Wednesday, the plaintiffs in a decadeslong class-action suit against the city called for the appointment of a new court monitor to oversee implementation of the order.

“Not Only Is This A Legal Failing, But It’s A Moral Failing.”

“Not only is this a legal failing, but it’s a moral failing,” said Lauren Stephens-Davidowitz, a staff attorney with the Prisoners’ Rights Project at the Legal Aid Society, a public defense organization, which made the Wednesday filings. “You have these young people who are begging to get their high school education while they’re incarcerated, and are just trying so hard, and are being denied it.”

The original 1996 suit claimed that the city Department of Correction and the Department of Education failed to provide education to young people entitled to public schooling. Plaintiffs are now alleging that the city has failed to comply with a 2016 federal court order requiring that incarcerated young people be given access to a minimum of three hours of educational services each day. The order also required provision of special education services to people who needed them.

Class members include 29 people in New York City custody between the ages of 18 and 21 who don’t currently have a high school diploma. Declarations from class members provided to The Intercept document alleged violations of the 2016 court order, including claims that they’ve been told they can only receive education if they’re housed in certain programmatic facilities. (The Department of Education referred questions to the Department of Correction. The mayor’s office did not provide a comment.)

By keeping people from accessing legally required educational services, the Department of Correction is working against its professed goal of rehabilitation, said Stefen Short, a supervising attorney with the Prisoner’s Rights Project.

“It’s proven that when an individual attains their high school diploma or the equivalent in custody, their prospects for success improve on the outside,” Short said. “DOC is essentially letting folks sit idle rather than provide them with access to educational services to which they have a right. That renders everyone in the jail setting less safe. It’s a strange state of affairs. It doesn’t serve anyone’s interests.”

A spokesperson for the Department of Correction referred questions about the legal filing to the city’s Law Department, which represents the mayor and city agencies, and has not responded.

“The department has just received additional funding for programming for people in custody,” said the Correction spokesperson, Annais Morales, said, adding that the funds would allow for programs including general education diploma preparation and “tutoring for all people in custody.”

Last Chance For A Diploma

The court appointed a monitor in 2016 to oversee the city’s implementation of the order. In his third report in 2018, as his two-year term was winding down, the monitor found that the order was working for younger detainees, who were being phased out of the adult criminal system under a 2018 city law and were no longer part of the class, but not for people over the age of 18.

“While the education program at Rikers has shown marked improvements during the past two years, access to education for inmates age 18 to 21 is a persistent problem,” the report said.

Only people incarcerated in special Department of Correction program housing have access to education services. Detainees don’t have a choice in where they’re housed, and people in non-program housing have said they’ve requested access to education and been denied.

At a November meeting of the city’s Board of Correction, a nine-member oversight body, Correction Department Deputy Commissioner Francis Torres said the department provided educational services at only two facilities: the Robert N. Davoren Complex and the Rose M. Singer Center. “For this year, we have targeted our educational efforts, meaning granting access to educational services at RNDC and Rose M. Singer,” Torres said.

One incarcerated person, who needs special education services and submitted a declaration as part of the new filing Wednesday, said he had lost nearly a year of progress toward his diploma during the Covid-19 pandemic and was still being denied access to education.

“I need my special education services in order to make educational progress,” the incarcerated man said. “I am not getting the three hours of education per day that I am entitled to.”

The man, who said he was interested in vocational training in carpentry, computers, or cybersecurity, added, “I want to seize every opportunity I can to prepare for a better future.”

An incarcerated 19-year-old who received special education services prior to being in jail custody said Department of Correction staff told him he had to wait to receive education services until he was transferred to a different complex. When he got there, he said staff told him he couldn’t enroll in education services because he wasn’t in a school dorm.

“I was worried that I would not be safe in another housing area,” he said. “I did not think it was fair that I had to choose between school and safety.”

When an incarcerated person turns 22, they age out of the right to get education while in jail. “This is the last chance they have to get a high school education,” said Stephens-Davidowitz, the Legal Aid attorney. “This is a critical juncture in their lives. They have a right to do it, and they’re trying.”

0 notes

virginiaprelawland · 8 months ago

Text

The Petito-Laundrie Civil Suit

By Elizabeth Wolnik, George Mason University Class of 2024

April 5, 2024

The infamous case of Gabby Petito and Brian Laundrie has evolved to include their parents. Gabby was a 22-year-old travel blogger who was killed by Brian while they were on a cross-country road trip [1]. In March 2022, Gabby’s parents Nichole Schmidt and Joseph Petito, filed a lawsuit against Brian’s parents, Christopher and Roberta Laundrie as well as their lawyer Steven Bertolino, for intentional infliction of emotional distress. The Laundries were alleged to have refused to return calls and texts to Gabby’s family during the investigation, which led to the Petitos releasing a public statement begging them to cooperate with the investigation [6]. The Petito family claimed that the Laundries were aware of Gabby’s murder soon after her death in August 2021, and willfully chose to do nothing to help the investigation other than issue a statement through Bertolino saying, “It is our hope that the search for Miss Petito is successful, and that Miss Petito is reunited with her family” [1]. The Laundries have argued in court filings that they had no duty to respond to the Petito family [7].

In July 2021, Gabby and Brian left for what was intended to be a four-month cross-country trip where they would visit national parks. They planned to sleep in their van and document their travels to post online [2]. In early August 2021, a 911 call was placed by someone who was reported to have seen a confrontation between Gabby and Brian. Police in Moab, Utah pulled the couple’s van over and police bodycam shows Gabby upset and crying. Police reports indicate that Gabby hit Brian, but no arrests were made. However, this contradicted what the 911 caller saw. They state that they saw Brian hit Gabby while they were driving. The couple was separated for the night with Brian checking into a hotel and Gabby staying in the van [2].

In late August 2021, the couple’s van was spotted at Grand Teton National Park and Gabby posted her last picture to Instagram [2]. According to a search warrant, on August 27 Nichole Schmidt said that she received a strange text from Gabby. It read: “Can you help Stan, I just keep getting his voicemails and missed calls.” Stan is Gabby’s grandfather, but she never referred to him by his first name. Nichole said this was out of character for Gabby and confusing [2].

On September 1, 2021, Brian returned home to Florida alone and by September 11, Gabby was reported missing by her family [2]. On September 13, Brian’s parents reported that he left the family home for a hike in the Carlton Reserve in Sarasota County, Florida, but that he hadn’t returned. They also released a statement through their lawyer saying that they intend to remain in the background while the search for Gabby continues. The Petito family also released a statement accusing Brian of refusing to tell them when he last saw Gabby. By mid-September, Brian was named a person of interest for failing to cooperate with the investigation [2].

On September 19, 2021, remains were found near Grand Teton National Park in Wyoming that were later identified to be Gabby Petito’s remains [2]. Soon after this discovery, the FBI raided Brian’s home. They seized his car and a hard drive that they say, “may contain evidence that a felony has been committed.” An arrest warrant was then issued for Brian, who was charged with unauthorized use of a debit card to make unauthorized withdrawals worth more than $1,000 during the time Gabby was missing [2].

On October 6, 2021, it was confirmed that Brian flew home to Florida on August 17 and returned to Utah on August 23, four days before Gabby was last seen [2]. Brian reportedly flew home to get some supplies and to close a storage unit. On October 20, human remains were found at the site where authorities were searching for Brian. Later identified as Brian, authorities announced that he died from a self-inflicted gunshot wound to the head. In the FBI’s final report on the investigation into Gabby’s death, they reported that Brian claimed responsibility for Gabby’s death in a notebook that was found near his remains. The notebook was found alongside a backpack and a revolver. FBI confirmed that Brian had been “attempting to deceive law enforcement by giving the impression that Ms. Petito was still alive by continuing a text chain between their two phones after she is believed to have died.” [2].

At this point, lawsuits are in full swing. In March 2022, the Petito family sued the Laundrie family claiming that Brian told his parents that he killed Gabby and that they concealed Brian’s confession to committing the murder [2]. The Laundries filed to dismiss the lawsuit, calling it “baseless and frivolous”, but the lawsuit moved forward. In August 2022, the Petito family also filed a $50 million wrongful death suit against Utah police. The lawsuit named the Moab Police Department, three of its officers, and 10 other unnamed defendants and accused them of “negligent failure” in their investigation into the alleged assault between Gabby and Brian, weeks before Gabby’s murder. In a report, the Moab police officers indicate that they made “unintentional mistakes” on the day of the incident, and in November 2022, the Petito family was awarded $3 million dollars in the wrongful death suit. The Petito’s lawyer announced that whatever money was received will go to the Gabby Petito Foundation, which is dedicated to locating missing people and curbing domestic violence [2].

Depositions in the civil suit filed by the Petitos against the Laundries have recently been released, which shows a more complete timeline in the aftermath of Gabby’s disappearance [4]. On August 29, 2021, Brian told his parents that Gabby was “gone” and to “call a lawyer” in what is described as a frantic phone call that took place three weeks before Gabby’s remains were found. On September 2, 2021, Brian’s parents sent Stephen Bertolino a retainer and Bertolino entered into a fee agreement with a criminal defense firm in Wyoming [3]. The same day Brian “frantically” called his parents, documents also allege that Brian was using Gabby’s phone pretending to be her in text messages to her family [4]. When asked what Roberta Laundrie understood what Gabby being “gone” meant in her deposition, she stated, “I wasn’t sure. I don’t even remember what I thought. (Brian) was very upset. He didn’t sound like himself. I knew something was wrong.” The attorney for the Petito family then asked Roberta on why Brian saying “(Gabby’s) gone. Call a lawyer.” didn’t raise any alarm bells. Roberta responded with, “A lot of things ran through my head. Possibly they got into a fight, and you know, maybe she’s going to press charges against him or something? I don’t know.” In her deposition Roberta Laundrie also denied blocking Nichole Schmidt on social media but admitted to ignoring her texts at the advice of Bertolino [4].

After going back and forth on whether to include an incriminating letter from Roberta Laundrie to Brian in the civil suit, a judge in the 12th Judicial Circuit Court determined that it could be relevant to the case and that the plaintiff’s lawyers should at least get a copy [7]. The letter was found near Brian’s remains and said “burn after reading” on the envelope. It contained “references to bringing a shovel to help bury a body, and baking a cake with a shiv in it should Brian Laundrie go to prison” [6]. Roberta Laundrie has continued to state that she wrote the letter before Brian left for his trip with Gabby. She said, “It was a poor choice of words. When I read this later, I was like ‘This sounds awful’. It was a jokey, stupid letter that I dashed off before he left with lots of bad jokes and poor humor…I never imagined any of this.” Roberta also states that her and Brian’s relationship was strained before he left on the trip, so she wrote the letter to remind her son that she would always love him [6].

The Petito and Laundrie family have decided to settle the civil suit between them to avoid going to trial [1]. The details of the settlement were not disclosed, but it reportedly came “after a long day of mediation.” The Petito family said that “All parties reluctantly agreed in order to avoid further legal expenses and prolonged personal conflict” [5].

______________________________________________________________

[1] https://abcnews.go.com/US/parents-gabby-petito-brian-laundrie-reach-settlement-emotional/story?id=107434194

[2] https://www.cbsnews.com/news/gabby-petito-brian-laundrie-case-story-deaths/

[3] https://www.cnn.com/2023/12/04/us/gabby-petito-gone-brian-laundrie-parents-lawsuit/index.html

[4] https://www.mysuncoast.com/2024/02/13/court-documents-roberta-laundrie-insists-she-didnt-know-gabby-petito-was-dead/

[5] https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/settlement-reached-gabby-petito-laundrie-families-rcna139905#:~:text=The%20parents%20of%20slain%20New,distress%20case%20were%20not%20disclosed.

[6] https://abc7chicago.com/what-happened-to-gabby-petito-brian-laundrie-parents-phone-calls/14452286/#:~:text=But%20Laundrie%20returned%20to%20his,claimed%20responsibility%20for%20Petito's%20death.

[7] https://www.cnn.com/2023/05/24/us/gabby-petito-parents-lawsuit-letter-brian-laundrie

0 notes

hardynwa · 9 months ago

Text

SIM-NIN linkage: NCC rules out extension, telcos bar 12 million lines

The Nigerian Communications Commission has ruled out an extension of the February 28, 2024 deadline for the linkage of Subscriber Identity Module cards to National Identification Numbers. As a result, telecommunication companies have been directed to bar 12 million lines which have not been linked to the owners’ NINs after the expiration of the deadline. The Director of Public Affairs, NCC, Reuben Mouka, confirmed the development to The PUNCH on Wednesday. Reaffirming the NCC’s stance, Mouka stated, “We already issued a public notice in this regard and all the information. If there was an extension, NCC would have communicated that. But as far as I know, there is no extension.” In a December 2023 notice, the NCC had asked telcos to bar SIMs that had not been linked to their owners’ NINs by February 28, 2024. It further asked the Global Satellite Mobile Communications firms to bar those whose NINs have been submitted but not verified by March 29, 2024; and interdict those who have less than five lines linked to an unverified NIN by April 15, 2024. The Chairman, Association of Licensed Telecommunications Operators of Nigeria, Gbenga Adebayo, confirmed to The PUNCH that telecom operators would comply with the NCC’s directive. He said out of the 224 million active lines, about 12m lines risked deactivation. Adebayo said, “About 12 million SIM cards may not have been linked to NIN. Some of these SIM cards work on modems and mifi devices. According to the regulatory directives, those numbers that are not properly linked to NIN will have services withdrawn to them by midnight today. We stand by that regulatory directive and we are going to comply,” The ALTON chairman also dismissed speculations about a possible extension, stating that the deadline ought to have happened last year. He declared, “No, the regulator has made it clear that there won’t be any further extension. Let us remember that this ought to have happened last year, but it was extended by the regulator till the 28th of February, 2024.” Since the NCC first ordered the suspension of SIM cards without NIN on December 15, 2020, there had been a rapid increase in the number of people obtaining their NINs. Between the period the order was given and the second deadline date, January 19, 2021, Nigerian mobile operators received 47.8m new submissions from active subscribers. In 2021, about 21 million subscribers were yet to obtain their NIN, even as the deadline for registration approached A high-ranking official at MTN Nigeria, who was not authorised to comment publicly on the matter, informed The PUNCH that the company planned to disconnect the defaulting subscribers in compliance with the directive. According to the official, there has not been any counter-directives from the NCC. Emphasising that it is a federal issue, the official pointed out that some lines had been disconnected earlier. “Remember, this is not an issue with the telcos. It’s a Federal Government issue, and before now, some lines were being disconnected. If they wanted to extend the deadline, they would have issued another notice, but they aren’t as I speak to you,” the official stated. In response to the situation, a Public Relations official at Airtel Nigeria, Sam Adeoye, mentioned that Airtel would release an official statement on the development. However, Chineze Amanfo, Lead, Public Relations at 9Mobile, did not respond to calls when contacted by our correspondent. Court order Meanwhile, the Federal High Court in Lagos has restrained telecom operators from deactivating or barring any line or SIM not linked to their NINs. Justice Ambrose Lewis-Allagoa restrained the telcos while ruling on an application filed by a Lagos-based lawyer, Olukoya Ogungbeje. Lewis-Allagoa made the order on February 22, 2024, while ruling on a motion for the restraining orders filed by Ogungbeje. Ogungbeje, in a suit marked FHC/L/CS/667/23, sued the Federal Government of Nigeria, the Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, MTN Nigeria Communications Plc, and Airtel Network Nigeria Limited before the court. He asked the court for an injunction pending appeal, ‘’restraining all the respondents jointly or severally, whether, by themselves, their agents, outlets, agencies, privies, officials, servants, men, parastatals, units, organs, or anybody or person however so called, from taking any step or action capable of enforcing the judgment in anyway and from further outright barring, deactivating and or restricting any SIM cards or his phone Lines, or of any Nigerian Citizen, slated for February 28, 2024, or any other scheduled date, pending the hearing and determination of his appeal at the Court of Appeal, against the court’s judgment delivered on May 8, 2023, by Justice Lewis-Allagoa.’’ When quizzed about the NCC’s reaction to the court injunction, Mouka responded, “We are not aware of any court injunction stopping the NCC from barring lines that have not been linked with NIN.” Earlier today, at the ongoing 45th Kaduna International Trade, the Executive Vice Chairman, National Communication Commission, Dr. Aminu Maida, insisted that, as a matter of critical national security, telecom consumers must link their NIN to their SIM. Maida reaffirmed that the February 28th deadline was given to telecom operators to bar subscribers who failed to link their NIN to their SIM stands. “To this end, the National Communication Commission has directed all telecommunication operators to bar the phone lines of subscribers whose lines are not linked to their NINs on or before February 28, 2024,” he added. In his reaction to Mouka’s statement that the NCC was not aware of his suit, Ogungbeje said the position of the commission is ‘’most ridiculous and shameful.’’ Ogungbeje stated that the Federal Government of Nigeria and the AGF were part of the suit, stressing that the NCC as an agency of the Federal Government must obey the court order restraining it from barring SIMs not linked to NINs. He said, “The order specifically stated that both the Federal Government and its agencies are hereby restrained. A very good instance is the order of the Supreme Court in respect of the Central Bank of Nigeria and Godwin Emefiele’s policy on the new naira notes. “That position by the NCC is most ridiculous and shameful. The Federal Government of Nigeria and the Attorney General of the Federation are part of the suit.’’ “So in this instant case, the NCC is bound by the order of the court as the court restrained both the Federal Government and it agencies, including the telecom firms.” Network glitches On Wednesday, major operators across the country, including MTN, Airtel, and 9Mobile, grappled with a widespread network connection crisis. Subscribers were unable to make calls due to glitches attributed to a fibre optic cable cut. The chairman of ALTON, Adebayo, clarified that the telecom connection failure experienced by subscribers was unconnected to the NIN/SIM link deadline. He attributed the connectivity issue to the significant fibre cuts made by road contractors employed by the Federal Government. The ALTON chairman noted, “What you have seen today as difficulty in connection has nothing to do with the NIN/SIM link deadline. “There have been significant fibre cuts across the country, and this has impacted connectivity today, but efforts are being made by affected telecom operators to rectify this situation.” He assured the public that efforts were being made to salvage the situation as soon as practicable while emphasising the need to protect telecom infrastructure. “Appropriate reports would be made to the right quarters. The cuts can be traced to the activities of the Federal Government by contractors doing road work. This is why it is imperative to safeguard telecom infrastructure, going by what we have seen today. “If we have critical national infrastructure protection, maybe what happened today wouldn’t have happened. We put it on the doorstep of the government to ensure that road contractors do not continue to cause this type of damage.” The incident left countless residents in communication limbo, sparking a digital uproar across social media platforms. Users have taken to expressing their frustration, detailing their struggles with the sudden loss of connection on social media. A WhatsApp user, Emekuku said, “It’s frustrating when network providers in Nigeria cite server or application issues as reasons for service problems, leaving customers unable to resolve their issues. “It highlights the need for improved infrastructure and communication from the providers to address such issues promptly and transparently.” Another user, Babatee, noted, ‘’MTN is trying so hard to compete with Glo for the award of the most useless network in Nigeria. Dear MTN, no matter how hard you try, Glo will always be miles ahead of you when it comes to uselessness. So stop playing, fam.’’ MTN network Another subscriber said, “The poor MTN network knocked me out of an important meeting and kept me incommunicado for several hours. “Even now, they have only restored data services, but still no call or SMS. Not that they can ever say, ‘Oh, sorry for the network failure, oya take free airtime and data.’ Lai-lai.” An Airtel user wrote, “It appears that the frustration with network services in Nigeria is widespread. The lack of a reliable network service provider affects many users, and the absence of explanations from the providers regarding disruptions in data and call services raises concerns. “The situation may not be trending because such issues might be common and not getting enough attention. In a statement released by MTN, the telecom company acknowledged the existence of a connectivity problem and committed to resolving the issue promptly. According to the telco, the problem started at about 1.39 on Wednesday, February 28, 2024. In its reaction via X, MTN Nigeria blamed the network issue on multiple fibre cuts, even as it assured customers that its engineers were working assiduously to restore normal services. The statement read, “Dear Customer, you have been experiencing challenges connecting to the network due to a major service outage caused by multiple fibre cuts, affecting voice and data services. “Our engineers are working hard to resolve this, with services gradually being restored in some areas. “We apologise for the inconvenience and ask for your patience & understanding as the team works to restore full service as soon as possible.” Read the full article

0 notes

olko71 · 10 months ago

Text

New Post has been published on All about business online

New Post has been published on https://yaroreviews.info/2024/02/final-scheduled-cost-of-living-payment-being-paid

Final scheduled cost-of-living payment being paid

Getty Images

By Kevin Peachey

Cost of living correspondent

Eight million people on means-tested benefits are now receiving their final cost-of-living payment to help with high prices and bills.

The £299 payment will go directly into bank accounts of those eligible before 22 February without the need to claim.

No further payments of this kind are scheduled and charities are urging the government to consider more support.

However, questions have been raised over whether such payments were the best way to help struggling households.

Scam warning

This payment of £299 is the last of three instalments that totalled £900 that will have been paid within a year.

Work and Pensions Secretary Mel Stride said: ”The economy has turned a corner, and with inflation falling we are providing millions of the most vulnerable households with another significant cash boost.”

Those on low incomes and receiving benefits such as universal credit are eligible, but they should be wary of scams in which fraudsters use the opportunity to try to personal details.

They often purport to be from government bodies. Some are designed to capture financial information.

On legitimate payments, there will be a reference on a recipient’s bank account of their national insurance number, followed by DWP COL, or the reference HMRC COLS for those who are eligible through tax credits.

What are cost-of-living payments and who gets them?

Five hacks to help save money on your food shop

After this final instalment, no further cost-of-living payments are currently scheduled, with some pressure on Chancellor Jeremy Hunt to announce more support in next month’s Budget.

“Our data shows that the cost-of-living payments do offer some respite to people, but this is short lived. Historically high energy bills, unaffordable housing and other spiralling costs are keeping people in crisis,” said Morgan Wild, of Citizens Advice.

“The government has responded with temporary support but we need more than quick fixes. Long-term commitments are needed to raise people’s incomes and standard of living.”

The government has pointed to a 6.7% rise in benefits and an 8.5% rise in the state pension, as well as an increase in the financial support provided to those on benefits who rent privately, which all come into effect in April.

A committee of MPs recently questioned whether the payments were sufficient to help those in financial difficulty owing to high bills and prices.

In November, a report by the Work and Pensions Committee said the money only provided a temporary reprieve for some, and may have been better used for increasing benefits instead.

This is not the only cost-of-living payment. More than six million people with disabilities received £150 during last summer. During the winter, over eight million pensioners received an extra payment of up to £300, primarily to help with energy bills.

Are you affected by the issues raised in this story? Share your experiences by emailing [email protected].

Please include a contact number if you are willing to speak to a BBC journalist. You can also get in touch in the following ways:

WhatsApp: +44 7756 165803

Tweet: @BBC_HaveYourSay

Upload pictures or video

Please read our terms & conditions and privacy policy

If you are reading this page and can’t see the form you will need to visit the mobile version of the BBC website to submit your question or comment or you can email us at [email protected]. Please include your name, age and location with any submission.

Am I eligible for the money?

The money will be added automatically into the account which is used to receive benefit payments

The reference will be DWP COL, along with the claimant’s National Insurance number

To qualify for a payment, you must receive one of universal credit, income-based jobseeker’s allowance, income-related employment and support allowance, income support, working tax credit, child tax credit, or pension credit

You will need to have been entitled to a payment for one of these benefits between 13 November and 12 December, or payment for an assessment period ending between these dates

Low-income pensioners who are eligible for, but not claiming pension credit, can still qualify for the cost-of-living payment if they make a successful backdated pension credit application

Those who qualify solely through tax credits will receive their cost-of-living payment with the reference HMRC COLS

More on this story

What are cost of living payments and who gets them?

4 hours ago

Five tips for cutting energy costs this winter

23 November 2023

Five hacks to help save money on your food shop

29 November 2023

0 notes

brian-in-finance · 7 months ago

Note

Tony was credited twice on The Fratellis' last album including "many thanks". So, the idea that he's nothing is just another lie shippers push to discredit him. They know nothing about him. What they comment on are they own fiction.

Thanks for the message, Anon. 😃

©️2000 / Released April 2021

On photographer Joe’s LP image ⬇️ you can see the two credits, but I’m unable to see “many thanks.” Perhaps it’s out of frame, among the band members’ thanks?

Instagram 5 April 2021

As far as anyone’s being “nothing”… sigh… I don’t know how one reconciles respecting or honouring or just plain liking Caitríona with calling her husband a vampire… and so much worse. 🤷🏻‍♂️

Thanks for your message, Anon. 😃

I chose to crop the screenshot you included because I simply don’t want it on my blog. 🚫

Three years ago I thought the madness surely would end. Silly me. It has increased: paternity reassignment, mourner misidentification, new recruits. I realise now, the Damies will never be lonely.

Received yesterday, 22 April

And thanks for your message, Anon. 😃 You sent it while I was busy completing my post on the topic.

I cropped the two links you sent, but appreciate your sending them.

Screenshot/recording from YouTube

Remember… a person’s choice of partner only needs to make sense to that person.

#Tait rhymes with hat #Good times #Inbox #Anonymous #x3 #Credit #Madness #Parents night out #My screenrecording #Received 22 & 23 April/Responded 23 April 2024

37 notes · View notes

nsomniacsdream · 11 months ago

Text

Text:

jacobin.com

Ron DeSantis Is Giving Away Florida Pension Money to Wall Street Donors

By Matthew Cunningham-Cook

16 - 20 minutes

Florida governor and Republican presidential hopeful Ron DeSantis has been crusading against “woke” investments for allegedly threatening his state employees’ retirement funds. But the most imminent threat to Florida public employees’ retirement dollars appears to be the massive state pension investments that have gone to some of the Republican Party’s Wall Street donors under DeSantis’s watch.

Despite a federal anti-corruption rule designed to prevent donors from receiving pension investments, private equity executives have donated millions to political groups supporting DeSantis, all while the governor oversaw the transfer of more than $1 billion of Florida public employees’ retirement dollars into these donors’ high-fee, high-risk “alternative investments.”

Our review found that had the state pension fund instead been invested in a simple, low-cost index fund, compared to its present mix of holdings, teachers, police officers, and other state employees would have about $10 billion more in their retirement funds.

“From a distance, it sure looks like the pensioners are getting hurt here,” Kathleen Clark, an ethics expert and professor at the Washington University in Saint Louis School of Law, told us. “It certainly seems like it raises the distinct possibility that the decisions that the pension board is making may be serving DeSantis’ political interests and not the pensioners’ interest.”

The low-return, high-fee investment strategy under DeSantis — who serves with two other Republicans on the state pension board — has been harmful for the state’s retirees, who had already been struggling with subpar retirement payouts.

But under DeSantis’s leadership, the state pension fund’s investments have been a boon for financial firms whose executives have delivered huge donations to the Republican Governors Association (RGA), which has pumped $22 million into the Friends of Ron DeSantis, a political committee that supported DeSantis’s gubernatorial campaigns and is expected to finance a super PAC supporting his 2024 presidential bid. Friends of Ron DeSantis was the largest recipient of RGA cash last cycle.

The pension fund’s underperformance comes as Republican legislative leaders in April put the kibosh on restoring annual cost-of-living adjustments for public employees that were cut in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis.

The federal pay-to-play rule — which came into effect in 2011, in the wake of bribery scandals at pension funds across the country — was crafted to halt private equity firms and other investment managers from using campaign contributions to improperly influence pension-fund decision makers. But the financial firms receiving pension money have donated to the RGA rather than directly to DeSantis — and federal officials have declined to enforce the rule’s anti-circumvention provisions.

DeSantis and the RGA did not respond to questions from us.

“DeSantis Is Delivering for the Private Equity Industry”

As governor, DeSantis is the chairman of the Florida State Board of Administration (SBA), which appoints officials who make and approve investments for the state’s $180 billion retirement fund. The SBA’s other trustees are state attorney general Ashley Moody and state chief financial officer Jimmy Patronis, two Republicans who are close allies of DeSantis.

Over the past few years, many of the Wall Street interests benefiting from DeSantis’s private equity investments have donated money that has ended up funding the Florida governor’s political committee.

Take Aeolus Capital Management hedge fund, which received a $50 million commitment from the Florida pension fund in May 2019, four months after DeSantis became governor, and has since delivered a negligible 0.7 percent annual return for state pensioners in four years, compared to an average annual 15.75 percent return for the S&P 500 index of major stocks.

Paul Singer, the founder and co-CEO of Elliott Management, which as of 2020 owned a majority stake in Aeolus, a reinsurance hedge fund based in Bermuda, hosted a 2021 Colorado meeting of elite conservative billionaires, called the American Opportunity Alliance, where DeSantis appeared alongside former vice president Mike Pence and others. The following year, Singer pumped $750,000 into the RGA.

Three weeks after Singer’s donation, the RGA transferred $2 million into the Friends of Ron DeSantis group, which raised $177 million in the 2022 cycle. Singer also donated $500,000 to the RGA in March 2020.

Singer is well known on the world stage for buying up the debt of countries in the Global South, like Argentina, then aggressively calling on payment. Singer also chairs the Manhattan Institute, a conservative think tank that employs Chris Rufo and Ilya Shapiro, leading propagators of the “critical race theory” panic.

While there has not been reporting since 2020 that shows whether Elliott continues to hold a majority stake in Aeolus, the CEO that Elliott installed in 2020, Andrew Bernstein, remains in place. Neither Aeolus nor Elliott responded to repeated requests for comment from us.

Then there’s the private equity firm Thoma Bravo. At the end of March 2022, just four weeks after the Florida pension put $150 million into a Thoma Bravo fund, the group’s cofounder Carl Thoma donated $40,000 to the RGA. It came just two days after the RGA made its $2 million contribution to the DeSantis committee and appears to be Thoma’s first-ever contribution to the RGA.

The Florida pension made another $100 million commitment to a different Thoma Bravo fund in August of last year. The following month, Thoma doated another $100,000 to the RGA, and just two weeks later, the RGA donated $3 million to DeSantis.

Thoma Bravo has attracted controversy in the past year for its ownership of RealPage, a real estate technology platform that has driven coordinated increases in rent across the country, according to a ProPublica investigation.

Bradford Freeman of the private equity firm Freeman Spogli, meanwhile, donated $50,000 to the RGA in 2018, just seventeen days before the RGA gave $1 million to the DeSantis political committee. The next year, his firm received a $100 million commitment from the Florida pension.

In 2015, Freeman Spogli executives hosted fundraisers for former Florida governor Jeb Bush and paid him lucrative speaking fees, after he had overseen investments in the firm during his tenure as chair of the SBA

James Carey of Stone Point Capital donated $10,000 to the RGA just weeks before the 2018 election. The firm received two $100 million commitments from the Florida pension under DeSantis’s governorship, in 2020 and 2022, records show.

While the pay-to-play rule “prohibits acts done indirectly, which, if done directly, would violate the rule,” it does not explicitly cover contributions to super PACs or 527 groups like the Republican and Democratic Governors Associations. This is true even if the super PACs were controlled by the politician in question, or the 527 group was funneling donations into the respected candidate.

In the case of Friends of Ron DeSantis, DeSantis filed a statement of solicitation with the Florida election officials in early 2018 declaring he had established the political committee, which can accept unlimited contributions.

“This situation makes it look like the Republican Governors Association is a way of laundering campaign contributions, as they’re allowing these entities to do indirectly what they cannot do directly,” said Clark, the Washington University ethics expert.

Eileen Appelbaum, the codirector of the Center for Economic and Policy Research and who studies private equity, said, “It’s pretty obvious that DeSantis is delivering for the private equity industry, and in exchange they’re providing funding for his campaigns.”

DeSantis recently filed a notice with state election officials notifying them that he is “no longer associated” with Friends of Ron DeSantis — a necessary move before the political committee can start funding the super PAC backing his potential 2024 campaign.

Anti-“Woke” Giveaways to Wall Street

For years, Florida public pensioners have received benefits well below the national norm. The average public pension that Florida public employees receive was just $23,712 per year in 2020, as opposed to the national average of $29,132.

Due to poor performance during the 2008 financial crisis, the Florida legislature reduced what it offered to state employees for their retirement. Pensions granted after July 2011 are not subject to cost-of-living adjustments, meaning that teachers and other public employees who retire in 2023 with thirty years of service receive less than two-thirds the cost-of-living adjustment that they would have received prior to July 2011.

Florida’s pension system has for years poured public employees’ retirement savings into so-called alternative investments, which include private equity, real estate, and hedge funds — a trend that has continued under DeSantis’ watch.

The state’s high-risk, high-fee strategy has resulted in an about $10 billion loss relative to a stock-bond index fund from fiscal years 2019 to 2022, our review has found.

During that same period, pension fees to investment managers have increased by 11 percent. Since DeSantis’s first year as governor, total investment management fees have risen from 0.26 percent of assets to 0.29 percent, an increase that cost the pension $54 million in additional fees in 2022.

“It should come as no surprise that an investment amateur would recklessly pump ever greater sums into the highest cost, poor-performing investments, who happen to make substantial political contributions,” said Edward Siedle, a former attorney with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) who now resides in Florida.

Rather than rethink his investments into low-performing and politically connected investment funds, DeSantis has been vocally opposed to environmental, social, and governance (ESG) investing.

ESG considerations urge large investors, like pension funds and endowments, to consider the environmental and social impacts of their investments and assess the governance structure of firms. For years, ESG considerations were relatively uncontroversial, and to date even their proponents admit that they have had a limited impact on corporate behavior.

DeSantis launched his first volley against ESG in August 2022, when he and his fellow SBA trustees issued a resolution condemning the practice.

“Corporate power has increasingly been utilized to impose an ideological agenda on the American people through the perversion of financial investment priorities under the euphemistic banners of environmental, social, and corporate governance and diversity, inclusion, and equity,” DeSantis said. “With the resolution we passed today, the tax dollars and proxy votes of the people of Florida will no longer be commandeered by Wall Street financial firms . . . we are prioritizing the financial security of the people of Florida.”

DeSantis followed that resolution with changes to the pension’s investment policy and proxy voting guidelines — the guidelines the state uses to determine how it votes on shareholder resolutions. And in January, he further prohibited “woke ESG considerations,” implementing guidelines that would ensure “all investment decisions focus solely on maximizing the highest rate of return.”

“Thanks to the leadership of Governor DeSantis, the Florida Cabinet reaffirmed today that we don’t want a single penny of our dollars going to woke funds,” said Patronis, the state’s chief financial officer. “We need asset managers to be laser focused on returns and nothing more.”

In his book released in February, DeSantis expanded his critiques of “woke” investments, calling for the “crippling” of the ESG movement.

DeSantis’s condemnation of ESG investing has come out of the broader culture wars, of which the governor is an eager participant. But combating ESG is also a major interest of Leonard Leo, a conservative strategist and cochair of the Federalist Society, who last year received the largest-known dark-money transfer in American history to advance the political interests of the religious right and reshape American politics.

In April, we reported that the leader of DeSantis’s new super PAC, Never Back Down, was deeply involved in orchestrating that $1.6 billion donation. Friends of Ron DeSantis could transfer its resources — $85 million at this point — to Never Back Down if DeSantis decides to run for president, according to the Washington Post.

But while the DeSantis administration claims to be fighting to stop Floridians’ tax dollars from being “commandeered by Wall Street financial firms” and ensuring asset managers are “laser focused on returns,” such priorities don’t seem to apply to the SBA’s private equity investment strategies.

Kent Perez, deputy executive director of the Florida SBA, said, “No elected officials, including SBA trustees, participate in, or approve the selection of individual investments.”

Index funds have been championed by everyone from Warren Buffett to Jack Bogle, the founder of the world’s largest asset manager, because they deliver better returns by minimizing a central drag: fees. In contrast, the private equity, hedge funds, and private real investments massively expanded by the Florida SBA under DeSantis’ tenure come with fees that can be 5,000 percent higher than traditional index funds.

Siedle, for his part, said, “If DeSantis really wanted to improve the pension, he should try to change the organizational structure and usher in an era of transparency, so the public can see how the pension has been grossly mismanaged.”

“It Sure Looks Like the Pensioners Are Getting Hurt”

In their new book These Are the Plunderers: How Private Equity Runs — and Wrecks — America, journalist Gretchen Morgenson and financial policy analyst Joshua Rosner found that the SEC, especially under President Donald Trump, routinely waived enforcement penalties for any violations of the pay-to-play rule that was implemented in 2011 to prevent campaign contributions from having a corrosive influence at public pension funds.

In its twelve-year history, the SEC appears to have never enforced the rule’s anti-circumvention provision.

While the Biden administration has launched other rulemaking that would crack down on some of the private equity industry’s worst practices, including requiring expanded disclosure of performance and preferential terms offered to some investors but not others, it has not expanded enforcement of the pay-to-play rule beyond a modest crackdown in September against some minor firms.

In response to that minor enforcement action, Trump-appointed SEC commissioner Hester Peirce launched a broadside against the pay-to-play rule, calling it “an exceedingly blunt instrument.” Prior to her appointment in 2018, Peirce spent six years at the Koch-backed Mercatus Center at George Mason University.

“These pay-to-play rules were adopted because of the concern that political donations would distort the judgment of these governmental officials, that they would not just create bad public policy, but also negatively impact those whose money is at stake,” said Clark at the Washington University in Saint Louis.

Meanwhile, in early May, DeSantis doubled down on his crusade against “big banks and corporate activists who’ve colluded to inject woke ideology into the global marketplace,” signing legislation that would “block the use of ESG in all investment decisions at the state and local level” as well as in procurement and contracting.

“Through this legislation,” said DeSantis in a statement, “Florida will continue to lead the nation against big banks and corporate activists who’ve colluded to inject woke ideology into the global marketplace, regardless of the financial interests of beneficiaries.”

Screenshot only.

241 notes · View notes

campusassaultpolicyforum-blog · 6 years ago

Text

When Rape Isn’t a 4-Letter Word: How New York is Fighting Back Against Campus Assault

By Jacklynn Blanchard, Lauren Szczesny and Paige Allen

As the summer wanes and the leaves begin to change color, new flocks of teenagers will descend upon campuses across America. There they will take up residency in dorms, explore their identities, and begin to etch out their lives as college students. These young adults will be expected to fend for themselves – sometimes for the first time in their lives – and certainly, mistakes will be made. Every year splashy headlines tell stories of wild frat parties, cheating scandals, and student activism gone awry, but these are just a cursory glance of the college experience. While for some college will be remembered fondly, for others the indelible marks of trauma may overshadow an otherwise carefree and happy time.

Campus sexual assault has always been and remains an epidemic. It is estimated that 20% of women will experience a sexual assault in college (Donde, Ragsdale, Koss, & Zucker, 2018). In 2019, that amounts to roughly 33.6 million women annually in the United States (Statista, 2017). To put that into context, that is more than double the number of cancer survivors currently living in the US (NCI, 2018). While the sexual assault victims’ movement has gained traction culturally, acknowledging the problem exists only goes so far in protecting women and helping them to get the justice they deserve.

While the current Me Too movement has brought sexual assault to the forefront of the women’s movement and in turn the women’s movement to the forefront of American consciousness, campus sexual assault justice has been a slow moving train. In the 1980s, Title IX was updated to include sexual assault (Lieberwitz et al., 2016). In 1990, the Cleary Act was passed after a young woman was raped and murdered in her residence hall (Lieberwitz et al., 2016). In 2011, the Obama administration specifically outlined how universities should handle campus sexual assault (Ali, 2011, p.1-19). In 2017, the Trump administration rolled these guidelines back (DeVos, 2017). This slow action by both the government and American culture has contributed to an uncertain environment in which to discuss sexual assault. We are simply not comfortable talking about it, and as a result little has changed for women on campus. Women are encouraged to share their stories but are met with mixed messages from both government and culture when they do so. A study by the National Center for Educational Statistics found the number of reported campus sex crimes increased by 205% between 2001 and 2014 (2017, pp.11). Despite this alarming increase, 89% of 11,000 colleges reported zero rapes in 2014 (Becker, 2017). More women are reporting, but it’s not leading to institutional action. If in our society we can’t have frank conversations about the problem, how can we expect colleges take corrective action when reporting anything above 0% could mean a damaged reputation or a loss of funding? What does that say about our national values?

While both government and contemporary culture promote valuing women, there is a hesitance to admit that women who are victims of sexual assault have been failed by the laws in place and by a society that has not made dismantling oppressive gender dynamics a priority. The evidence in reporting increases should be enough of a catalyst to pass protective legislation, but the unfortunate reality is evidence is not enough on its own. The hardest work is in a meaningful shift of our national values. The Me Too movement has put the spotlight to sexual assault, but the federal government has failed to tighten the laws that protect women – in Secretary DeVos’s case, these laws have even been loosened (Jackson, 2017).

Thankfully, New York State (NYS) has stepped up as a leader in the charge to protect women on its college campuses. New York’s Enough is Enough law echoes the sentiments of women everywhere. Can New York function as a model for the rest of the country? We think so. While its system is imperfect, it is a huge step forward in not just shining a light on the issue, but actually attempting to rectify one of the greatest threats to women in our time.

What is New York doing? Enough is Enough

In 2015, Governor Andrew Cuomo signed Enough is Enough into law. This legislation asserts that students attending college have the right to an educational environment that is safe, healthy and free from discrimination and violence (Governor’s Press Office, 2015). The law was created to address sexual assault, dating violence, domestic violence, and stalking on college campuses (Governor’s Press Office, 2015).

What is it?

Enough is Enough creates:

· A statewide definition of affirmative consent as a knowing, voluntary and mutual decision among all participants to engage in sexual activity;

· A statewide amnesty policy encouraging students to report incidents of sexual assault or sexual violence by granting immunity for certain campus policy violations such as drug and alcohol use when reporting sexual assault;

· The students’ bill of rights which informs sexual assault victims of their legal rights and available resources, and requires campuses to distribute that information;

· Training requirements for administrators, staff and students on sexual assault and related remedies (during orientations);

· A campus requirement to annually submit to the State Education Department reports of sexual violence, which is made publicly available;

· The sexual assault victims’ unit within the NYS police which specializes in responding to sex assaults and related crimes as well as trains local law enforcement appropriately; and,

· Requirements for first responders to notify survivors of their rights to contact outside law enforcement (Governor’s Press Office, 2015).

Remember the victims

Victims of sexual violence have historically been subjected to blame, suspicion, and outright disdain. Campuses have swept reports under the rug, and retaliation has driven some victims to drop out or attempt suicide (Dick, 2015). Under Enough is Enough, victims have the right to:

· Decide whether to report to university police/campus security, local law enforcement, and/or state police;

· Report the incident to their institution and be protected by the institution from retaliation for reporting an incident; and,

· Receive assistance and resources from their institution (Governor’s Press Office, 2015).

Why is Enough is Enough different?

Enough is Enough differs from previous campus sexual assault initiatives because it not only applies to publicly-funded colleges, it also includes private institutions. Therefore, no students are left behind. This legislation also creates a uniform definition of consent. The affirmative consent policy does not discriminate, even if the victim was under the influence, and consent can be revoked at any time during the encounter. Silence does not equal consent. This law underpins the value of women and acknowledges historic gender dynamic imbalances that need to be addressed to move forward as a more just society. Institutionalizing a new definition of consent helps to rectify the historic power imbalance that exists in sexual situations. New York responded to the plethora of evidence that young women were not safe, recognized the failure of the laws in place, and forced an uncomfortable conversation about this epidemic.

University at Albany’s Advocacy Center

The State University of New York at Albany (UAlbany) even went so far as to create the Advocacy Center for Sexual Violence. We talked to its director, Carol Stenger, to gain insight into her work and how Enough is Enough works in practice. Carol, in conjunction with the Title IX Office, developed trainings aimed at freshman orientation. The idea behind these trainings is to underscore the importance of consent and make it clear that sexual assault is taken seriously at this school. The advocacy center offers students a safe, discreet, and comfortable space to discuss an extremely traumatic event, and to receive compassionate guidance through whatever justice process they pursue. It’s a place to learn and it’s a place to be heard. The underlying message to young women is: you are valued.

References:

Ali, R. (2011, April 4). Dear Colleague [Letter]. The United States Department of Education Office of Civil Rights. Retrieved from

https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/letters/colleague-201104.pdf

Governor’s Press Office. (2015). Governor Cuomo launches “Enough Is Enough” public awareness campaign to educate students on new law combating sexual violence on college campuses. Retrieved 26 April 2019 from https://www.governor.ny.gov/news/governor-cuomo-launches-enough-enough-public-awareness-campaign-educate-students-new-law

Jackson, C. (2017, September 22). Dear Colleague [Letter]. The United States

Department of Education Office of Civil Rights. Retrieved from

https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/letters/colleague-title-ix-201709.pdf

Lieberwitz, R.L., Jaleel, R., Kelleher, T., Scott, J.W., Young, D., Reichman, H., . . . (2016). The History, Uses, and Abuses of Title IX. AAUP. Retrieved from https://www.aaup.org/file/TitleIXreport.pdf

National Cancer Institute. (2018, April 27). Cancer statistics. Retrieved from

https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/understanding/statistics

Statista. (2019). Total population of the United States 2010-2024, by gender. Retrieved from https://www.statista.com/statistics/737923/us-population-by-gender/

Stenger, C. (2019, April 15) Interview with Carol Stenger.

Students' Bill of Rights. University at Albany. Retrieved from

https://system.suny.edu/sexual-violence-prevention-workgroup/policies/bill-of-rights/

1 note · View note

sciencespies · 4 years ago

Text

Virgin Galactic to work with NASA on private orbital spaceflight experiences

https://sciencespies.com/space/virgin-galactic-to-work-with-nasa-on-private-orbital-spaceflight-experiences/

Virgin Galactic to work with NASA on private orbital spaceflight experiences

WASHINGTON — Virgin Galactic announced June 22 it has signed an agreement with NASA to support development of a program to train and potentially procure rides for private individuals seeking to fly to the International Space Station.

The company, best known for developing the SpaceShipTwo suborbital spaceplane, said it signed a Space Act Agreement with the Johnson Space Center to develop a “private orbital astronaut readiness program.” That initiative would support renewed efforts by NASA, announced a little more than a year ago, to increase commercial use of the station, including visits by private astronauts.

As envisioned by Virgin Galactic, that program will handle various aspects of flying private individuals to the station. That would include identifying potential customers, handling training and arranging for transportation to the station. The company didn’t disclose details about those plans, including a schedule for beginning such flights or their costs.

It’s unlikely that, in this scenario, Virgin Galactic would use its own vehicles for transporting people to and from the station. SpaceShipTwo is capable of only suborbital flight, and the company’s published long-term plans focus on high-speed point-to-point transportation rather than orbital human spaceflight.

The company would more likely work with Boeing and SpaceX, the companies developing commercial crew vehicles for accessing the ISS. Both companies have shown interest in working with third parties rather than sell seats to individuals directly. SpaceX has already sold commercial flights of its Crew Dragon spacecraft to Axiom Space for a mission to the station as well as to Space Adventures for a standalone mission to an orbit higher to than the station. Space Adventures previously announced plans to partner with Boeing to market commercial Starliner flights.

The arrangement, though, could make use of Virgin Galactic’s existing vehicles and infrastructure. The company said those capabilities “could play an important role in the training for orbital travel,” such as flying people to give them experience with microgravity and the G-forces of launch. The company would also use its facilities at Spaceport America in New Mexico for other aspects of training.

“We are excited to partner with NASA on this private orbital spaceflight program, which will not only allow us to use our spaceflight platform, but also offer our space training infrastructure to NASA and other agencies,” George Whitesides, chief executive of Virgin Galactic, said in a statement.

The agreement fits into a broader low Earth orbit commercialization effort the agency announced last June, seeking to stimulate commercial use of the ISS and eventual development of commercial stations. That initiative includes a new commercial use policy for the station and price list for commercial use of ISS resources, as well as allowing private astronaut missions to the station.

The strategy also included a competition to award access to a docking port on the station for a commercial module. In January, the agency selected Axiom Space to use that port for a module that the company plans to launch in the second half of 2024. That module will serve as a node for a series of future commercial modules that will eventually undock from the ISS and become a standalone space station.

That strategy, though, has faced challenges, including a lack of funding. NASA requested $150 million for its LEO commercialization effort last year but received just a tenth of that amount from Congress. NASA is again seeking $150 million for LEO commercialization in its fiscal year 2021 budget proposal.

NASA is also revamping its LEO commercialization strategy. Doug Loverro, at the time the associate administrator for human exploration and operations, said in April that he planned to establish a single organization within its mission directorate that handled all commercial activities, including its commercial cargo and crew programs, in order to better manage them. That reorganization, though, appears to be on hold after Loverro abruptly resigned from the agency last month amid rumors of violating procurement regulations for the agency’s lunar lander program.

This Space Act Agreement between NASA and Virgin Galactic is not the first agreement between the two organizations. Virgin Galactic has a contract from NASA’s Flight Opportunities program to carry research payloads on SpaceShipTwo flights. The company has several other Space Act Agreements to support research and development work, including one announced May 5 to assist its work on future high-speed transportation systems.

A future area of cooperation may involve flying NASA astronauts on SpaceShipTwo. NASA Administrator Jim Bridenstine announced March 2 that the agency would start an effort to certify commercial suborbital vehicles, like SpaceShipTwo, so that astronauts could fly on them for training or research. Bridenstine, in a June 19 tweet, said a request for information to support that effort would be released within a week.

“This is big news,” Whitesides said in a tweet responding to Bridenstine. “We look forward to working with the agency to advance this exciting capability to fly NASA astronauts.”

#Space

0 notes

itsfinancethings · 5 years ago

Link

Russian President Vladimir Putin eased the nationwide lockdown imposed on March 30 to stem the spread of the coronavirus, even as Russia becomes Europe’s new hotspot for the infection. With more than 250,000 cases as of May 15, Russia now has the second-highest number of confirmed COVID-19 cases in the world.

In a televised address to the nation on May 11, Putin said that some sectors would return to work from the following day, though restrictions on large public events across the country would stay in place. Everyone is required to wear face masks and gloves in shops and on public transport. Still closed in Moscow are car dealers, non-food stores, hairdressers and most other service sector businesses. But some of those businesses have been allowed to reopen in Russia’s other provinces.

Residents still should not leave their home unless to shop, work or walk the dog, and must have a digital permit to travel. Individual regions, he said, would be left to decide whether to keep rules in place and that it would be a cautious “step-by-step” exit. “We have a long and difficult process ahead of us with no room for mistakes,” he said.

Across Europe, countries have gradually lifted restrictions following a decline in the number of recorded infections and virus-related deaths. However, Putin’s announcement about ending lockdown came as Russia registered a record 11,000 new infections on May 11.

How many cases does Russia have?

The first locally transmitted infections—cases not brought in by Russians returning from abroad—were confirmed on March 15. Since then, the numbers have soared, reaching 252,245 cases and 2,305 deaths as of May 14, according to data from Johns Hopkins University. Russia now has the second highest number of recorded infections in the world after the U.S. “The country has not yet reached its peak,” says Christopher Gerry, Director of Russian and East European Studies at the School of Global and Area Studies at Oxford University.

But Russia’s unusually low case fatality rate of 0.9%, compared to 6% in the U.S. and 14.4% in the U.K. has been questioned by experts.

According to analysis published by the Financial Times on May 11, the national death toll could be more than 70% higher than the official data show. Analysis of all-cause mortality — death resulting from disease or a harmful exposure — in Moscow and Russia’s second largest city, St. Petersburg, found that there were 2,074 more deaths in April compared to the historical average over the past five years. However, official COVID-19 deaths in the two cities accounted for just 629 in the same period, leaving 1,444 deaths unaccounted for. If this figure was included in the national coronavirus death toll as of May 11, it would lead to a 72% increase in the number of fatalities.

Moscow Mayor Sergei Sobyanin admitted on May 7 that the real number of infections in the capital city was at least three times higher than the official figure. Moscow—the country’s capital city and major transport hub—is the epicenter of Russia’s outbreak, accounting for more than half the country’s official confirmed cases and deaths. Prime Minister Mikhail Mishustin and Putin’s spokesperson Dmitry Peskov are among those in hospital with the virus.

Anastasia Vasilieva, the head of Russia’s Alliance of Doctors, claims the virus has spread much further than official figures indicate. “Some hospitals don’t test patients with pneumonia for coronavirus, and those that do don’t always include a positive diagnosis in the statistics. They’re afraid of having to report it,” she says. “The real picture is hidden from the population,” she adds. In January 2020, pneumonia cases in Moscow surged 37 % year-on-year, an increase which Vasilieva believes to have been caused by coronavirus.

On April 2, Vasilieva and her colleagues were detained by the police for a night while delivering protective gear to a hospital outside of Moscow, accused of violating self-isolation rules. “It is staggering that the Russian authorities appear to fear criticism more than the deadly COVID-19 pandemic,” said Natalia Zviagina, Amnesty International’s Russia Director.

“They want to silence me and stop my activities. The government don’t want me to become a hero” Vasilieva says.

Keep up to date on the growing threat to global health by signing up for our daily coronavirus newsletter.

How has Putin and his government responded?

Russia was initially quick to respond to the coronavirus outbreak in China. The Kremlin closed its 2,500 mile-long border with China on January 30 and set up a quarantine facility in Siberia in early February for Russian nationals evacuated from Wuhan, the hotspot of China’s COVID-19 outbreak. The recorded number of coronavirus cases remained under 120 until March 17, when Putin said “the situation is generally under control.” Between the end of January and the end of March, “very little was done to tackle the pandemic,” says Gerry.

“In the beginning of March I wrote to the government to tell them we need to prepare, we need supply medical staff with PPE, otherwise they will die. A lot of doctors understood what was coming — we watched what was happening in Italy. We had time to prepare,” Vasilieva says.

Even as the number of infections has soared, Putin has repeatedly insisted that the situation is “under control.” Experts say he seems to be taking a backseat in managing the pandemic, an unusual move in Russia’s centralized political system, where power is concentrated in the president. He retreated to his country residence outside of Moscow in March, leaving local governors to decide on what restrictions to introduce.

Read More: Where’s Putin? Russia’s President Stays Out of Sight as Coronavirus Hits Economy

“There has been a genuine decentralization of command that has left responsibility and the margin of error to local authorities and not to the Kremlin, and definitely not to Putin,” says Mathieu Boulegue, a research fellow at the Russia and Eurasia Program at London think-tank Chatham House.

Putin postponed on March 25 the nationwide vote on the country’s constitutional amendments that had been planned for April 22, citing safety concerns. Since the beginning of the year parliament has been working on a series of amendments that would allow Putin to remain in power beyond the end of his current term in 2024.

The Russian president’s approval ratings hit a historic low of 59% in April, according to a survey published May 6 by the independent polling agency, the Levada Center, down from 69% in February. Levada also said in April that more Russian respondents approved of local officials’ measures against coronavirus than they did of Putin’s.

Putin has been very “worried about his approval ratings” ahead of the postponed public vote on the constitutional amendments that could keep him in power beyond the end of his current term in 2024, says Boulegue. “He is trying to create a buffer zone around him for any criticism and public discontent. It’s too early to tell how the epidemic will affect Putin’s popularity in the long-run, but it is unlikely to get out of the pandemic unscathed.”

In the meantime, Moscow Mayor Sobyanin has emerged as a leading figure in the fight against the virus. He placed restrictions on the city on March 30, stricter than those in New York City, closing all parks and non essential restaurants and stores. Following Sobyanin’s lead, leaders of about 20 regions so far have made it mandatory for residents to stay at home.

Andrey Rudakov —Bloomberg via Getty ImagesCustomers wear protective face masks inside a cafe as a television screen displays Vladimir Putin, Russia’s president, delivering a national address, in Moscow, Russia, on Wednesday, March 25, 2020.

Why are cases continuing to rise?

The lockdown was introduced too late, experts say. By the time it was brought in, “the virus had already taken hold in Moscow, similar to the U.K. in a way,” Gerry says.

Poor testing early on blinded the authorities in tracking how far the virus had spread, Gerry says. In February and March, the testing regime was “inadequate,” he says. “There was a very convoluted, three stage testing regime that involved sending tests to Western Siberia and waiting a few days for the results. People could have been carrying the virus for a week or more without knowing the test results,” Gerry says.

Compliance with the lockdown has also been “relatively low,” partly because of the mixed messaging that the Russian public are receiving, says Gerry. “It was certainly much lower than was required to stop the virus from taking hold,” he adds. More than 70,000 people from Moscow and St. Petersburg were booked to visit other regions by planes and trains around the country during the long May holidays (April 14 to May 12) despite the stay-at-home orders. While international flights were grounded with a few exceptions on March 27, domestic flights have continued to operate (though demand has sharply fallen).

Russia has recently scaled up coronavirus testing, with Putin saying on May 11 that 170,000 tests are being conducted daily. However, questions over the reliability of the tests remain. Moscow’s Department of Health released a statement on May 7 saying that tests being used across the country have been wrongly showing that people in the late stage of coronavirus are disease free.

At the start of the outbreak, there was “misplaced hubris and arrogance that the pandemic wouldn’t hit Russia seriously,” says Judy Twigg, a Professor of Political Science at Virginia Commonwealth University. As infection numbers in Russia reached over 27,000 on April 1, the Kremlin sold protective gear and ventilators to the U.S., prompting criticism at home. “We raise money all over the country to buy protection for doctors, and our authorities sell personal protective equipment to the U.S. What a mockery,” the Doctors’ Alliance, an independent trade union linked to opposition figure Alexei Navalny, tweeted on April 2. Less than two weeks earlier, the Kremlin sent 122 military doctors, personal protective equipment (PPE), ventilators and mobile disinfection machines on cargo planes to assist Italy.

Meanwhile, Vasilieva says that even in Moscow, there’s not enough PPE. “Some doctors have to wear the same mask for the whole day when they should change it every two or three hours. And of course they’re taking public transport to get home. They’re fighting fire without protection,” she says.

Shortages of personal protective equipment (PPE) equipment have led to a high transmission rate within hospitals among patients, doctors, nurses and healthcare workers. An advocacy group of Russian doctors recently launched an online “in memoriam” list of the health workers who have died from coronavirus. The list names 190 people as of May 14, the youngest person being 26 years old. “That’s tragic. And it didn’t have to be that way,” Twigg says.

Regional authorities, suddenly given an unprecedented level of responsibility, have also been ill-equipped to manage the crisis. “They are not used to being handed such duties. They’re unclear about the resources they can use when health systems are short of supply. PPE hasn’t been delivered to the hospitals that really need them.” Gerry says.

Healthcare systems in some areas outside of Moscow have been struggling to cope with the rise in cases, says Gerry. Although Russia has a higher rate of hospital beds per capita than Western Europe, much of the medical equipment is out of date, he says. “Even where there are intensive care facilities, it’s questionable whether they have the workforce to manage those,” says Gerry.

“In some areas that have emerged as hot spots, there is a lack of specialists, placing healthcare workers under enormous pressure” Twigg says. She says hospitals have made pleas on social media for help from anesthesiologists, respiratory therapists and others. “They are very much in demand in some places to the point where the system is desperate for them,” she adds.

Twigg points to the cases of three doctors who fell out of hospital windows in Russia within the space of two weeks in April and May as an indication of the intense pressure that healthcare workers have been facing.“These doctors probably committed suicide from all the strain and stress,” she says.

Why does Putin want Russia to begin easing its lockdown?

The main motivation for taking the decision to reopening public life was economic, analysts say. Two thirds of Russians have no financial savings, according to a May 2019 survey by Levada, making it more urgent to get people back to work.

“Russia is in dire economic straits,” says Boulegue. In a country where the energy sector makes up two-thirds of exports, the drop in prices of oil and natural gas has posed a real threat to people’s livelihoods. Experts are now predicting the worst recession in a generation. Putin himself conceded on April 24 that Russia now faces a bigger economic crisis than the 2009 global recession. As he announced an easing of restrictions, Putin said that unemployment has already doubled to 1.4 million. As many as eight million people could be left without a job, according to the former Finance Minister, Alexei Kudrin.

Russians who have already found themselves out of work have had little recourse to financial support from the government. Unlike most European countries, Russia has not unveiled a major package to support people who are out of work. The government’s first two economic rescue packages amount to 2.8% of GDP, whereas in the U.S. it comes to about 10% of GDP. Russia is now preparing a third package and Minister of Finance Anton Siluanov has argued that the actual amount of state support is at 6.5% of GDP.

What’s next for Russia?

Significant challenges lie ahead, not least for the public health system, which is under increasing strain.

Twigg is mostly worried about the regions outside of Moscow, including some big cities and towns and rural areas. “They’re under funded, under staffed, and under equipped. That’s a story that’s still evolving,” says Twigg. But the absence of a lockdown will be “a major obstacle to saving lives in the end,” Gerry adds.

For Boulegue, the pandemic has revealed the paradox of Putin’s 20-years’ consolidation of power. “Russia is a fragile power that has neither the economic means nor ability to enforce a strict lockdown. The pandemic is the ultimate stress test.”

Please send tips, leads, and stories from the frontlines to [email protected]

#IFTTT #Blogger

0 notes