wnd--2020-07-30--The 10 datasets Congress needs to evaluate social media

[ Editor 's note : This story originally was published by Real Clear Politics . ]
As Washington intensifies its focus on the influence of social media platforms on American life and the democratic process , the heated rhetoric and myriad policy proposals lack one crucial element : data .
For all the concern over “ community guidelines , ” content moderation , fact-checking and advertising policies , we have few of the actual data points necessary to evaluate how well the companies are doing .
Could it be that they get it right most of the time and it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are driving our concern ?
Conversely , are the companies getting it wrong much more than we -- or even they -- realize ?
What are the datasets that Congress should require from social companies in order to help the public better understand the role those platforms play in society today ?
TRENDING : Ghislaine Maxwell allegedly took topless photos of girls as a 'hobby' On paper , the platforms ’ content moderation practices and fact-checking partnerships seem like reasonable solutions to the difficult task of keeping bad actors from disrupting their digital @ @ @ @ @ @ @ companies adhere to these rules in practice ?
To what degree do the unconscious biases of the companies ’ engineers manifest themselves in their algorithms ?
Would the American public be as supportive of content moderation if they understood the disproportionate ways it can impact certain voices or the unevenness in how the platforms apply their rules .
In order to compare rhetoric to reality , we need data that captures the daily functioning of our modern public squares .
Here are 10 datasets that Congress could demand from social media companies that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ needed to understand their roles in our modern democracy and highlight areas that may require further legislative action .
A Database of Violating Tweets .
Given that all tweets are publicly viewable and already accessible to researchers using Twitter ’ s data APIs ( application programming interfaces ) , there would be few privacy implications in requiring Twitter to provide a public database of all tweets the platform flags each day , along with a description of why Twitter believed each tweet was a violation of its rules or disputed by a fact-checker @ @ @ @ @ @ @ analysis of the kinds of content Twitter ’ s moderation efforts focus on , while the ability to compare those violating tweets against the rest of Twitter would make it possible to assess how evenhanded the platform ’ s removal efforts are .
A Database of Journalist & Politician Private Post Violations .
Most social platforms , such as Facebook and Instagram , are a mixture of public and private content .
Publicly shared content violations could be compiled and disseminated to researchers , as could public tweets , but private content such @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or flagged as misinformation pose unique privacy challenges .
One possibility would be to treat the verified official accounts of journalists and elected officials as different from other users , given their outsized role in the public discourse , and to automatically make available to researchers any posts by those accounts that are later deleted as violations of platform rules or disputed by fact-checkers .
A separate voluntary submission database could allow ordinary users to submit their own posts that were deemed violations , along with the explanation they received regarding the violation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ such removals would make it easier to understand trends in the kinds of content platforms are most heavily policing and whether there is public agreement with the platforms ’ decisions .
A Demographic Database of Content Removals .
Social platforms use algorithms to estimate myriad demographic characteristics of their users , including race , gender , religion , sexual orientation and other attributes that marketers can use to precisely target their ads .
While these attributes are imperfect , the fact that the companies make them available for ad targeting suggests they believe @ @ @ @ @ @ @ advertising strategy upon .
The companies should be required to compile regular demographic percentage breakdowns of deleted and flagged posts for each of their community guidelines and fact checks .
For example , what percentage of “ hate speech ” posts were ascribed to persons of color or how many “ misinformation ” posts were by members of a given religious affiliation ?
Do the companies ’ enforcement actions appear to disproportionately impact vulnerable voices ?
A Database of Exempted Posts .
A common criticism of content moderation is the unevenness with which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ users seemingly face constant enforcement action while others posting the exact same material face no consequences ?
Why is one politician ’ s post preserved as “ newsworthy ” while another is removed as a violation ?
A critical missing component in our understanding of content moderation is the degree to which companies create silent exemptions from their rules .
On paper , Facebook prohibits all forms of sexism , racism , bullying and threats of violence , but in practice , the company allows some posts as “ humor ” or otherwise @ @ @ @ @ @ @ do users report posts that the company determines are not a violation ?
And does it systematically exempt certain kinds of content ?
Compiling a central database of posts the companies rule are not violations would offer critical insights into how evenhanded they are and where their enforcement gaps are .
A Database of Deleted & Exempted Protest Posts .
Protest marches are increasingly being organized over social media .
As platforms extend their censorship to these posts , they are able to control speech that occurs beyond their digital borders .
This @ @ @ @ @ @ @ uniquely important .
For weeks Facebook touted its removal of COVID “ reopening ” protests that did not require social distancing , yet quietly waived those rules for the George Floyd protests .
Having a centralized database of protest posts removed by platforms as well as those exempted from its rules would go a long way towards understanding how much the platforms are shaping the offline discourse .
Increased Access to Facebook ’ s Fact-Checking Database .
Facebook provides an internal dashboard to fact-checking organizations that lists the posts it believes may be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to that dashboard is extremely limited , but broadening access to policymakers and the academic community as a whole would enable much closer scrutiny of the kinds of material Facebook is focusing on .
Given that the company already shares this content with its fact-checking partners , there would be fewer privacy implications to broadening that access to a wider pool of researchers .
A Database of Fact-Checked Posts .
What are the kinds of posts that social platforms delete or flag as having been disputed by fact-checking organizations ?
Are climate change @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
How are platforms managing the constantly changing guidelines for COVID-19 , where just a few months ago posts recommending masks would have in theory been a violation of the platforms ’ “ misinformation ” rules governing health information that goes against CDC guidance ?
How often are posts flagged based on questionable ratings or potentially conflicted sources ?
In an ideal world , platforms would be required to compile a database of every post they flag as being disputed by a fact-checker .
For public posts such as those on Twitter , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ platforms like Facebook , this would pose a privacy challenge .
One possibility would be to require platforms such as Facebook to provide a daily report listing the URL of every fact check they relied upon to flag a user post that day , along with how many posts were flagged based on that fact check .
For example , of all of the climate change fact checks published over the years , which are the ones that yield the most takedowns on social platforms ?
Do the most heavily cited fact checks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ truth ” as other fact checks on that topic or is a particular source , such as an academic “ expert , ” having an outsized influence on “ truth ” on social platforms ?
Such data would also help fact-checkers to periodically review their most-cited fact checks to verify that their findings still hold , while during pandemic public health officials could use it to flag emerging contested narratives .
Increased Access to Facebook Research Datasets .
Through academic partnerships and programs like Social Science One , Facebook permits large-scale research on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their emotions to linking data sets to more in-depth analyses of the flow of information across its platform .
Researchers from across the world have been given access to study misinformation and sharing on Facebook , and a closer look at the projects approved to date suggests the kinds of access they have been granted would also support work into understanding the biases of Facebook ’ s own moderation practices .
Algorithmic Trending Datasets .
The power of algorithms to shape our awareness of events around us was driven home in 2014 when @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Mo.
, while Facebook was filled with the smiling faces of people dumping buckets of ice water over their heads .
A public dataset capturing how public posts are being prioritized or deemphasized by these algorithms across classes of users and over time would provide insights into inadvertent biases in these algorithms and provide greater visibility into what the public is and is not seeing .
The Legal System .
Many of the “ community guidelines ” enforced by social platforms are , at least on paper , also violations of U.S. law @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of violence .
How often do social media companies or recipients of those messages refer them to law enforcement and what was the outcome of those cases ?
If few such posts are ever referred to law enforcement , why do social platforms believe harassment and threats of violence should not be reported to officials if they believe they are dangerous enough to warrant removal from their platforms ?
Tracking cases where posts were referred to law enforcement and the resulting legal decisions would shed light on how closely social media platforms ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
In the end , we lack the necessary data to determine what kinds of regulation are required for social platforms .
The datasets above would give policymakers and researchers critical building blocks upon which to begin understanding Silicon Valley ’ s influence over democracy itself .

[Editor's note: This story originally was published by Real Clear Politics.]
By Kalev Leetaru
Real Clear Politics
As Washington intensifies its focus on the influence of social media platforms on American life and the democratic process, the heated rhetoric and myriad policy proposals lack one crucial element: data.
For all the concern over “community guidelines,” content moderation, fact-checking and advertising policies, we have few of the actual data points necessary to evaluate how well the companies are doing. Could it be that they get it right most of the time and it is just a few high-profile mistakes that are driving our concern? Conversely, are the companies getting it wrong much more than we -- or even they -- realize? What are the datasets that Congress should require from social companies in order to help the public better understand the role those platforms play in society today?
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
On paper, the platforms’ content moderation practices and fact-checking partnerships seem like reasonable solutions to the difficult task of keeping bad actors from disrupting their digital communities. Yet how closely do the companies adhere to these rules in practice? To what degree do the unconscious biases of the companies’ engineers manifest themselves in their algorithms? Would the American public be as supportive of content moderation if they understood the disproportionate ways it can impact certain voices or the unevenness in how the platforms apply their rules. In order to compare rhetoric to reality, we need data that captures the daily functioning of our modern public squares.
Here are 10 datasets that Congress could demand from social media companies that would begin to provide the critical insights needed to understand their roles in our modern democracy and highlight areas that may require further legislative action.
A Database of Violating Tweets. Given that all tweets are publicly viewable and already accessible to researchers using Twitter’s data APIs (application programming interfaces), there would be few privacy implications in requiring Twitter to provide a public database of all tweets the platform flags each day, along with a description of why Twitter believed each tweet was a violation of its rules or disputed by a fact-checker. Such a database would permit at-scale analysis of the kinds of content Twitter’s moderation efforts focus on, while the ability to compare those violating tweets against the rest of Twitter would make it possible to assess how evenhanded the platform’s removal efforts are.
A Database of Journalist & Politician Private Post Violations. Most social platforms, such as Facebook and Instagram, are a mixture of public and private content. Publicly shared content violations could be compiled and disseminated to researchers, as could public tweets, but private content such as non-public Facebook posts that are deleted or flagged as misinformation pose unique privacy challenges. One possibility would be to treat the verified official accounts of journalists and elected officials as different from other users, given their outsized role in the public discourse, and to automatically make available to researchers any posts by those accounts that are later deleted as violations of platform rules or disputed by fact-checkers. A separate voluntary submission database could allow ordinary users to submit their own posts that were deemed violations, along with the explanation they received regarding the violation. Having a single centralized database of such removals would make it easier to understand trends in the kinds of content platforms are most heavily policing and whether there is public agreement with the platforms’ decisions.
A Demographic Database of Content Removals. Social platforms use algorithms to estimate myriad demographic characteristics of their users, including race, gender, religion, sexual orientation and other attributes that marketers can use to precisely target their ads. While these attributes are imperfect, the fact that the companies make them available for ad targeting suggests they believe they are sufficiently accurate to build an advertising strategy upon. The companies should be required to compile regular demographic percentage breakdowns of deleted and flagged posts for each of their community guidelines and fact checks. For example, what percentage of “hate speech” posts were ascribed to persons of color or how many “misinformation” posts were by members of a given religious affiliation? Do the companies’ enforcement actions appear to disproportionately impact vulnerable voices?
A Database of Exempted Posts. A common criticism of content moderation is the unevenness with which it is applied. Why do some users seemingly face constant enforcement action while others posting the exact same material face no consequences? Why is one politician’s post preserved as “newsworthy” while another is removed as a violation? A critical missing component in our understanding of content moderation is the degree to which companies create silent exemptions from their rules. On paper, Facebook prohibits all forms of sexism, racism, bullying and threats of violence, but in practice, the company allows some posts as “humor” or otherwise declines to take action. How often do users report posts that the company determines are not a violation? And does it systematically exempt certain kinds of content? Compiling a central database of posts the companies rule are not violations would offer critical insights into how evenhanded they are and where their enforcement gaps are.
A Database of Deleted & Exempted Protest Posts. Protest marches are increasingly being organized over social media. As platforms extend their censorship to these posts, they are able to control speech that occurs beyond their digital borders. This makes understanding how platforms moderate protest-related speech uniquely important. For weeks Facebook touted its removal of COVID “reopening” protests that did not require social distancing, yet quietly waived those rules for the George Floyd protests. Having a centralized database of protest posts removed by platforms as well as those exempted from its rules would go a long way towards understanding how much the platforms are shaping the offline discourse.
Increased Access to Facebook’s Fact-Checking Database. Facebook provides an internal dashboard to fact-checking organizations that lists the posts it believes may be false or misleading. Today, access to that dashboard is extremely limited, but broadening access to policymakers and the academic community as a whole would enable much closer scrutiny of the kinds of material Facebook is focusing on. Given that the company already shares this content with its fact-checking partners, there would be fewer privacy implications to broadening that access to a wider pool of researchers.
A Database of Fact-Checked Posts. What are the kinds of posts that social platforms delete or flag as having been disputed by fact-checking organizations? Are climate change posts flagged more often than immigration posts? How are platforms managing the constantly changing guidelines for COVID-19, where just a few months ago posts recommending masks would have in theory been a violation of the platforms’ “misinformation” rules governing health information that goes against CDC guidance? How often are posts flagged based on questionable ratings or potentially conflicted sources?
In an ideal world, platforms would be required to compile a database of every post they flag as being disputed by a fact-checker. For public posts such as those on Twitter, this could be possible, but for platforms like Facebook, this would pose a privacy challenge. One possibility would be to require platforms such as Facebook to provide a daily report listing the URL of every fact check they relied upon to flag a user post that day, along with how many posts were flagged based on that fact check. For example, of all of the climate change fact checks published over the years, which are the ones that yield the most takedowns on social platforms? Do the most heavily cited fact checks rely on the same sources of “truth” as other fact checks on that topic or is a particular source, such as an academic “expert,” having an outsized influence on “truth” on social platforms? Such data would also help fact-checkers to periodically review their most-cited fact checks to verify that their findings still hold, while during pandemic public health officials could use it to flag emerging contested narratives.
Increased Access to Facebook Research Datasets. Through academic partnerships and programs like Social Science One, Facebook permits large-scale research on its 2 billion users, from manipulating their emotions to linking data sets to more in-depth analyses of the flow of information across its platform. Researchers from across the world have been given access to study misinformation and sharing on Facebook, and a closer look at the projects approved to date suggests the kinds of access they have been granted would also support work into understanding the biases of Facebook’s own moderation practices.
Algorithmic Trending Datasets. The power of algorithms to shape our awareness of events around us was driven home in 2014 when Twitter chronicled the unrest in Ferguson, Mo., while Facebook was filled with the smiling faces of people dumping buckets of ice water over their heads. A public dataset capturing how public posts are being prioritized or deemphasized by these algorithms across classes of users and over time would provide insights into inadvertent biases in these algorithms and provide greater visibility into what the public is and is not seeing.
The Legal System. Many of the “community guidelines” enforced by social platforms are, at least on paper, also violations of U.S. law, including libel, harassment and threats of violence. How often do social media companies or recipients of those messages refer them to law enforcement and what was the outcome of those cases? If few such posts are ever referred to law enforcement, why do social platforms believe harassment and threats of violence should not be reported to officials if they believe they are dangerous enough to warrant removal from their platforms? Tracking cases where posts were referred to law enforcement and the resulting legal decisions would shed light on how closely social media platforms’ interpretations of U.S. laws adhere to reality.
In the end, we lack the necessary data to determine what kinds of regulation are required for social platforms. The datasets above would give policymakers and researchers critical building blocks upon which to begin understanding Silicon Valley’s influence over democracy itself.


wnd--2020-07-30--Seattle police chief has simple message for businesses facing rioters: You're on your own

On Friday , a judge put a temporary halt to a Seattle city ordinance , hastily passed in the wake of the protests touched off by the death of George Floyd in late May , which would have banned virtually all safe crowd control measures for police officers .
According to Crosscut , the ordinance would have prohibited not only tear gas , but also pepper spray and other crowd control weapons .
The Department of Justice argued the new rules would have caused “ irreparable harm resulting from officer confusion and the inability to modulate force or de-escalate situations @ @ @ @ @ @ @ U.S. District Judge James Robart agreed , issuing a 14-day temporary restraining order just days before the ordinance was set to take effect .
`` The issuance of this immediate change , without time for additional direction or training , is likely to result in officer confusion , '' he wrote .
TRENDING : Ghislaine Maxwell allegedly took topless photos of girls as a 'hobby' If you 're a resident or business owner in Seattle , at least for the next week and a half , this is a very good thing .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the ordinance would have taken effect , Seattle Police Chief Carmen Best wrote a letter to residents and business owners informing them that amid protests that have frequently turned violent , she does n't intend to put her officers in harm 's way without the crowd control weapons that are normally at her department 's disposal .
`` Please know that the Seattle Police Department is committed to addressing life safety incidents and calls for service , and responding to ongoing demonstrations and unrest in the city , '' Best wrote .
`` @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Ordinance 119805 Crowd Control Tool goes into effect this weekend on Sunday , July 26 , 2020 .
This ordinance bans Seattle Police officers the use of less lethal tools , including pepper spray that is commonly used to disperse crowds that have turned violent .
Simply put , the legislation gives officers NO ability to safely intercede to preserve property in the midst of a large , violent crowd .
`` It is important to bring to your attention that yesterday , I sent the City Council a letter ensuring them that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have done my due diligence of informing them numerous times of the foreseeable impact of this ordinance on upcoming events .
The letter is attached for your reference , '' she continued .
`` For these reasons , Seattle Police will have an adjusted deployment in response to any demonstrations this weekend -- as I will never ask our officers to risk their personal safety to protect property without the tools to do so in a safe way , '' Best said in conclusion .
The letter to the city council which Best @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that protests in the city remained a serious law enforcement issue .
`` It is a fact that there are groups and individuals who are intent on destruction in our City .
Yes , we also have seen weeks of peaceful demonstrations , but two recent events ( Sunday , July 19th and Wednesday , July 22nd ) have included wide-scale property destruction and attacks on officers , injuring more than a dozen , some significantly , '' Best wrote .
`` This weekend we know that several events are planned across the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the same violent actors from recent days .
There is no reason not to assume we will continue to experience property destruction , arson , looting , and attempts to injure additional officers throughout the weekend and beyond .
`` With this Council ordinance , we hear loudly and clearly that the use of these less-lethal tools by SPD officers to disperse crowds that have turned violent have been completely banned by City Council . ''
This left two different paths for police officers to deal with rioters .
The first , being @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pull back .
The other possibility open to officers to control crowds , however , went against the spirit of the ordinance -- but could be the sole avenue remaining for officers dealing with situations where the only choices left open to them are bad ones .
`` We have clear , court-mandated procedures for arresting individuals , grounded in the principles of deescalation .
SPD ’ s de-escalation principles are premised on the expectation , consistent with policy and best practices , that officers have the full array of approved tools .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ safe way for officers to effect arrests when their colleagues do not have the tools necessary to protect them , '' Best wrote .
`` As City Council ’ s legislation goes into effect , it will create even more dangerous circumstances for our officers to intervene using what they have left -- riot shields and riot batons . ''
Best , by the way , does n't come across like a sanguinary Bull Connor type .
Here 's an excerpt from another letter that the police chief sent to the city council @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I am concerned by the clear disconnect many of these recommendations have from reality .
If we are to do the hard work ahead of us , we can not argue about facts .
If we are going to successfully meet the needs of our entire community , we must , together , create a plan , grounded in theory , guided by evidence , and governed by equity , '' she wrote .
`` With a plan in place , we can then , as a City , determine how to best @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will not happen overnight .
We will have to 'bridge the gap ' between the realities of today and the vision of tomorrow . ''
That plea fell upon death ears .
Like so many other cities in the wake of George Floyd 's death , Seattle was Lady Macbeth , trying desperately to wash nonexistent blood off of their hands .
They gazed upon the tools of traditional police work and said , `` Out , damned spot ! ''
-- without realizing those tools were n't actually causing their city pain @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Unlike the guilt-ridden queen of Scotland , however , Seattle 's leftist politicians are going to have to hang around to see what happens when things go bad -- assuming , of course , they get their wish and the DOJ 's attempt to block the pepper spray ban fails .
Best is neither being dramatic nor taking her ball and going home because the city council wo n't delay or reconsider the ban .
There 's a significant and dedicated contingent of protesters in Seattle who are out to wreck whatever they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their way .
This is n't just putting property at risk ; these are the rioters who set a fire in a Starbucks which was below residential units on Saturday , after all .
Best ca n't risk her officers unless things get particularly bad -- and at that point , her department does n't have less-lethal crowd control measures at their disposal .
Is this what Seattle officialdom thinks will end well ?
At least for now , Best has additional options at her disposal .
`` The Seattle Police Department hears @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ready to partner in moving forward , '' Best said in the wake of the judge 's ruling , according to KING-TV .
`` I implore all of you to remain peaceful and to encourage the peace of others . ''
That is n't likely to happen .
It is , however , more likely that the unrest does n't end with a lawless power vacuum or violent police intervention .
This article appeared originally on The Western Journal .

On Friday, a judge put a temporary halt to a Seattle city ordinance, hastily passed in the wake of the protests touched off by the death of George Floyd in late May, which would have banned virtually all safe crowd control measures for police officers.
According to Crosscut, the ordinance would have prohibited not only tear gas, but also pepper spray and other crowd control weapons.
The Department of Justice argued the new rules would have caused “irreparable harm resulting from officer confusion and the inability to modulate force or de-escalate situations in which force may be needed.”
U.S. District Judge James Robart agreed, issuing a 14-day temporary restraining order just days before the ordinance was set to take effect.
"The issuance of this immediate change, without time for additional direction or training, is likely to result in officer confusion," he wrote.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
If you're a resident or business owner in Seattle, at least for the next week and a half, this is a very good thing.
On Friday, just two days before the ordinance would have taken effect, Seattle Police Chief Carmen Best wrote a letter to residents and business owners informing them that amid protests that have frequently turned violent, she doesn't intend to put her officers in harm's way without the crowd control weapons that are normally at her department's disposal.
"Please know that the Seattle Police Department is committed to addressing life safety incidents and calls for service, and responding to ongoing demonstrations and unrest in the city," Best wrote.
"Please also know that the City Council Ordinance 119805 Crowd Control Tool goes into effect this weekend on Sunday, July 26, 2020. This ordinance bans Seattle Police officers the use of less lethal tools, including pepper spray that is commonly used to disperse crowds that have turned violent. Simply put, the legislation gives officers NO ability to safely intercede to preserve property in the midst of a large, violent crowd.
Seattle police send message to businesses, residents. There are riots. City council banned use of pepper spray, other crowd control agents. So now, we have 'NO ability to safely intercede to preserve property in the midst of a large, violent crowd.' Shorter: You're on your own. pic.twitter.com/ZLzg1VToeV — Byron York (@ByronYork) July 27, 2020
"It is important to bring to your attention that yesterday, I sent the City Council a letter ensuring them that as the Chief of Police, I have done my due diligence of informing them numerous times of the foreseeable impact of this ordinance on upcoming events. The letter is attached for your reference," she continued.
"For these reasons, Seattle Police will have an adjusted deployment in response to any demonstrations this weekend -- as I will never ask our officers to risk their personal safety to protect property without the tools to do so in a safe way," Best said in conclusion.
The letter to the city council which Best sent the previous day made it clear that protests in the city remained a serious law enforcement issue.
"It is a fact that there are groups and individuals who are intent on destruction in our City. Yes, we also have seen weeks of peaceful demonstrations, but two recent events (Sunday, July 19th and Wednesday, July 22nd) have included wide-scale property destruction and attacks on officers, injuring more than a dozen, some significantly," Best wrote.
"This weekend we know that several events are planned across the city that will foreseeably involve many of the same violent actors from recent days. There is no reason not to assume we will continue to experience property destruction, arson, looting, and attempts to injure additional officers throughout the weekend and beyond.
"With this Council ordinance, we hear loudly and clearly that the use of these less-lethal tools by SPD officers to disperse crowds that have turned violent have been completely banned by City Council."
This left two different paths for police officers to deal with rioters.
The first, being advocated by Chief Best, was to pull back. The other possibility open to officers to control crowds, however, went against the spirit of the ordinance -- but could be the sole avenue remaining for officers dealing with situations where the only choices left open to them are bad ones.
"We have clear, court-mandated procedures for arresting individuals, grounded in the principles of deescalation. SPD’s de-escalation principles are premised on the expectation, consistent with policy and best practices, that officers have the full array of approved tools. In large crowds, there is no safe way for officers to effect arrests when their colleagues do not have the tools necessary to protect them," Best wrote.
"As City Council’s legislation goes into effect, it will create even more dangerous circumstances for our officers to intervene using what they have left -- riot shields and riot batons."
Best, by the way, doesn't come across like a sanguinary Bull Connor type. Here's an excerpt from another letter that the police chief sent to the city council two days earlier:
"Altogether, I am concerned by the clear disconnect many of these recommendations have from reality. If we are to do the hard work ahead of us, we cannot argue about facts. If we are going to successfully meet the needs of our entire community, we must, together, create a plan, grounded in theory, guided by evidence, and governed by equity," she wrote.
"With a plan in place, we can then, as a City, determine how to best fund and implement that plan. This will not happen overnight. We will have to 'bridge the gap' between the realities of today and the vision of tomorrow."
That plea fell upon deaf ears. Like so many other cities in the wake of George Floyd's death, Seattle was Lady Macbeth, trying desperately to wash nonexistent blood off of their hands. They gazed upon the tools of traditional police work and said, "Out, damned spot!" -- without realizing those tools weren't actually causing their city pain, but saving them from it.
Unlike the guilt-ridden queen of Scotland, however, Seattle's leftist politicians are going to have to hang around to see what happens when things go bad -- assuming, of course, they get their wish and the DOJ's attempt to block the pepper spray ban fails.
Best is neither being dramatic nor taking her ball and going home because the city council won't delay or reconsider the ban.
There's a significant and dedicated contingent of protesters in Seattle who are out to wreck whatever they can and attack anyone who gets in their way.
This isn't just putting property at risk; these are the rioters who set a fire in a Starbucks which was below residential units on Saturday, after all.
Best can't risk her officers unless things get particularly bad -- and at that point, her department doesn't have less-lethal crowd control measures at their disposal.
Is this what Seattle officialdom thinks will end well?
At least for now, Best has additional options at her disposal.
"The Seattle Police Department hears the community’s message and stands ready to partner in moving forward," Best said in the wake of the judge's ruling, according to KING-TV. "I implore all of you to remain peaceful and to encourage the peace of others."
That isn't likely to happen. It is, however, more likely that the unrest doesn't end with a lawless power vacuum or violent police intervention.
This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.


wnd--2020-07-30--Top researcher, a Democrat, warns Big Tech is stealing election from Trump

For Harvard-trained research psychologist and Democratic voter Robert Epstein , the question is n't whether or not Google and other Silicon Valley giants are manipulating their searches and feeds to make sure Donald Trump does n't win reelection .
A supporter of Hillary Clinton in 2016 and Joe Biden in 2020 , he told WND in an interview Wednesday he has statistical evidence to back up the tech titans ' bias , derived from more than seven years of research , internal documents , emails , videos and the testimony of whistleblowers .
He has testified to Congress that Google @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump 2.6 million votes in 2016 .
In 2020 , he believes , as many as 15 million votes could be manipulated .
And as Silicon Valley CEOs testified to Congress Wednesday about their outsized influence , there was `` anecdotal '' evidence , such as the claim of Breitbart News that Google has manipulated its algorithm to curb traffic to the site and those of other conservative outlets .
On May 1 , for example , a Google search for `` Joe Biden '' resulted in 30,000 impressions for Breitbart News links @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to zero .
TRENDING : Ghislaine Maxwell allegedly took topless photos of girls as a 'hobby' What is needed now , Epstein believes , is to follow up his research in 2016 and 2018 with a large-scale system of field agents in every swing state to monitor Google , YouTube , Twitter , Facebook and others in real time .
He had the funding lined up to launch the ambitious project in February , but the money `` dried up '' he said , when the coronavirus hit and `` sucked all of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Now , with interest returning to the election , he has the people and systems in place and just needs the money .
Many small donations have come in , he said , but he needs much more to pull it off – about $ 10 million .
He emphasized to WND he is not a Trump supporter but a `` supporter of democracy . ''
He wants Joe Biden to win , but he wants the election to be fair , recognizing that in the future the tech giants could put their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ n't want .
`` It 's not in our interest to turn the election over to Google and the gang , '' he said .
`` To give them carte blanche is insane . ''
The goal of his monitoring project is to force the tech companies `` to back off in the swing states . ''
`` And when we do get them to back off , we will be able to detect that , '' he said .
But much more funding is needed `` to do this in a credible @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the courts and also by mainstream media . ''
`` We have people on standby , we have a very ambitious program of what we want to monitor , '' explained Epstein , a senior research psychologist at the American Institute for Behavioral Research and Technology in Vista , California .
The plan is to do a `` real time analysis so we can make announcements almost every day if we find bias in news feeds , tweet suppression and the sequence of YouTube videos . ''
All of that would be reported @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trade Commission .
He said he 's getting calls from Congress members , senators , attorneys general and others , but there 's no money .
`` There is so much as stake here that I 'm dumbfounded , '' he said .
`` This is the watershed year , where we either turn over democracy to the tech companies – and maybe never get it back again – or we fight them . ''
Epstein – who was famed behavioral psychologist B.F. Skinner 's last Ph.D. student at Harvard – has been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
He has served in various editorial positions at Psychology Today magazine and Scientific American MIND .
He 's the author of 15 books and more than 300 scientific and mainstream articles on artificial intelligence and other topics .
In testimony one year ago to the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution , he emphasized he is `` not a conservative . ''
`` I am here today for three reasons : to explain why Google presents a serious threat to democracy and human autonomy , to explain how passive monitoring systems can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ future from companies like Google , and to tell you how Congress can immediately end Google ’ s worldwide monopoly on search . ''
He found in 2016 that biased results generated by Google 's search algorithm likely impacted undecided voters in a way that gave at least 2.6 million votes to Hillary Clinton .
He based that on his preservation of more than 13,000 election-related searches conducted by a diverse group of Americans on Google , Bing , and Yahoo in the weeks leading up to the election .
Google search results @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , he found , in all 10 positions on the first page of search results in both blue states and red states .
Epstein said he knows the number of votes that shifted because he conducted dozens of controlled experiments in the U.S. and other countries that measure precisely how opinions and votes shift when search results favor one candidate , cause or company .
He calls the shift `` SEME , '' for the Search Engine Manipulation Effect .
His first scientific paper on SEME was published in the Proceedings of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ SEME , he noted , also has been replicated by a research team at one of the Max Planck Institutes in Germany .
Epstein warned that SEME is one of the most powerful forms of influence ever discovered in the behavioral sciences , particularly because it is invisible to people , or subliminal , in effect .
`` It leaves people thinking they have made up their own minds , which is very much an illusion , '' he told the Senate Committee .
`` It also leaves no paper trail for authorities @ @ @ @ @ @ @ very few people who can detect bias in search results shift even farther in the direction of the bias , so merely being able to see the bias does n't protect you from it . ''
SEME , he said , is an example of an `` ephemeral experience , '' deliberately engineered to change someone 's thinking .
Epstein noted to WND on Wednesday that Google internal emails leaked to the Wall Street Journal showed the company created `` ephemeral experiences '' to change people 's views about Trump 's ban on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ companies understand what 's at stake and that 's why they are being so brazen , '' he said .
`` If they are brazen about Breitbart , imagine what they are doing with ephemeral experiences and search results . ''
He also pointed to the power of YouTube 's manipulation of videos through its `` up-next '' algorithm , which pushes to users subsequent videos of YouTube 's choice .
Some 70 % of videos people watch on YouTube are suggested by its up next algorithm , Epstein said .
He and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ power that algorithm possesses to influence votes and opinions .
`` If a platform wants to shift people 's views and votes , you ca n't counteract what they 're doing , '' he said .
`` In most cases , you ca n't even see what they are doing – unless you are monitoring . ''
Epstein said a member of the Senate committee asked him for questions to pose to the Big Tech CEOs on Wednesday .
`` Generally speaking they are not asking the right questions , '' he said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ could give some of the CEOs , including Google parent Alphabet 's Sundar Pichai , `` a stroke on live TV ... because I know the truth . ''
`` It 's not just I know the numbers , but I 've been talking to whistleblowers for quite a while and talking about people who are considering becoming whistleblowers , '' Epstein said .
He believes a significant way to hold the tech titans accountable is for states to bring charges for illegal in-kind contributions .
`` If you are Facebook sending targeted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that is a massive in-kind campaign contribution that is illegal , '' he contended .
Last August , as WND reported , President Trump spotlighted Epstein 's study concluding Google manipulated millions of votes in favor of Hillary Clinton in 2016 .
The former secretary of state responded , contending the study had been `` debunked . ''
Epstein , who voted for Clinton in 2016 , fired back on Twitter , stating `` to my knowledge no credible authority has ever 'debunked ' either my 2016 and 2018 election monitoring projects or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ '' Epstein pointed out his `` 2016 monitoring findings were based on an analysis of 13,207 election-related searches , along with the 98,044 web pages to which the search results linked . ''
He said the `` pro-Hillary bias was significant at the .001 level . ''
In his testimony to the Senate in July , Epstein warned that Google is working to ensure that Trump does not win reelection in 2020 .
In an interview with WND in December 2018 , Epstein pointed to a video leaked in September 2018 that showed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ after the election of Donald Trump in 2016 exhibiting panic and dismay while expressing their determination to thwart the new administration 's agenda as well as the emerging global populist movement .
`` You heard people saying it .
It 's not my imagination , '' Epstein said .
Noting again that he voted for Clinton , he told WND , `` I don ’ t care whether I share those values or not , a private company not elected by the people should not have that kind of power . ''
But @ @ @ @ @ @ @ around the world , not just in the U.S. , he noted .
He estimated that the outcomes of about 25 % of elections around the world are being determined by Google ’ s search algorithm .
A senior software engineer at Google admitted in a July 2019 interview with Project Veritas that the tech giants are not politically neutral and that his company manipulates search algorithms `` to do what we want them to do . ''
`` It 's time to decide , do we run the technology , or does @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Greg Coppola , who worked on artificial intelligence and the popular Google Assistant software .
`` Are we going to just let the biggest tech companies decide who wins every election from now on ? ''
After the interview was published , Google put Coppola on administrative leave .
Project Veritas asked Coppola about CEO Pichai 's testimony to Congress in December 2018 in which he insisted Google 's algorithms are politically unbiased .
Coppola began by expressing his respect for Sundar as a manager and noted that the Google Assistant on which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 's Siri , `` really does n't have a political bias . ''
However , regarding Google 's algorithms , he said it 's `` ridiculous to say that there 's no bias . ''
`` I think everyone who supports anything other than the Democrats , anyone who 's pro-Trump or in any way deviates from what CNN and the New York Times are pushing , notices how bad it is , '' he said .

For Harvard-trained research psychologist and Democratic voter Robert Epstein, the question isn't whether or not Google and other Silicon Valley giants are manipulating their searches and feeds to make sure Donald Trump doesn't win reelection.
A supporter of Hillary Clinton in 2016 and Joe Biden in 2020, he told WND in an interview Wednesday he has statistical evidence to back up the tech titans' bias, derived from more than seven years of research, internal documents, emails, videos and the testimony of whistleblowers.
He has testified to Congress that Google manipulation of search results could have cost Trump 2.6 million votes in 2016. In 2020, he believes, as many as 15 million votes could be manipulated.
And as Silicon Valley CEOs testified to Congress Wednesday about their outsized influence, there was "anecdotal" evidence, such as the claim of Breitbart News that Google has manipulated its algorithm to curb traffic to the site and those of other conservative outlets. On May 1, for example, a Google search for "Joe Biden" resulted in 30,000 impressions for Breitbart News links. After May 5, it dropped to zero.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
What is needed now, Epstein believes, is to follow up his research in 2016 and 2018 with a large-scale system of field agents in every swing state to monitor Google, YouTube, Twitter, Facebook and others in real time.
He had the funding lined up to launch the ambitious project in February, but the money "dried up" he said, when the coronavirus hit and "sucked all of the oxygen out of Washington."
Now, with interest returning to the election, he has the people and systems in place and just needs the money. Many small donations have come in, he said, but he needs much more to pull it off – about $10 million.
Is Big Tech interfering with the 2020 presidential election? Yes No Completing this poll entitles you to WND news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use You're logged in to Facebook. Click here to log out. 99% (380 Votes) 1% (3 Votes)
He emphasized to WND he is not a Trump supporter but a "supporter of democracy." He wants Joe Biden to win, but he wants the election to be fair, recognizing that in the future the tech giants could put their massive power behind a candidate he doesn't want.
"It's not in our interest to turn the election over to Google and the gang," he said. "To give them carte blanche is insane."
The goal of his monitoring project is to force the tech companies "to back off in the swing states."
"And when we do get them to back off, we will be able to detect that," he said.
But much more funding is needed "to do this in a credible way that would be taken seriously by the courts and also by mainstream media."
"We have people on standby, we have a very ambitious program of what we want to monitor," explained Epstein, a senior research psychologist at the American Institute for Behavioral Research and Technology in Vista, California.
The plan is to do a "real time analysis so we can make announcements almost every day if we find bias in news feeds, tweet suppression and the sequence of YouTube videos."
All of that would be reported to Congress, journalists and the Federal Trade Commission.
He said he's getting calls from Congress members, senators, attorneys general and others, but there's no money.
"There is so much as stake here that I'm dumbfounded," he said. "This is the watershed year, where we either turn over democracy to the tech companies – and maybe never get it back again – or we fight them."
Epstein – who was famed behavioral psychologist B.F. Skinner's last Ph.D. student at Harvard – has been a research psychologist for nearly 40 years. He has served in various editorial positions at Psychology Today magazine and Scientific American MIND. He's the author of 15 books and more than 300 scientific and mainstream articles on artificial intelligence and other topics.
'Serious threat to democracy'
In testimony one year ago to the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution, he emphasized he is "not a conservative."
"I am here today for three reasons: to explain why Google presents a serious threat to democracy and human autonomy, to explain how passive monitoring systems can protect us both now and in the future from companies like Google, and to tell you how Congress can immediately end Google’s worldwide monopoly on search."
He found in 2016 that biased results generated by Google's search algorithm likely impacted undecided voters in a way that gave at least 2.6 million votes to Hillary Clinton.
He based that on his preservation of more than 13,000
election-related searches conducted by a diverse group of Americans on Google, Bing, and Yahoo in the weeks leading up to the election.
Google search results were significantly biased in favor of Clinton, he found, in all 10 positions on the first page of search results in both blue states and red states.
Epstein said he knows the number of votes that shifted because he conducted dozens of controlled experiments in the U.S. and other countries that measure precisely how opinions and votes shift when search results favor one candidate, cause or company.
He calls the shift "SEME," for the Search Engine Manipulation Effect.
His first scientific paper on SEME was published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences in 2015. SEME, he noted, also has been replicated by a research team at one of the Max Planck Institutes in Germany.
Epstein warned that SEME is one of the most powerful forms of influence ever discovered in the behavioral sciences, particularly because it is invisible to people, or subliminal, in effect.
"It leaves people thinking they have made up their own minds, which is very much an illusion," he told the Senate Committee. "It also leaves no paper trail for authorities to trace. Worse still, the very few people who can detect bias in search results shift even farther in the direction of the bias, so merely being able to see the bias doesn't protect you from it."
SEME, he said, is an example of an "ephemeral experience," deliberately engineered to change someone's thinking.
Epstein noted to WND on Wednesday that Google internal emails leaked to the Wall Street Journal showed the company created "ephemeral experiences" to change people's views about Trump's ban on travel from terrorist nations.
"These companies understand what's at stake and that's why they are being so brazen," he said. "If they are brazen about Breitbart, imagine what they are doing with ephemeral experiences and search results."
He also pointed to the power of YouTube's manipulation of videos through its "up-next" algorithm, which pushes to users subsequent videos of YouTube's choice.
Some 70% of videos people watch on YouTube are suggested by its up next algorithm, Epstein said.
He and his team are studying and measuring the power that algorithm possesses to influence votes and opinions.
"If a platform wants to shift people's views and votes, you can't counteract what they're doing," he said. "In most cases, you can't even see what they are doing – unless you are monitoring."
Epstein said a member of the Senate committee asked him for questions to pose to the Big Tech CEOs on Wednesday.
"Generally speaking they are not asking the right questions," he said of the lawmakers.
Epstein said he could give some of the CEOs, including Google parent Alphabet's Sundar Pichai, "a stroke on live TV ... because I know the truth."
"It's not just I know the numbers, but I've been talking to whistleblowers for quite a while and talking about people who are considering becoming whistleblowers," Epstein said.
He believes a significant way to hold the tech titans accountable is for states to bring charges for illegal in-kind contributions.
"If you are Facebook sending targeted messages only to Democrats to vote, that is a massive in-kind campaign contribution that is illegal," he contended.
'Debunked' study?
Last August, as WND reported, President Trump spotlighted Epstein's study concluding Google manipulated millions of votes in favor of Hillary Clinton in 2016.
The former secretary of state responded, contending the study had been "debunked."
Epstein, who voted for Clinton in 2016, fired back on Twitter, stating "to my knowledge no credible authority has ever 'debunked' either my 2016 and 2018 election monitoring projects or my controlled studies on internet influence."
Epstein pointed out his "2016 monitoring findings were based on an analysis of 13,207 election-related searches, along with the 98,044 web pages to which the search results linked."
He said the "pro-Hillary bias was significant at the .001 level."
In his testimony to the Senate in July, Epstein warned that Google is working to ensure that Trump does not win reelection in 2020.
In an interview with WND in December 2018, Epstein pointed to a video leaked in September 2018 that showed Google executives at their first weekly meeting after the election of Donald Trump in 2016 exhibiting panic and dismay while expressing their determination to thwart the new administration's agenda as well as the emerging global populist movement.
"You heard people saying it. It's not my imagination," Epstein said.
Noting again that he voted for Clinton, he told WND, "I don’t care whether I share those values or not, a private company not elected by the people should not have that kind of power."
But Google has that power in 200 countries around the world, not just in the U.S., he noted.
"That's obscene," Epstein said.
He estimated that the outcomes of about 25% of elections around the world are being determined by Google’s search algorithm.
Not politically neutral
A senior software engineer at Google admitted in a July 2019 interview with Project Veritas that the tech giants are not politically neutral and that his company manipulates search algorithms "to do what we want them to do."
"It's time to decide, do we run the technology, or does the technology run us?" said Greg Coppola, who worked on artificial intelligence and the popular Google Assistant software.
"Are we going to just let the biggest tech companies decide who wins every election from now on?"
After the interview was published, Google put Coppola on administrative leave.
Project Veritas asked Coppola about CEO Pichai's testimony to Congress in December 2018 in which he insisted Google's algorithms are politically unbiased.
Coppola began by expressing his respect for Sundar as a manager and noted that the Google Assistant on which he works, the counterpart to Apple's Siri, "really doesn't have a political bias."
However, regarding Google's algorithms, he said it's "ridiculous to say that there's no bias."
"I think everyone who supports anything other than the Democrats, anyone who's pro-Trump or in any way deviates from what CNN and the New York Times are pushing, notices how bad it is," he said.


wnd--2020-07-29--Congressman calls Democrats' attacks on Trump 'treasonous'

A House Republican charges Democrats ' attacks Donald Trump during the 2016 election and when he assumed the Oval Office are `` treasonous . ''
U.S. Rep. Greg Steube , R-Fla. , rebuked the FBI and said criminal charges are likely because `` the level to which this agency and these individuals were trying to thwart an incoming president , to me , is treasonous , '' reported Just the News .
In an interview on the `` John Solomon Reports '' podcast , he said if it 's unclear now , it should become `` abundantly clear when these @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in this through the Durham probe that ... this was a politicized , weaponized FBI at the highest level that was solely trying to take down a presidential campaign and then an incumbent president once he got sworn in—and that should scare every American . ''
U.S. Attorney John Durham is leading a criminal investigation into the Obama administration 's probe of now-debunk allegations of Trump campaign collusion with Russia .
TRENDING : Ghislaine Maxwell allegedly took topless photos of girls as a 'hobby' Special counsel Robert Mueller 's two-year-plus investigation could n't @ @ @ @ @ @ @ General Michael Horowitz found 17 significant `` errors or omissions '' in the Obama administration 's effort to obtain warrants to spy on the Trump campaign .
Steube said there should be consequences for not only lies to Congress but also `` misrepresentations '' to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court .
He said the controversy has left the once highly esteemed FBI a `` completely discredited '' agency .

A House Republican charges Democrats' attacks on Donald Trump during the 2016 election and when he assumed the Oval Office are "treasonous."
U.S. Rep. Greg Steube, R-Fla., rebuked the FBI and said criminal charges are likely because "the level to which this agency and these individuals were trying to thwart an incoming president, to me, is treasonous," reported Just the News.
In an interview on the "John Solomon Reports" podcast, he said if it's unclear now, it should become "abundantly clear when these indictments start coming out for individuals involved in this through the Durham probe that ... this was a politicized, weaponized FBI at the highest level that was solely trying to take down a presidential campaign and then an incumbent president once he got sworn in—and that should scare every American."
U.S. Attorney John Durham is leading a criminal investigation into the Obama administration's probe of now-debunk allegations of Trump campaign collusion with Russia.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
Special counsel Robert Mueller's two-year-plus investigation couldn't find evidence of collusion. DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz found 17 significant "errors or omissions" in the Obama administration's effort to obtain warrants to spy on the Trump campaign.
Steube said there should be consequences for not only lies to Congress but also "misrepresentations" to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.
He said the controversy has left the once highly esteemed FBI a "completely discredited" agency .


wnd--2020-07-29--Time for rioters to 'feel the burn' of the 'Crowd Buster' tool

The late 19th century saw conflicts break out in the western United States over grazing rights between those raising cattle and those raising sheep .
Sometimes , one side or the other brought in a `` hired gun '' – a gunman who was notorious for quickly effecting a result by employing a no-nonsense approach .
As the violence of rioters in Portland and elsewhere continues , causing serious injury to those defending federal property , the time has come for law enforcement to take a no-nonsense approach .
They need to bring in their `` hired gun . ''
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the inventories of both the military and civilian law enforcement .
However , it is unlike anything rioters in this country have ever before experienced .
It has been employed most effectively in Afghanistan .
But , before explaining its effectiveness , we first need explain why its use is now needed .
Rioters in Portland have been relentless for two months , hellbent on destroying property , disrupting local traffic flow , endangering citizens and injuring law enforcement officers .
They feed upon the mob mentality , finding courage in large @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , rioters have numbered over a thousand people , sometimes rising to four times that number .
Most revealing about the `` oppression '' they would have us believe they have suffered is that they will happily come together to party until darkness falls .
Then the Dr. Jekyll partiers turn into the Mr. Hyde criminal element .
Their dark side emerges as they seek to impose destruction upon their city in retaliation for a supposed oppression they never suffered .
Operating within the dark shadows of a human sea of anonymity , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ weaponry to assault those daring to deny them an outlet for their destructive rage .
Even innocent locals who happened to stumble in the way have suffered the consequences .
The weapons used have included bats , firecrackers , smoke bombs , guns , Molotov cocktails , knives , slingshot-fired ball bearings , etc .
The malicious intentions of rioters to do bodily harm is further demonstrated as some firecrackers thrown at police have been wrapped in nails to increase the injury potential .
The nature of these weapons should dispel the lie @ @ @ @ @ @ @ D-N.Y. , recently told that these were peaceful protests and any claim of violence was a `` myth . ''
TRENDING : Ghislaine Maxwell allegedly took topless photos of girls as a 'hobby' In a more recent attack , rioters used lasers against federal officers in Portland .
This resulted in three officers , defending the federal courthouse , suffering possible permanent blindness by the cowardly act .
Additionally , at one point , rioters tried setting the courthouse on fire with federal officers still inside .
Some rioters have brought their young @ @ @ @ @ @ @ obscenities at law enforcement officers or hold up signs with such messages .
They have attempted to employ human shields at times to protect them from the police so they could pelt officers with various objects .
These human shields have varied from mothers of the rioters linking arms to fathers doing so and , to avoid arrest , wearing fake press credentials .
In an effort to deny law enforcement a non-lethal means of defending itself , some liberal local politicians have banned the use of tear gas .
While both Seattle @ @ @ @ @ @ @ former 's was overturned by a judge .
The conduct of the rioters shows no signs of abating .
It has police so concerned as liberal government leaders fail to support them financially or otherwise that over 100 law enforcement agencies recently announced they would not provide security for the Democratic Party 's convention .
Meanwhile , Seattle police inform local business owners they are on their own to protect their properties .
Shockingly , mob violence seems to be part of the Democratic Party 's 2020 platform .
They blocked a Republican @ @ @ @ @ @ @ again claiming it was not needed as the protests were peaceful .
Since it is the not the size of the fight in the crowd but the size of the crowd in the fight providing rioters with a backbone , and with their close access to federal officers allowing them to inflict injury , it is time for law enforcement to introduce rioters to the `` crowd buster '' – the `` Active Denial System '' ( ADS ) .
ADS is a directed-energy weapon system developed by Raytheon several years ago .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ radio frequency beam ( a type of electromagnetic radiation ) onto a target , causing a very hot , skin-surface burning sensation .
This gives ADS the additional name of the `` heat '' or `` pain '' ray .
ADS actually works similar to a microwave oven .
There is one big difference , however ; while the microwave cooks meat from the inside out , ADS only penetrates the skin 's surface up to 1/64th of an inch .
But that penetration is sufficiently unbearable to force any victim within the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nearest escape route .
You will never see a snowflake move quicker to look for `` safe space '' than when targeted by ADS .
This system is one of the most effective non-lethal weapons designed to preserve perimeter security and crowd control .
And , as volunteers who have experienced it will attest , exposure causes absolutely no permanent injury .
For rioters , it is the equivalent of an adult receiving a severe paddling for misbehavior – one never to be forgotten .
While `` feel the Bern '' might be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rioters , `` feeling the burn '' of the ADS will have no similar effect .
It will leave them discombobulated as they run to find an escape route .
Thousands of people rioting in Portland for two months is an obvious indication these miscreants have too much time on their hands .
As local police stand down , the rioting and destruction continues , only encouraged by police inaction .
One ADS zap will go a long way to reorient such destructive thinking .

The late 19th century saw conflicts break out in the western United States over grazing rights between those raising cattle and those raising sheep. Sometimes, one side or the other brought in a "hired gun" – a gunman who was notorious for quickly effecting a result by employing a no-nonsense approach.
As the violence of rioters in Portland and elsewhere continues, causing serious injury to those defending federal property, the time has come for law enforcement to take a no-nonsense approach. They need to bring in their "hired gun."
This gun is a weapon currently found in the inventories of both the military and civilian law enforcement. However, it is unlike anything rioters in this country have ever before experienced. It has been employed most effectively in Afghanistan. But, before explaining its effectiveness, we first need explain why its use is now needed.
Rioters in Portland have been relentless for two months, hellbent on destroying property, disrupting local traffic flow, endangering citizens and injuring law enforcement officers. They feed upon the mob mentality, finding courage in large numbers. For the last 50 days, rioters have numbered over a thousand people, sometimes rising to four times that number. Most revealing about the "oppression" they would have us believe they have suffered is that they will happily come together to party until darkness falls. Then the Dr. Jekyll partiers turn into the Mr. Hyde criminal element. Their dark side emerges as they seek to impose destruction upon their city in retaliation for a supposed oppression they never suffered.
Operating within the dark shadows of a human sea of anonymity, rioters have used a wide range of weaponry to assault those daring to deny them an outlet for their destructive rage. Even innocent locals who happened to stumble in the way have suffered the consequences. The weapons used have included bats, firecrackers, smoke bombs, guns, Molotov cocktails, knives, slingshot-fired ball bearings, etc. The malicious intentions of rioters to do bodily harm is further demonstrated as some firecrackers thrown at police have been wrapped in nails to increase the injury potential. The nature of these weapons should dispel the lie House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y., recently told that these were peaceful protests and any claim of violence was a "myth."
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
In a more recent attack, rioters used lasers against federal officers in Portland. This resulted in three officers, defending the federal courthouse, suffering possible permanent blindness by the cowardly act. Additionally, at one point, rioters tried setting the courthouse on fire with federal officers still inside.
Some rioters have brought their young children along, teaching them to yell obscenities at law enforcement officers or hold up signs with such messages. They have attempted to employ human shields at times to protect them from the police so they could pelt officers with various objects. These human shields have varied from mothers of the rioters linking arms to fathers doing so and, to avoid arrest, wearing fake press credentials.
In an effort to deny law enforcement a non-lethal means of defending itself, some liberal local politicians have banned the use of tear gas. While both Seattle and Portland enacted such bans, the former's was overturned by a judge.
The conduct of the rioters shows no signs of abating. It has police so concerned as liberal government leaders fail to support them financially or otherwise that over 100 law enforcement agencies recently announced they would not provide security for the Democratic Party's convention. Meanwhile, Seattle police inform local business owners they are on their own to protect their properties.
Is it time to use the high-energy-microwave 'Crowd Buster' to stop the riots? Yes No Completing this poll entitles you to WND news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use You're logged in to Facebook. Click here to log out. 99% (955 Votes) 1% (11 Votes)
Shockingly, mob violence seems to be part of the Democratic Party's 2020 platform. They blocked a Republican resolution in Congress condemning such activity, again claiming it was not needed as the protests were peaceful.
Since it is the not the size of the fight in the crowd but the size of the crowd in the fight providing rioters with a backbone, and with their close access to federal officers allowing them to inflict injury, it is time for law enforcement to introduce rioters to the "crowd buster" – the "Active Denial System" (ADS).
ADS is a directed-energy weapon system developed by Raytheon several years ago. It generates and focuses a high-energy millmeterwave radio frequency beam (a type of electromagnetic radiation) onto a target, causing a very hot, skin-surface burning sensation. This gives ADS the additional name of the "heat" or "pain" ray.
ADS actually works similar to a microwave oven. There is one big difference, however; while the microwave cooks meat from the inside out, ADS only penetrates the skin's surface up to 1/64th of an inch. But that penetration is sufficiently unbearable to force any victim within the beam's path to immediately seek the nearest escape route. You will never see a snowflake move quicker to look for "safe space" than when targeted by ADS.
This system is one of the most effective non-lethal weapons designed to preserve perimeter security and crowd control. And, as volunteers who have experienced it will attest, exposure causes absolutely no permanent injury. For rioters, it is the equivalent of an adult receiving a severe paddling for misbehavior – one never to be forgotten. While "feel the Bern" might be a draw for many progressives among these rioters, "feeling the burn" of the ADS will have no similar effect. It will leave them discombobulated as they run to find an escape route.
Thousands of people rioting in Portland for two months is an obvious indication these miscreants have too much time on their hands. As local police stand down, the rioting and destruction continues, only encouraged by police inaction. One ADS zap will go a long way to reorient such destructive thinking.


wnd--2020-07-29--How Fusion GPS saved Planned Parenthood

How Fusion GPS saved Planned Parenthood

Other than Robert Mueller just about every American who follows the news has heard of Fusion GPS , the `` strategic intelligence '' firm best-known for its role in creating the infamous Steele Dossier in 2016 .
Although eventually busted for that caper , Fusion still has not been called to account for its equally duplicitous role in saving Planned Parenthood 's bacon a year earlier .
In the way of background , independent journalists David Daleiden and Sandra Merritt created a sham biomedical research company called `` Biomax Procurement Services '' to investigate Planned Parenthood 's trafficking of `` @ @ @ @ @ @ @ `` baby parts . ''
Over a period lasting more than two years , the highly disciplined twosome worked their way into the good graces of Planned Parenthood clinicians in several states and captured on camera the chilling words and deeds of the practitioners in the nation 's least-regulated major industry .
In July 2015 , Daleiden started dropping the videos .
The combination of callow words and cruel images , repeated in one video after another , rocked Washington .
TRENDING : Ghislaine Maxwell allegedly took topless photos of girls as a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2016 presidential campaigns were revving up , and many Republicans spoke out about what they saw .
`` The out-of-sight , out-of-mind mantra that propelled the pro-choice movement for decades is forever gone , '' Kellyanne Conway , then a Republican pollster , told the New York Times .
Reeling from the blow , even the Times had to wonder whether `` the new offensive will succeed in crippling Planned Parenthood . ''
Barack Obama , the first president to speak at Planned Parenthood 's national convention , kept his distance from the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ closer to the president than his press secretary , Josh Earnest .
On July 30 , 2015 , a young reporter asked Earnest if Obama had seen the video that was released on that day .
The video in question begins with interview footage of then Planned Parenthood president Cecile Richards insisting , `` It 's not a fee .
It 's not a fee .
It 's just the cost of transmitting this material . ''
The undercover footage that follows undercuts everything Richards said .
A doctor at a mega Planned @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the clinic 's traffic in body parts .
Aware that it is illegal to transfer `` human fetal tissue '' for `` valuable consideration , '' the doctor plays semantic games with the would-be purchasers .
`` We do n't want to get called on , you know , selling fetal parts across states , '' she jokes , unaware she is being recorded .
This interview is followed by an on-site review of actual body parts with the doctor and a clinician .
What is impressive is how well Daleiden and Merritt @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is unnerving is how casually the doctor and clinician pick through trays of baby parts – a heart , a brain , a lung – while talking about the commercial viability of the `` fetal cadaver . ''
At the press conference , Earnest appeared to be bored by the whole subject .
He did not know if Obama had seen the video in question or any of the videos and did not think it mattered .
Running for president at the time , Hillary Clinton could not afford to be so dismissive @ @ @ @ @ @ @ attack the video producers , Clinton herself began to waver as each new video dropped .
`` I have seen pictures from [ the videos ] and obviously find them disturbing , '' Clinton told the New Hampshire Union Leader late that July .
No one knew better than Clinton , however , what overwhelming force Planned Parenthood and its allies in the Democratic-media complex could bring to bear against a pair of citizen journalists .
For immediate assistance , Planned Parenthood hired the fixers at Fusion to review the unedited footage Daleiden @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 10-page report from Fusion , Richards went on the offensive .
Convincing people they did not see what they saw would not be easy , but the networks made the task possible by refusing to show the actual videos .
As to the newspapers and online journals , they welcomed Fusion 's `` forensic study '' as heartily as they would its preposterous `` Steele Dossier '' a year later .
According to the Washington Post , Fusion 's Glenn Simpson `` enlisted experts who analyzed both the short , highly produced videos @ @ @ @ @ @ @ well as hours of 'full ' footage the group posted on YouTube . ''
This took no great effort or skill .
Fusion GPS reviewed only the first four videos and supporting footage .
The Post could and should have done its own analysis , but by 2015 , it did not much matter .
The Post was as deep in the tank for Planned Parenthood as were the paid shills at Fusion GPS .
The Times headlined its story , `` Planned Parenthood Videos Were Altered , Analysis Finds . ''
Deep @ @ @ @ @ @ @ `` found no evidence that CMP inserted dialogue not spoken by Planned Parenthood staff , '' but the headline did the damage .
To complete the rout , prosecutorial friends of Planned Parenthood , both in Texas and California , brought utterly bogus criminal charges against Daleiden and Merritt .
Mainstream journalists yawned , even cheered .
As the 2016 presidential campaign wound its way to its expected conclusion , Planned Parenthood Action felt confident enough to ridicule Daleiden and Merritt for their `` fake , criminal videos . ''
Hillary Clinton felt @ @ @ @ @ @ @ her first speech as presumptive nominee at one of its events .
Hillary was on a winning streak , at least until she was n't .
If she chose to believe Fusion GPS , millions of Americans preferred to believe their own eyes .
And on Nov. 8 , 2016 , they made up their own minds .
@ jackcashill 's forthcoming book , `` Unmasking Obama : The Fight to Tell the True Story of a Failed Presidency , '' is available for pre-order .

Other than Robert Mueller just about every American who follows the news has heard of Fusion GPS, the "strategic intelligence" firm best-known for its role in creating the infamous Steele Dossier in 2016.
Although eventually busted for that caper, Fusion still has not been called to account for its equally duplicitous role in saving Planned Parenthood's bacon a year earlier.
In the way of background, independent journalists David Daleiden and Sandra Merritt created a sham biomedical research company called "Biomax Procurement Services" to investigate Planned Parenthood's trafficking of "fetal tissue," a euphemism for "baby parts."
Over a period lasting more than two years, the highly disciplined twosome worked their way into the good graces of Planned Parenthood clinicians in several states and captured on camera the chilling words and deeds of the practitioners in the nation's least-regulated major industry.
In July 2015, Daleiden started dropping the videos. The combination of callow words and cruel images, repeated in one video after another, rocked Washington.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
The timing was good. The 2016 presidential campaigns were revving up, and many Republicans spoke out about what they saw. "The out-of-sight, out-of-mind mantra that propelled the pro-choice movement for decades is forever gone," Kellyanne Conway, then a Republican pollster, told the New York Times.
Reeling from the blow, even the Times had to wonder whether "the new offensive will succeed in crippling Planned Parenthood."
Barack Obama, the first president to speak at Planned Parenthood's national convention, kept his distance from the hubbub. An indifferent media got no closer to the president than his press secretary, Josh Earnest.
On July 30, 2015, a young reporter asked Earnest if Obama had seen the video that was released on that day. The video in question begins with interview footage of then Planned Parenthood president Cecile Richards insisting, "It's not a fee. It's not a fee. It's just the cost of transmitting this material." The undercover footage that follows undercuts everything Richards said.
A doctor at a mega Planned Parenthood clinic in Colorado is seen explaining the clinic's traffic in body parts. Aware that it is illegal to transfer "human fetal tissue" for "valuable consideration," the doctor plays semantic games with the would-be purchasers.
"We don't want to get called on, you know, selling fetal parts across states," she jokes, unaware she is being recorded. This interview is followed by an on-site review of actual body parts with the doctor and a clinician.
What is impressive is how well Daleiden and Merritt play their roles as buyers. What is unnerving is how casually the doctor and clinician pick through trays of baby parts – a heart, a brain, a lung – while talking about the commercial viability of the "fetal cadaver."
At the press conference, Earnest appeared to be bored by the whole subject. He did not know if Obama had seen the video in question or any of the videos and did not think it mattered.
Running for president at the time, Hillary Clinton could not afford to be so dismissive. Although her first instinct was to attack the video producers, Clinton herself began to waver as each new video dropped.
"I have seen pictures from [the videos] and obviously find them disturbing," Clinton told the New Hampshire Union Leader late that July. No one knew better than Clinton, however, what overwhelming force Planned Parenthood and its allies in the Democratic-media complex could bring to bear against a pair of citizen journalists.
For immediate assistance, Planned Parenthood hired the fixers at Fusion to review the unedited footage Daleiden had posted online.
Armed with a 10-page report from Fusion, Richards went on the offensive. Convincing people they did not see what they saw would not be easy, but the networks made the task possible by refusing to show the actual videos.
As to the newspapers and online journals, they welcomed Fusion's "forensic study" as heartily as they would its preposterous "Steele Dossier" a year later.
According to the Washington Post, Fusion's Glenn Simpson "enlisted experts who analyzed both the short, highly produced videos publicized by the antiabortion group, as well as hours of 'full' footage the group posted on YouTube."
This took no great effort or skill. Fusion GPS reviewed only the first four videos and supporting footage.
The Post could and should have done its own analysis, but by 2015, it did not much matter. The Post was as deep in the tank for Planned Parenthood as were the paid shills at Fusion GPS.
The Times headlined its story, "Planned Parenthood Videos Were Altered, Analysis Finds." Deep in the copy, Fusion admitted they "found no evidence that CMP inserted dialogue not spoken by Planned Parenthood staff," but the headline did the damage.
To complete the rout, prosecutorial friends of Planned Parenthood, both in Texas and California, brought utterly bogus criminal charges against Daleiden and Merritt. Mainstream journalists yawned, even cheered.
As the 2016 presidential campaign wound its way to its expected conclusion, Planned Parenthood Action felt confident enough to ridicule Daleiden and Merritt for their "fake, criminal videos."
Hillary Clinton felt comfortable enough with Planned Parenthood to make her first speech as presumptive nominee at one of its events.
Hillary was on a winning streak, at least until she wasn't. If she chose to believe Fusion GPS, millions of Americans preferred to believe their own eyes. And on Nov. 8, 2016, they made up their own minds.
@jackcashill's forthcoming book, "Unmasking Obama: The Fight to Tell the True Story of a Failed Presidency," is available for pre-order.


wnd--2020-07-29--The 'garbage in, garbage out' culture we've created

It should go without saying that Americans have been wound pretty tight over the last five months due to the COVID-19 pandemic .
Aside from concerns over contracting the illness or infecting others ( I know many health care providers who remain quite worried over the latter aspect ) , social distancing , quarantining and mask requirements have added heretofore unknown levels of stress to activities as mundane as going to the grocery store .
The outbreaks of protracted civil unrest that have plagued our urban areas since May have certainly compounded these stresses .
While the pretext for widespread @ @ @ @ @ @ @ man by a white police officer in Minneapolis on May 25 , as we have seen , these demonstrations have been completely co-opted by radical leftists who have prolonged the protests and escalated the violence .
It would be one thing if some sort of leader or leaders among the protesters had emerged with clear objectives and an intent to sit down with government representatives to ameliorate the problem of police brutality against blacks , or racism amongst law enforcement personnel or whatever it is that 's vexing them .
All we 've @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and escalating violence , with inane , juvenile calls to dismantle police departments and end `` systemic racism . ''
We 've all been deeply disturbed by the video footage of riots that appear to have no objective other than fomenting destruction and chaos , and gangs of young blacks punching or kicking cowering white unfortunates into insensibility .
Tangential to the so-called race protests , we 've also seen several cases where very young children – in these instances , black children – have been killed by bullets fired by people supposedly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ But there 's also been an upswell of senseless violence that is occurring far away from the Black Lives Matter and Antifa protests .
Speaking to a general sense of societal breakdown , it appears that an increasing number of people perceive that they now have the latitude to engage in all manner of antisocial behavior .
TRENDING : Ghislaine Maxwell allegedly took topless photos of girls as a 'hobby' Last Saturday at a recreation center in Memphis , Tennessee , 300 to 400 teenagers began destroying the establishment after management refused to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stopped working .
One teenager reportedly set off fireworks inside the building , causing damage to the interior .
According to news reports , surveillance video of the establishment revealed that none of the teens engaging in the destruction were wearing masks .
And speaking of masks , it also appears that some people have decided they 're well within their rights to assault or even kill others over their failure to wear a mask in public places .
In just a few months , there have been innumerable instances of individuals who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the criminal justice system on a moment 's notice regarding this particular offense .
Finally , a nationwide spike in violent crime unrelated to the pandemic or BLM protests is currently being covered across many media venues .
A Christian might call all of this the work of the devil , while others would cite a proliferation of dark energies .
Colloquially , some might say that folks are `` losing their s -- t. '' In any case , there 's a great deal of dark whatever-it-is in the air these @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 's no need for me to argue that the protracted rioting is being orchestrated by radical influencers , and that there 's a very real element of Democratic politicians – you know , the ones who are doing nothing as their cities burn – hoping that the unrest can be extended long enough to have the desired effect upon the general election in November ( i.e.
, a defeat of President Trump ) .
I 've articulated all of this before , and enough people are coming to these realizations that it is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ What 's more important now – particularly for those who are n't familiar with the political dynamic at hand – is understanding how we got here .
Because while it 's gratifying to see that a majority of Americans do n't want their nation to burn , an understanding of the process will be integral to citizens keeping their wits about them as we seek solutions , rather than signing up for knee-jerk , imprudent remedies .
For decades , people such as myself have been pointing out that government , the press @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by radical leftists and that the twisted cultural sensibilities they espouse have been promulgated by those in the entertainment industry .
This has given rise to a generation of young people who have been thoroughly indoctrinated into a culture of entitlement , narcissism , fear , anger , resentment and victimhood .
In my view , it is in no way surprising that these young people , who have been alternately traumatized and coddled , passed along in school and showered with participation trophies are willing to violently rebel because they 're not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as myself have been pointing out for decades that it probably was n't such a good idea to welcome into our country millions of people who either have very little to contribute to our society or hate it outright ; further , that granting these people citizenship was manifestly insane .
Inasmuch as these entreaties were completely ignored , it should be in no way surprising that we now have first- and second-generation citizens who have risen to elected office and are now espousing policies that reflect their hatred of America , her @ @ @ @ @ @ @ go on with related anecdotes ad nauseam , of course , but the bottom line is that we 're reaping what we 've sown in terms of allowing the political left to dictate the narrative in many areas , particularly as regards social issues and subverted free speech sensibilities .
Or , to use tech parlance , we 're operating under the `` garbage in , garbage out '' paradigm .
We 've created an inferior , buggy program , and until it is re-written , we will continue to suffer with its @ @ @

It should go without saying that Americans have been wound pretty tight over the last five months due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Aside from concerns over contracting the illness or infecting others (I know many health care providers who remain quite worried over the latter aspect), social distancing, quarantining and mask requirements have added heretofore unknown levels of stress to activities as mundane as going to the grocery store.
The outbreaks of protracted civil unrest that have plagued our urban areas since May have certainly compounded these stresses. While the pretext for widespread protests was the killing of a black man by a white police officer in Minneapolis on May 25, as we have seen, these demonstrations have been completely co-opted by radical leftists who have prolonged the protests and escalated the violence.
It would be one thing if some sort of leader or leaders among the protesters had emerged with clear objectives and an intent to sit down with government representatives to ameliorate the problem of police brutality against blacks, or racism amongst law enforcement personnel or whatever it is that's vexing them. All we've seen however, are more widespread protests and escalating violence, with inane, juvenile calls to dismantle police departments and end "systemic racism."
We've all been deeply disturbed by the video footage of riots that appear to have no objective other than fomenting destruction and chaos, and gangs of young blacks punching or kicking cowering white unfortunates into insensibility. Tangential to the so-called race protests, we've also seen several cases where very young children – in these instances, black children – have been killed by bullets fired by people supposedly engaging in "peaceful protests."
But there's also been an upswell of senseless violence that is occurring far away from the Black Lives Matter and Antifa protests. Speaking to a general sense of societal breakdown, it appears that an increasing number of people perceive that they now have the latitude to engage in all manner of antisocial behavior.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
Last Saturday at a recreation center in Memphis, Tennessee, 300 to 400 teenagers began destroying the establishment after management refused to issue refunds for arcade machines that had stopped working. One teenager reportedly set off fireworks inside the building, causing damage to the interior.
According to news reports, surveillance video of the establishment revealed that none of the teens engaging in the destruction were wearing masks.
And speaking of masks, it also appears that some people have decided they're well within their rights to assault or even kill others over their failure to wear a mask in public places. In just a few months, there have been innumerable instances of individuals who have chosen to act as all arms of the criminal justice system on a moment's notice regarding this particular offense. Finally, a nationwide spike in violent crime unrelated to the pandemic or BLM protests is currently being covered across many media venues.
A Christian might call all of this the work of the devil, while others would cite a proliferation of dark energies. Colloquially, some might say that folks are "losing their s--t." In any case, there's a great deal of dark whatever-it-is in the air these days.
At this juncture, there's no need for me to argue that the protracted rioting is being orchestrated by radical influencers, and that there's a very real element of Democratic politicians – you know, the ones who are doing nothing as their cities burn – hoping that the unrest can be extended long enough to have the desired effect upon the general election in November (i.e., a defeat of President Trump). I've articulated all of this before, and enough people are coming to these realizations that it isn't necessary to belabor the point.
What's more important now – particularly for those who aren't familiar with the political dynamic at hand – is understanding how we got here. Because while it's gratifying to see that a majority of Americans don't want their nation to burn, an understanding of the process will be integral to citizens keeping their wits about them as we seek solutions, rather than signing up for knee-jerk, imprudent remedies.
For decades, people such as myself have been pointing out that government, the press and our educational system have been infiltrated by radical leftists and that the twisted cultural sensibilities they espouse have been promulgated by those in the entertainment industry. This has given rise to a generation of young people who have been thoroughly indoctrinated into a culture of entitlement, narcissism, fear, anger, resentment and victimhood. In my view, it is in no way surprising that these young people, who have been alternately traumatized and coddled, passed along in school and showered with participation trophies are willing to violently rebel because they're not millionaires yet.
Similarly, people such as myself have been pointing out for decades that it probably wasn't such a good idea to welcome into our country millions of people who either have very little to contribute to our society or hate it outright; further, that granting these people citizenship was manifestly insane. Inasmuch as these entreaties were completely ignored, it should be in no way surprising that we now have first- and second-generation citizens who have risen to elected office and are now espousing policies that reflect their hatred of America, her culture and her people.
I could go on with related anecdotes ad nauseam, of course, but the bottom line is that we're reaping what we've sown in terms of allowing the political left to dictate the narrative in many areas, particularly as regards social issues and subverted free speech sensibilities.
Or, to use tech parlance, we're operating under the "garbage in, garbage out" paradigm. We've created an inferior, buggy program, and until it is re-written, we will continue to suffer with its miserable functionality.