Here in Israel, we will be celebrating Passover because our flights back to the United States were canceled due to the Coronavirus. We are about to begin celebrating the first night of Passover. Passover is an easily defined holiday for Jews. It is the holiday of Freedom.

The Founders of our great American Republic saw themselves as the Israelites coming from bondage to freedom. The Pilgrims saw themselves that way, and so did the Quakers and many others.

One of the earliest suggestions for the seal of the new United States was Moses parting the Red Sea.

Franklin Roosevelt famously articulated the Four Freedoms on Monday, January 6, 1941. The Four Freedoms that Roosevelt defined were: freedom of speech, freedom of worship, freedom from wont, and freedom from fear. The speech was delivered only 11 months before the attack on Pearl Harbor.

We can think of the freedoms we long for today: freedom of choice; freedom from confinement; freedom from fear; freedom from disease; and freedom from government restrictions, whether necessary or not.

Perhaps in America we do not think enough about our freedom. We often hear the trite expression that freedom is not free. It is of course beyond question that freedom has taken the sacrifice of many millions of Americans over a period of more than 200 years. That is freedom in the macro sense. Today, we think about the micro component of freedom. Our freedom of movement is severely restricted. We feel confined, threatened, and fearful.

The Passover Seder represents the beginning of the New Year. It was a time when the Jews left Egypt as a formerly enslaved people not yet used to the privileges and responsibility of freedom. Initially, they questioned everything and sometimes they did not even understand the significance of the miracles which brought them as wanderers into the desert seeking the promised land, the land of milk and honey.

Jews in Israel are acutely aware of their responsibility to the rest of the world. Israel does set an example of a robust, free democracy surrounded by a sea of hatred and malcontent.

Americans who are not celebrating Passover but are getting ready to celebrate Easter and its message of rebirth can also join as brothers and sisters with the Jewish community in appreciating our freedom and in focusing on how we can make our country and our lives better after the immediate threat of the current pandemic is lifted. How are we going to be better? How are we going to change? What resolutions will we make that we keep, and what resolutions will we make that we cannot keep?

I have taken to making a list of things I would like to see changed in my personal approach, in the way that my business is run and in my community. That is taking on enough. I would like to see plenty of changes on the national and international levels, but if I can just change two or three things in a significant way that improves the quality of my life and the lives of the people around me, that would be very BIG.

Each day, we read more and more bad news about death and suffering in our immediate community, in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, the United States, and the world at large. Perhaps as a civilization and society, we can think about being kinder to our world and more attentive to the spread of disease among the many billions of people whose health we are now the stewards of. When we get back to full steam in the great United States of America, what will we do to prepare for future threats? Perhaps this is the time to put the lid on the nuclear genie and get serious about shutting down nuclear proliferation. Countries like Iran and Syria must be sanctioned until they give up their nuclear ambitions. The great world powers need to cooperate on this goal and it needs to be an apolitical destination as well.

The question of environmental damage and global warming are issues that we should think about when we have time to tackle other great problems.

I once heard a Rabbi give a cute sermon in which he said G-d always taps us on the shoulder first. If we do not listen, we may get a nudge; and finally, we will get hit over the head with a 24. Maybe it is time that we sit up and actually see what is going on in the world around us?

To everyone and their families, friends, loved ones, those without support, those alone and those with families of varying sizes, may you all have a blessed, peaceful, happy and healthy Passover and Easter.

From Bat Galim, Haifa Israel, the Holy Land.

Cliff Rieders is a Board Certified Trial Advocate in Williamsport, is Past President of the Pennsylvania Trial Lawyers Association and a past member of the Pennsylvania Patient Safety Authority.

See original here:

Passover, Freedom and the Coronavirus | Clifford Rieders - The Times of Israel

Dear Mr. President:

Communist China is a strategic threat and presents a rival model of governance to the United States and liberal democracies throughout the world. It is a challenge we must meet and surmount, for the world is watching and awaiting the outcome.

Unlike many of your predecessors, you have commenced confronting this threat, notably the Beijing regimes predatory trade practices that have gutted our nations manufacturing base and stolen the jobs of hardworking Americans. The results of your initial efforts have begun to accomplish what many said could never be done: the repatriation of our manufacturing base and jobs back to the United States. Combined with your historic tax reforms, the economy under your stewardship soared, including real wages rising and unemployment dropping to record lows.

And the world took notice of what our free people had achieved.

Today, the lives and livelihoods of Americans here, as well as those of nations around the world, have been endangered or tragically taken due to a pandemic spawned by Communist Chinas tyrants concealing the COVID-19 virus from its own people and the worlda cover-up that continues to this day.

Relying upon the experts, you have led the way in advancing the hard but necessary public health measures to protect the American people. To your immense credit, as an entrepreneur yourself, you made this call understanding these lifesaving measures would stop our economy in its tracks. Already, you and your administration have fought for and provided economic relief to help people get through these difficult days until our country can get back on its feet, get back to work, and keep America great.

While America and every nation afflicted by this pandemic grapple with the human toll and economic and societal consequences of COVID-19, Communist Chinathe nation culpable for spreading this pandemic contagionisnt engaged in an apology tour, let alone a simple apology. It is engaged in a propaganda campaign to blame the United States and our military, in particular. Abetted by the World Health Organization and, unconscionably, by some in the American media, the regime continues to lie about its COVID-19 cases and deaths. It goes so far to claim that it has the virus under control. Beijing is sending and/or selling faulty medical equipment around the globe, and proclaiming itself the worlds pandemics saviornot its originator.

Why? Because the world is watching and waiting.

Like Lenin, Stalin, Castro, and other Communist carnival barkers, the Beijing regime proclaims itself the wave of the future. Unlike the United States where we know liberty is the foundation of our prosperity and security, the Chinese Communist Party insists liberty is the enemy of prosperity and security. In the wake of the Hong Kong freedom protests and the ripples those protests sent throughout the mainland, the death and destruction the CCPs COVID-19 cover-up is causing the Chinese people is an existential threat to the oppressive regime.

Denying liberty, if the regime cannot even provide prosperity and security, seems a poor bargain. Why would the rest of the world consider the communist model one worthy of emulating? And, closer to home, the Chinese people will seize the opportunity finally to put this gangster government in the ashcan of historyas they once tried to do in Tiananmen Square, where they were butchered by this hideous regime (and where the CCP also reported zero deaths).

This is not the first time our free republic and her allies have faced such a generational challenge, as the world watched and waited. During the Great Depression, many demagogic ideologues and their deluded followers declared our free republic and other liberal democracies to be antiquated. They proclaimed fascism or communism were the future. And, as the world watched, America and her allies proved them wrong.

Under your leadership, Mr. President, the world will watch America and her allies prove them wrong again about Chinese Communism.

Recently, amidst this pandemic, you have rightly taken more steps to confront the challenge of Communist China and its enablers.

You have raised the prospect of cutting Americas contribution to the World Health Organization. The United States currently covers 20 percent of the WHOs budget. China covers about 10 percent. In return for our contribution, the American taxpayers expect the WHO to be accurate, objective, and credible. Despite paying 50 percent less than the United States, China is getting a far better return on its investment: rather than safeguarding world health, the WHO enabled Communist Chinas cover-up of COVID-19 and the subsequent peril caused to world health.

While this raises the question of whether the WHO believes Communist China is the wave of the future, it leaves no question the WHO should receive no further money from U.S. taxpayers, whose health and prosperity this failed organization has decimated through malfeasance and in collusion with communist China.

In restoring American prosperity in the wake of Communist Chinas covered up COVID-19 pandemic our nation wont be starting from square one, thanks to your foresight and ongoing efforts.

In addition to the already occurring repatriation of jobs back to our shores, for the sake of Americans health, prosperity, and national security, we must incentivize the return of critical pharmaceutical and medical supplies manufacturing back home, so we can never be never extorted by Beijing communists or by any other country for any reason. We must fully guarantee Americas medicines are safe and available when we need them, like the essential personal protective equipment that keeps our doctors, nurses and first responders safe from contracting diseases and infections when they are helping the ill and most vulnerable amongst us.

Further, building upon your historic accomplishment in negotiating the USMCA trade agreement, the United States should be looking to engage in more free trade with free nations. In the near term, America should keep a keen eye out for partnering with countries possessing the raw materials needed to produce medicine, vaccines, and testing for which we currently, dangerously, rely on Communist China.

In the larger picture, we should be leveraging the economic power of the United States to enlist our European, Asian, and Pacific Rim allies to join us in new trade agreements. Based upon the inalienable liberty of free peoples and free markets, the international prosperity and comity produced by these economic agreements will end the delusion that the future will be communist.

At another critical time for our nation, while the world again watched and waited, an American president was pilloried and undermined by the Democratic Party, their allies in the media, academia, and Hollywood. Despite their venom, President Ronald Reagan called out the Soviet Union as an Evil Empire, and demanded that Mikhail Gorbachev tear down this wall. While Gorbachev did not heed that call, thanks to President Reagans policies, the people of Eastern Europe did heed it and the Russian people followed suit by casting off the Communist yoke.

As he charted and navigated the demise of Soviet Communism, President Reagan maintained the lines of communication with Gorbachev and, indeed, he forged a friendship with him. In the Cold War, the stakes were too great for a miscommunication. But President Reagan was never blinded to the nature of the regime led by Gorbachev. Never wavering, President Reagan and his administration steered the Soviet Union off the world stage.

Thus, despite its ruling Chinese Communist Party being engaged in a full-court blitzkrieg and a very serious threat to the United States, geopolitically, economically, militarily, and a threat to the integrity of our institutions given their ability to influence thingsas Attorney General William Barr sagely put it, America, as you have noted, has no quarrel with the Chinese people. This is true. But if one genuinely cares about the Chinese people, one must condemn the Chinese Communist Party. To do otherwise, is to enable and abet the CCPs human rights abuses of the Chinese people.

As in the Cold War, however, we dont have the luxury of shunning or ignoring this regime. Americas strategic interests are too important, and the potential costs of a miscommunication or misunderstood incident are too great.

Nonetheless, this does not preclude a policy of strategic containment of and decoupling from communist Chinaa policy already given voice in a nascent shape by Vice President Mike Pence, a stellar defender of global liberty and human rights. Based upon the necessary actions you have already takenincluding rooting out communist Chinese espionage and identifying agents of influence within our bordersthrough the continued articulation and implementation of this policy America will lay the foundation for the demise of the CCP, and help usher a free China onto the world stage as a welcome member of the community of nations.

Once more, the world is watching and waiting for America to prove the future is freedom.

Continued here:

America Must Prove the Future Is Freedom - American Greatness

Shaw Communications executives said Thursday that the Freedom Mobile service won't meet its 2020 target for growing its subscriber base because the COVID-19 crisis has kept stores closed and customers distracted, but they said the lost revenue will be offset by lower operating costs during the coming months.

The comments came in a conference call to discuss the Calgary-based company's results for the second quarter, which ended Feb. 29, just prior to the official declaration of a global pandemic and unprecedented social-distancing measures designed to slow and reduce the spread of the novel coronavirus.

The quarter also ended before Saudi Arabia began a global price war that dropped the price of crude oil, a major source of revenue for Shaw's customers.

"While we generally feel very comfortable that we can manage through this crisis, it is difficult, if not impossible to accurately or precisely predict the impacts on Shaw," chief financial officer Trevor English told analysts.

Like other companies across Canada, Shaw and Freedom have closed most of theirretail stores in response to official demands to avoid or limit activities that could move the virus through the community by person-to-person contacts. Freedom says 20 corporate stores are still open to deal with urgent customer matters.

English said that Freedom customers "are simply not making decisions to switch or alter their services during this time" and Shaw expects its wireline businesses will also experience "considerably muted" activity for "a period of time."

He said some of Shaw's business and residential subscribers may select less expensive packages or cut some services amid "increased difficulty for some customers to pay their bills."

However, English said those lost revenues will be manageable given Shaw's financial strength and the importance of its communications and entertainment services while most Canadians are conducting work and school from home.

The company said it will preserve cash by suspending a share buyback program that had cost Shaw about $130 million as of the end of March, but it will continue to maintain its dividend payments to shareholders.

During the fiscal second quarter ended Feb. 29, net income, revenue and free cash flow were up compared with a year earlier.

Net income was $167 million, or 32 cents per share, up from $154 million or 30 cents per share; Revenue was up 3.7 per cent to $1.36 billion from $1.32 billion. And free cash flow, which is the amount of cash available after servicing short-term debt obligations, was up 20 per cent to $191 million.

Here is the original post:

Shaw warns that Freedom Mobile isn't adding as many customers as planned due to COVID-19 - CBC.ca

JERUSALEM (Reuters) - The Jewish Passover holiday typically draws crowds of Israelis outside to burn heaps of leavened bread, commemorating the Biblical exodus from slavery in Egypt.

But on Wednesday, a coronavirus lockdown meant the streets of Jerusalem and other cities were nearly empty on the first day of the week-long holiday, when they would normally be dotted with fires and columns of smoke.

Israel this week imposed holiday restrictions to try to halt the spread of the disease.

Jews may only celebrate the traditional seder meal that kicks off the April 8-15 holiday season with immediate family. Travel between cities is banned until Friday.

A full curfew took effect on Wednesday, just before the seder begins, and will last until Thursday, prompting a dash for last-minute shopping, which saw long lines of Israelis wearing face masks outside grocery stores.

Police have thrown up roadblocks and will deploy drones and helicopters to enforce curbs on movement throughout the lockdown, a spokesman said.

But some areas found workarounds to keep festive traditions alive in a month that will also see Christians celebrate Easter and Muslims mark the beginning of the holy month of Ramadan.

The Jerusalem municipality on Wednesday collected leavened products from designated dumpsters outside peoples homes and took them away to be burned in a large open area on the citys outskirts.

A rabbi accompanied by a firefighter tossed a long, fire-tipped stick onto a patch of flammable liquid leading to a pile of the leavened bread products, many still in plastic bags, engulfing the mound in smoke and flames.

One Jerusalem man, Daniel Arusti, disposed of a paper bread box in one of the dumpsters outside his house, instead of gathering with his ultra-Orthodox community to burn it in public.

Next year ... when there will hopefully be no (coronavirus) threat, well be able to come and redo public burning of chametz (leavened bread) together, as we should, Arusti said.

Throughout Passover, Jews abide by special dietary laws which include eating unleavened bread known as matzo. The tradition marks a Book of Exodus tale that the Jews did not have time to prepare leavened bread before leaving for the promised land.

But in the ultra-Orthodox Jerusalem neighbourhood of Mea Shearim, some Israelis flouted the restrictions and gathered in small groups or by themselves to burn leaven alongside the districts sandstone homes and concrete walls.

Some ultra-Orthodox have heeded rabbis who, distrusting the state, spurned Health Ministry restrictions.

Unable to gather in person, other Israelis plan to hold the seder with friends and extended family online by video conferencing platforms.

The holiday restrictions added to anti-virus measures that have seen Israelis largely confined to their homes, forcing many businesses to close and sending unemployment to 25%.

Israel has reported more than 9,400 cases and at least 71 deaths from COVID-19, according to Health Ministry data.

Additional reporting by Suheir Sheikh; Editing by Alison Williams and Janet Lawrence

See more here:

Israelis mark Passover, a celebration of freedom, in virtual isolation - Reuters

Photo by Jon R. Luini

Anyone who lives in the New York metro area knows that driving across the Long Island Expressway is a punishment reserved for only the most extreme masochists. But the first area appearance of Eric Johnsons Classics: Present and Past Tour at the YMCA Boulton Center for the Performing Arts in Bay Shore was compelling enough for me to make the painful trek.

Determined to avoid traffic, I got a head start and ended up arriving at the venue hours early, when it was eerily empty. There were no signs of life other than the flurry of notes from Johnson doing a soundcheck, and a pair of siblings waiting by the box office. I soon found out that the brother and sister I had just met endured even more torturous travelling conditions than traversing the LIE at any hour of the day. They took a grueling 16-hour flight from Tahiti solely to see Johnson (they even had front row seats!)and rented a car to get around to four of Johnsons Northeast shows from places as far flung as Fairfield, Connecticut, and Albany, New York. Thats the sort of hardcore dedication you see from Phishheads, but might not expect for Johnson, whose fan base was, for a long time, strictly tone-obsessed guitar geeks enamored by Johnsons virtuosity.

Over the decades, Johnsons music has broadened in scope considerably and now has a much wider appeal. The audience at the Boulton Center consisted of a diverse array of folkshipsters, young kids, rich lawyer types, and musicians who resembled electronics guru Larry Hartkewho, over the course of a three-hour show (with only a very brief intermission), enjoyed hearing Johnson singing and playing electric guitar, acoustic guitar, and piano on everything from classics like Zap and Cliffs of Dover to vocal-driven songs from his latest release EJ Vol. II. (Its the sequel to the 2016 all-acoustic EJ, and adds in electric elements.)

While Johnson burned through many of the electric selections with his trademark lightning-speed pentatonic sequences, he also captivated the audience equally with his sensitive vocals and jazzy piano playing on Over the Moon, which also featured rhythm guitarist Dave Scher lightly hybrid-picking volume-swelled, chordal fragments. Of course, Johnson is aware that many in the audience were there for the shred, and though he opened the second set with an acoustic in hand, he started right off the bat with the jaw-dropping Lake Travis, a burning instrumental highlight of EJ Vol. II.

For this tour, Johnson brought out his new signature Virginia guitar, from the Fender Stories Collection. The instrument is based on his favorite 1954 Strat that was used on iconic albums like Tones and Ah Via Musicom, but had, sadly, been sold years back. Virginia was released after EJ Vol. II was recorded, so the model doesnt appear on the album, but Johnson is extremely pleased with the instrument, so you can expect to hear it on future recordings. That was my favorite guitar I ever owned, so with this one being so close, it really fulfills everything I need, he says. Fenders Carlos Lopez, the master builder behind the Virginia model, has publicly stated that when he first took on the project he was a little intimidated, which, given Johnsons legendary history of gear neuroticism, makes complete sense.

Decades ago, when guitarists read that Johnson could hear microscopic differences in the batteries used in his pedals, a kind of urban myth was born. And with the advent of guitar forums, many gearheads have come to believe that every single pieceno matter how seemingly unrelated (like a screw)has an impact on tone. In fact, as I watched Johnsons show I couldnt help but wonder if there was a tonal reason why Johnsons two Bandmaster Reverb heads had different colored power lightsthe top head green and the bottom red. This nagged me so much that I had to follow up with Johnson. To which he simply replied that there is no tonal difference between the amps due to the color of the lights. Its just a way to identify them.

Its better to be secure, have faith, practice, and just go for that magical performance.

Is the fan of Eric Johnson the virtuoso guitarist the same person as the fan of Johnson the acoustic singer/songwriter?Yeah, Ive had a lot of people that seem to like both things. As there are people that would rather hear me get going and hear a lot of guitar playing, I think similarly there are people that want to hear all the other stuff. Theres some crossover, but Im sure theres some people that just favor one or the other.

Being aware of that, as you worked on EJ and EJ Vol. II, did you worry about what the Cliffs of Dover guy would be expecting in an EJ record?I thought about some of the stuff that some people might not like as much, but Ive always enjoyed songs. Trying to write a song has always been a part of my thing since I started playing music. I guess I was fortunate enough to get something working for me and it turned out to be the guitar thing. But Ive always enjoyed the whole spectrum.

Live, when going from acoustic to electric, is it a tricky transition in terms of touch?Yeah, it takes a little different touch on the acoustic. Thats true. On acoustic, a lot of times I use my fingers. But there are songs where I use a pick and, yeah, theres a little bit more resistance on the acoustic. Its not too hard of an adjustment if Im on tour and Im used to doing it. If Ive been playing electric for a few weeks and havent been playing acoustic, it can be a hard adjustment. But if Im in the groove of doing it, its not too hard.

Youve released a good amount of albums over the past few years, whereas there were six years between Ah Via Musicom and Venus Isle. Are you clinging less to your perfectionist tendencies?Yeah, I think it is that. Just kind of realizing that the extra belaboring over the record not only takes an exorbitant amount of time, but it doesnt really produce any better quality. And, in many cases, it makes it worse [laughs]. Or, you know, maybe it makes it better, grammatically, but it makes it not as potent, emotionally. So Im trying to learn that and practice that more.

I mean, I wrote Cliffs of Doverreally quickly. It just came to me. But I had several years to play it live, over and over and over, to get all the notes the way I wanted. Then when I went into the studio yeah, I really spent a lot of time trying to get the right take.

How much of your live solos are improvised versus composed?

Its probably about half and half. Sometimes they're just completely off the cuff, but sometimes they have certain guidelines to them.

I imagine there are many subtle things you hear that a fan might not pick up on. But if you hadnt labored over Cliffs of Dover 30 years ago, looking back, would the result have been that much different?Its interesting that you say that. I think if you rehearse and youre in shape, and you do the discipline of practice, and then you capture a magic performancethen no, I dont think so. I have that version from Austin City Limits thats totally live, and I guess a lot of people like that better than the studio version. That would be the answer to your question right there. And then its also just a matter of your mindset and believing you can do it.

Sometimes insecurity is another form of ego because you dont think that you can do something so you have to hands-on everything and try to control the universe, which is impossible to do anyhow. Its better to be secure, have faith, practice, and just go for that magical performance.

Were songs on EJ Vol. II cut live or did you do a lot of overdubbing?I cut the parts live in the studio. One of the songs, Black Waterslide, actually did come from a live performance at a gig, and I took it back to the studio and overdubbed percussion to it.

In your live set, you jam on John Coltranes Impressions. Are you free enough to push yourself to go for new things, or are you inhibited knowing that someone will likely be filming it and putting it on YouTube?No, I try to experiment. Im still learning about all of that so its definitely not way out and deep and crazy like Eric Dolphy (saxophonist) or Coltrane, but Im trying to learn more about harmony. I just want to do what I do, but I would like to learn more about harmony, so Id rather push myself in a situation like that.

Watch our latest Rig Rundown with Eric talking about his signature Thinline Strat

Read more:

Eric Johnson on Breaking Patterns to Play with More Freedom - Premier Guitar

STATEN ISLAND, N.Y. Saying they believed he was truly repentant and could avoid trouble when back in society, members of a state board have granted parole to a New Dorp Beach man who killed his brother 24 years ago during an argument in the family home.

Thomas Corella, 62, had served more than 23 years of a sentence of 20 years to life for first-degree manslaughter in the June 19, 1996 fatal stabbing of his brother Victor Corella, 35.

Thomas Corella was 38 then.

The panel weighed several factors, such as your age, length of incarceration, your institutional adjustment, your completion of programming (while in prison), your remorse for the victims and your risk and needs assessment, the three-person board wrote. Your insight into the harm and pain you caused your family and yourself was given considerable weight. Therefore, the panel believes that your release would no longer be incompatible with the welfare of society and you can live a law-abiding life.

In setting Corella free, the board also acknowledged there had been official and community opposition to his release.

The panel reminded Corella the decision to parole him should in no way be interpreted or intended to minimize your crime or the senseless loss of life you caused.

Corella was released last Dec. 10. The board interviewed him two months earlier on Oct. 16, a transcript of the proceeding shows.

Only a few months earlier, a state board had denied Corella parole after a late August interview.

Corella told the board then he had learned my lesson and turned his life around in prison.

The board at that time apparently didnt agree.

In rejecting Corella, the panel had cited his criminal history, which includes two prior prison stints the first for attempted burglary, after which he violated parole, and later for seriously attacking his girlfriend, for which he pleaded guilty to attempted assault.

Corella had been out of prison for slightly more than a year when he killed his brother, said that board.

Corella was brought back before the board in October as a special consideration for parole, said the partially-redacted hearing transcript.

He again expressed his remorse to the panel and said alcohol- and drug-abuse had been at the root of his problems.

He said he has been clean now for 23 years.

I brought upon my family something horrific for which I have to live with for the rest of whatever life I have, Corella said. And I cant tell you how regretful I am that this ever happened, and I am certain that had I not been intoxicated, had I not been under the influence, that this would not have happened.

Prosecutors said the killing occurred between 5:15 and 5:30 p.m. inside the home on Milbank Road, which Victor shared with the siblings mother. Thomas Corella had been staying at the home for about 10 days, the Advance reported.

Corella testified at his trial in September 1998 that the events unfolded in his mothers bedroom after he came home from work.

He said his brother questioned him about missing house keys, and he quizzed Victor in return about money missing from their mothers purse.

Corella said his sibling charged him and put him in a chokehold, and fearing for his life, he stabbed Victor in self-defense.

Prosecutors, however, alleged Thomas Corella had become enraged during an argument with his brother over smoking in the house and repeatedly plunged the eight-and-a-half-inch blade of a kitchen knife into the victims chest.

Ramona Corella, the mens mother, was slashed on the nose in the struggle.

A witness testified she was on the phone with Ramona Corella and overheard the two men arguing.

The woman said she heard Victor imploring his mother to tell his older brother to stop, while Thomas told the younger man twice to Shut up, according to Advance reports.

The witness said she heard the phone drop, a scuffle, and a bang before the phone went dead.

A jury in state Supreme Court, St. George, acquitted Corella of second-degree murder, but convicted him of first-degree manslaughter.

In his October interview with the parole board, Corella said he had consumed around three quarts of beer before the deadly confrontation.

He said he and his brother began fighting, and Victor put him in a headlock. He said he escaped, went into a kitchen, got a knife and returned.

At that point I did not recognize him as my brother, Corella told the board.

He admitted to stabbing the victim several times and expressed his contrition.

I have had many years to think of what I did and how many people I hurt, he said, adding he does not believe he is the same person he was back then.

People do change for the better, and I am done with alcohol and I am done with drugs, said Corella. I am just asking for a chance for whatever years I have left to spend positively.

The board imposed a number of conditions on Corella.

He must obtain a job or enter an academic or vocational program. He must submit to substance-abuse testing, as required.

In addition, he cannot consume alcohol, he must abide by a curfew his parole officer establishes and must participate in any anti-aggression or anti-violence counseling as directed.

See the rest here:

Freedom for man who killed brother in 1996 in argument over smoking - SILive.com

Gov. Gretchen Whitmer on Sunday night issued an executive order that relaxes requirements for government workers responding in person to Freedom of Information Act requests during coronavirus outbreak.

The order, signed Sunday, April 5, applies to records requests submitted by mail fax or in person. Public bodies are now allowed to defer parts of the responses that would require workers to report to government offices in-person, the order states.

The order is effective immediately and is scheduled to be lifted June 4, according to a state-issued news release.

It is the public policy of this state that, during the COVID-19 states of emergency and disaster, public bodies continue to respond to requests for public records as expeditiously as possible and, to the extent practicable, by using electronic means, the order states.

Under the order, workers still must respond to requests received through the mail or fax within 10 business days, but if the request requires a physical search of records, it can be deferred until the order is lifted, the release said.

During a time of crisis, its crucial that Michiganders have access to the information they need to stay safe. My administration is committed to ensuring that while also protecting public health and encouraging social distancing," Whitmer said in the release. This Executive Order encourages public bodies to respond to Freedom of Information Act requests in a timely manner and in the safest way possible.

Workers receiving the FOIA requests must communicate to the person who filed it if they are unable to fulfill the request without a physical public record search, the order mandates. The person who filed the request may then amend it to include electronic records only. If the request cannot be fulfilled due to remote work or social distancing, then a written notice should be sent explaining the delay, the order requires.

Whitmer signed another executive order Sunday to extend an existing order that was set to be lifted April 5. The reissued order extends restrictions on visitors at health care and juvenile justice facilities amid the coronavirus outbreak.

Related: Whitmer extends order banning non-essential visits to hospitals, care facilities

The states latest statistical report on COVID-19, which was updated at 3 p.m. April 5, showed there were 15,718 confirmed cases in Michigan with a total of 617 deaths.

Complete coverage of coronavirus in Michigan.

COVID-19 PREVENTION TIPS

In addition to washing hands regularly and not touching your face, officials recommend practicing social distancing, assuming anyone may be carrying the virus.

Health officials say you should be staying at least 6 feet away from others and working from home, if possible.

Carry hand sanitizer with you, and use disinfecting wipes or disinfecting spray cleaners on frequently-touched surfaces in your home (door handles, faucets, counter tops) and when you go into places like stores.

Also on MLive:

Whitmer says patchwork response to coronavirus with no national strategy could prolong fight

Michigan reports 1,493 new coronavirus cases on Sunday and 77 more deaths

Kalamazoo County tops 50 coronavirus cases

Beaumont urges state to make more hospitals release data on coronavirus

Continue reading here:

Whitmer issues order allowing delayed in-person processing of Freedom of Information Act requests - MLive.com

Pattie Stockman, wife of former Rep. Steve Stockman (R-Texas), asked President TrumpDonald John TrumpCalifornia governor praises Trump's efforts to help state amid coronavirus crisis Trump threatens to withhold visas for countries that don't quickly repatriate citizens Trump admin looks to cut farmworker pay to help industry during pandemic: report MORE to pardon him amid the coronavirus pandemic so his 10-year sentence for fraud and other white-collar crimes does not become a death penalty.

Stockman, a conservative firebrand, was convicted in April 2018 of 23 felonies for allegedly misusing $1.25 million in campaign funds for personal expenses. The 63-year-old is serving his sentence in a federal prison in Beaumont, Texas.

My pleas are reasonable. Keeping an aging, physically vulnerable, non-violent, non-sex crime convicted inmate in prison during a pandemic is cruel. My husband is not a danger to society. At a minimum, I want Steve to shelter at home so that hes not sent to me in a body bag in a few weeks, Patti Stockman said.

Concerns over the spread of coronavirus in prisons have grown in recent weeks, though mostly from the left-leaning advocacy groups as well as Democratic lawmakers and leaders.

Patti Stockman is not seeking a temporary release of prisoners, but a pardon for her husband specifically.

More than 50conservative leaders, including several former members of Congress, alsosent a letterto Trump urging for Stockmans "humanitarian release."

Steve StockmanStephen (Steve) Ernest StockmanInmates break windows, set fires in riot at Kansas prison Wife of imprisoned former congressman cites COVID-19 risk in plea to Trump for husband's freedom Consequential GOP class of 1994 all but disappears MORE poses no danger to society, but remaining in prison may be a death sentence for him, the letter states, calling him a perfect example of a prisoner who fits the criteria of who should be removed from prison during the pandemic.

California Gov. Gavin NewsomGavin Christopher NewsomCalifornia governor praises Trump's efforts to help state amid coronavirus crisis Dwayne Johnson stresses importance of maintaining mental health amid pandemic Congress needs to stop the 'essential' confusion MORE (D) announced last month that the state planned to release 3,500 nonviolent offenders over concerns of a coronavirus outbreak in prisons. The state's correctional agency also announced that it would temporarily slow intake into county jails.

Trump has pardoned at least 25 people since the start of the administration, according to the Department of Justice.

Read the rest here:

Wife of imprisoned former congressman cites COVID-19 risk in plea to Trump for husband's freedom | TheHill - The Hill

(Last Updated On: April 10, 2020)

Freedom From Facebook press release to Zennie62Media does not necessarily reflect the views of Zennie62Media, Inc., or its partners, contractors, and employees.

Six New Groups Join Coalition FreedomFromFacebookAndGoogle.com

Washington, DC After nearly two years of shifting the paradigm on Facebook, we thought it was time to broaden our work, so Freedom From Facebook is expanding to also take on Google. Facebook and Google are two of the worlds most dangerous monopolies. They have seized control of how billions of people communicate online, making more than $200 billion a year from selling advertising. They addict us to their services, promote dangerous content, engage in surveillance, and rent out our attention to anyone willing to pay up.

As America and the world struggle to deal with the coronavirus, these corporate giants are using this pandemic to launch P.R. campaigns to shore up their power. But half measures and splashy headlines dont fix any of the problems with big tech monopolies. If anything, this crisis has revealed them to be even more dangerous to people and our democracy: the platforms are allowing deadly misinformation to flourish, profiting off of deceptive and opportunistic advertising for critical health supplies, and accelerating the collapse of local news, all while uncertainty around upcoming elections grows.

It has been quite a change for FFF going from a few years ago when these concerns werent really on anyones radar and Facebook was the darling of Silicon Valley and D.C. to having the DOJ and 47 state attorneys general conducting antitrust investigations of their monopoly.

Besides all of the substance we had some fun too including flying a plane over Facebooks shareholders meeting and getting a full page ad in the student paper when Sandberg was the commencement speaker at MIT. Facebook was so freaked out about everything they hired opposition researchers to go after us!

There is no question that Facebook is taking a wrecking ball to our democracy but Google is also working full time at being evil, said Sarah Miller, Co-Chair of Freedom From Facebook & Google. Facebook and Google are using the coronavirus crisis to entrench their power, amplifying and profiting from deadly misinformation and scammers, lording it over small businesses in distress, and decimating the free press by monopolizing advertising markets. No one should buy into their pandemic PR, while the need to break their power should be crystal clear.

Freedom From Facebook and Google has four core demands for policy makers and regulators:

Break up Facebook and Google

Regulate them to keep us safe

Hold them accountable for wrongdoing

Reject their lobbyists and corporate money

More details about how these problems can be fixed are addressed in this new paper from FFF&G member American Economic Liberties Project, Addressing Facebook and Googles Harms Through a Regulated Competition Approach.

Besides expanding the scope of our work FFF&G is also expanding with new members: American Economic Liberties Project, Campaign for Accountability, Daily Kos, Progress America, The Revolving Door Project, and Social Security Works.

Read more here:

Freedom From Facebook Expands To Take On Google - Oakland News Now

Albert Camuss novel The Plague is a lesson to the human race on valuessocial, moral and political. It is often seen as an allegory for the political plague of Nazism that invaded France. It also vividly described the gravity of genocide caused by the pandemic. Across the world, a big calamity can have a tendency to make the state stronger and the people weaker. The present infestation is no exception.

Along with the miseries that the virus has brought in, the plight of migrant workers, household workers, rag pickers, daily wagers, street vendors and other marginalised among the workforce has now become part of the political discourse. The Supreme Court, on its own, cannot set right the problem. Let us see the relevant laws. The country had promulgated the Inter-State Migrant Workmen (Regulation of Employment and Conditions of Service) Act way back in 1979. It stipulates registration of establishments where such workers are employed. There are provisions for licensing of contractors.

The Act also provides for adequate wage rates, displacement allowance, journey allowance, etc., along with other facilities. Section 16 of the Act guarantees just and reasonable pay, suitable residential accommodation, free medical aid, etc. Non-compliance with the provisions could invite penal consequences. The country also designed the Unorganised Workers Social Security Act in 2008, with the laudable objective of providing better quality of life for workers in the unauthorised sector. It speaks about schemes to be designed by the Centre and state governments to improve the habitats of the proletarians.

These legislations were not only breached but even forgotten by the governments at the Centre and states. The radical provisions of the statutes remained a non-starter. Had it been otherwise, and had there been imaginative preparatory measures before the inevitable lockdown, the labour scenario would have been different. The sight of the moving populations of workers on the street once more echoed Camus prophetic words: No longer were there individual destinies; only a collective destiny, made of plague...

Stay at home is a hollow rhetoric for many Indians who do not have a home. The Census of 2011 revealed that there are more than 17 lakh homeless people in our nation. Right to housing has been recognised as a fundamental right in a few modern constitutions (see, for example, Section 26 of the South African Constitution). In India, right to property is longer a fundamental right as Article 19 (1)(f) was deleted from the Constitution with effect from 20 June 1979. Today, it is, at best, a constitutional right, as per Article 300A of the Constitution, which says that persons should not be deprived of property, except by authority of law. This constitutional silence about an enforceable right for residence was sought to be indemnified to some extent by the parliamentary legislations. The efforts, however, met with an executive apathy due to which the country now pays a hefty cost.

As Yale University professor Frank M Snowden demonstrated in his scholarly work Epidemics and Society: From the Black Death to the Present (2019), a pandemic can lead to an illiberal regime and an excessive exercise of power over the citizens. After the contagion, right to privacy is curtailed to a considerable extent, as its infringement is often justified by a public health emergency. Control over the media too could be in the states agenda. Journalists were booked for reporting the misdeeds of the persons holding power. There are also instances of human rights violations. During the hard times, free flow of factual information and reports needs to be ensured.

The lockdown and other executive measures in India are backed by the Epidemic Diseases Act of 1897 and the Disaster Management Act of 2005. The statutes contain penal provisions, and equip the authorities to deal with the offending individuals. Section 3 of the colonial statute makes disobedience of the order issued under the Act punishable under Section 188 of the Indian Penal Code. The Act, which was made by the British in the background of the bubonic plague outbreak, is not wholly adequate to meet the requirements of the present days globalised India. Obstructions to relief activities, false claims, false warnings, etc., are punishable under Chapter 10 of the 2005 statute.

Article 257 of the Constitution empowers the Union to exercise control over the states during certain exigencies but it does not alter the character of cooperative and collaborative federalism, a basic feature of our fundamental law. The Centre would do well in taking all the states into confidence in our historical endeavour for survival.

It is not enough to impose the rigour of law on the public. The challenge is also to realise the laws humane face. Right to life, which means dignified life, has the protection of Article 359 of the Constitution, which says that it cannot be taken away even by the proclamation of Emergency. This was a significant constitutional correction done by the Janata regime under Morarji Desai by way of the 44th Amendment Act, 1978. It was the indignity attached to the poor Indians that got exposed during the days of pandemic. For them, Article 21, speaking about right to life became non est.

The freedoms under Article 19 also became redundant. As Amartya Sen demonstrated in his celebrated book Development as Freedom (1999), poverty inhibits freedom and access to resources. Poverty is not merely the poor mans problem.National solidarity is an imperative to fight the virus and in the battle, constitutional values of justice, liberty, equality and fraternity can have a catalytic effect.

KALEESWARAM RAJLawyer, Supreme Court of IndiaEmail: kaleeswaramraj@gmail.com

Read the rest here:

Freedom in the time of COVID-19 - The New Indian Express

A fight between scholars and senior managers at an Irish university has highlighted the ongoing tension between internationalization and academic freedom.

A working group established by the academic council at University College Dublin last month proposed an addendum to the institutions statement on academic freedom, in which it explained that it was important for "a university with a large international footprint, to consider and appraise the risk of tension arising between the obligations regarding academic freedom and the strategic imperative to internationalize higher education."

The draft addendum added that there is little firm ground (including case law) on which to rest an agreed definition of what academic freedom means and pointed out that learning about and engaging with other traditions of academic freedom is a valuable component of such international partnerships.

It said the university should establish whether divergent approaches to academic freedom can be reconciled or accommodated during partnership negotiations.

The working group revised its recommendations this week just hours after academics signed a petition claiming that the addendum amounts to a serious weakening of [a] crucial academic value and Times Higher Education approached the institution for comment. Some scholars had also raised concerns that the draft addendum and a survey on the subject were shared with staff when they were distracted by the COVID-19 crisis.

However, academics said they were still concerned that the initial proposals had been considered, and they speculated about whether the university would attempt to reintroduce them at a later date.

The revised recommendations suggest that UCD should introduce measures to ensure that scholars are informed about the specific context applying to academic freedom in other jurisdictions where they may be required to teach. They add that academic freedom should be addressed in the initial stages of all international partnership negotiations with the aim of promoting the tradition and ethos of academic freedom as articulated in the UCD Statement of Academic Freedom.

Wolfgang Marx, associate professor in musicology at UCD, who started the petition, said the original proposals would have relativized and downgraded academic freedom from a basic principle to a legal nicety that needs to be negotiated on a case-by-case basis and can be sacrificed if it stands too much in the way of the acquisition of lucrative fee-paying students, and the setting up of joint programs and campuses.

While Marx described the universitys U-turn as a victory for academics, he added that the increasing financial pressure on universities as a result of the coronavirus crisis might result in other institutions considering changes to their academic freedom policies in a bid to secure more international partnerships.

Patrick Paul Walsh, full professor of international development studies at UCD, said it was quite concerning that the university would even consider trading off academic freedom to profit from internationalization of education.

A lot of governments are not open to the idea that academics can talk absolutely freely Maybe we just shouldnt be setting up partnerships in these countries, he said.

Grace Mulcahy, chair of the academic freedom working group at UCD, said it had revised its recommendations in response to the feedback received from faculty.

The objective of the working group was to provide additional protections to strengthen academic freedom, she added.

Read more from the original source:

Dispute in Ireland over academic freedom and internationalization - Inside Higher Ed

I was half asleep in a plane on the tarmac in Seattle when the pilot first alerted us that the world was changing fast. Leave American soil right now and you may not be able to re-enter, he warned, just minutes before we were due to take off for Europe.

My daughter and I looked wide-eyed at each other. Wed been planning a trip to Cape Town via Europe for months and had an incredible itinerary outlined for the next two weeks. In the space of five minutes we had to decide whether to head north homeward or continue our journey towards the southern hemisphere.

I knew we should deplane, as they say in airport-speak, but the imploring look on my kids face faltered my conviction. Lets just go, I told her, as we prepared for takeoff. Somehow, wed make a plan to get back.

I was right about the plan, but its execution was much sooner than what Id expected. Just 48 hours after landing we were packing our bags and rerouting our tickets home as Canada sent a chilling warning to citizens abroad to return while they still could. Over six days we spent some 60 hours in the air. But we were lucky to be able to return, and luckier still to get back uninfected and symptom free.

Lately, as the restrictions ramp up and our home confinement continues, Im trying hard to focus on our good fortune. How lucky I am to have all my children home with me, back in our cocoon of family safety. Lucky that we can sit down to meals together, take some long walks by the river and be fully in the present, rather than rushing around to the various activities that otherwise fill our respective lives.

For the first time ever we have time on our hands to focus just on our homes and our family relationships. With almost nowhere to go except the store, the resources we have at home become our whole world: the games in our cupboards, the books on our shelves and the puzzles that have been gathering dust, untouched for years. Now is the time to get down to those hobbies weve always procrastinated, the cleaning projects long delayed and the books weve been meaning to read.

In a time when all normalcy has been disrupted, in some ways COVID-19 has given us the gift of time, and with it the opportunity to reflect on what really counts. The virus has stripped away our exercise regimens, our social obligations and our urge to shop for new, unnecessary things. Whats left is screen time, remote work, virtual socializing and our own personal resources for keeping ourselves busy and entertained. Some of us will flourish with this freedom, others will wither under the pressure, particularly if and when the Internet crashes.

READ: MARRIED WITH KIDS: FEARS OF THE ROAD

In some ways COVID-19 has delivered a prison sentence; in other ways, it promises a refreshing opportunity to focus without distraction. The prison shackles are hard to shake off. Like many, Im finding it impossible to stay away from the news, and harder still to absorb and process the implications of its discouraging announcements. I go about my day with a knot of anxiety in my stomach, a constant web of worry that refuses to dissipate, no matter how hard I wrestle and reason with it.

But when I get outside, theres encouragement everywhere. Here in B.C., the buds of spring are forming in my backyard and the bald eagles are back, circling in the thermals and filling the sky with their calls. The river is writhing with bird life and the natural world is awakening after a long winter, preparing for the flourish of summer. The message it sends me is that we will get through this, its just a matter of time. Normal life will resume, and when it does, this pandemic will become an old, distant memory we will mention with relief, glad to see the back of it. With any luck we wont be so complacent about normalcy ever again.

Its going to be a different Passover this year. As we spin through the haggadah singing songs with varying degrees of gusto, I know I for one will be focussing less on hekshers and more meaningfully on the plagues and the concept of freedom versus enslavement than ever before.

Share and Enjoy !

See the original post:

Married With Kids: Freedom in the age of the coronavirus - Canadian Jewish News

BBJ

Saturday, April 11, 2020, 00:20

Led by different opposition and reform groups, the Opposition Round Table (Ellenzki Kerekasztal or EKA) was set up with the aim of ensuring a peaceful transition from the socialist regime in Hungary to democracy. Though its main goal, the change of the regime was fulfilled, many critical questions, including those around the economy and the market, arguably remain unsettled.

Talks started in the spring of 1989, as a follow-up to a demonstration that took place on March 15 that same year, where the opposition presented the conditions they wanted for the change to happen. The list of 12 points was mutually devised by various opposition representatives and read out by actor Gyrgy Cserhalmi at the demonstration.

The wish list included multi-party parliamentary democracy; the rule of law, human rights and political freedoms; fair burden-sharing and the abolition of privileges; a functioning market economy with equity; cutting down on bureaucracy and violence; the restoration of the countrys sovereignty, neutrality and the withdrawal of Soviet troops.

A strategy on transition was also presented at Kossuth tr, which basically called for a strong and united opposition to serve as an inevitable rival and negotiating partner of the governing party, the Hungarian Socialist Workers Party [MSZMP], said Jnos Kis, representative of the Alliance of Free Democrats (SZDSZ). A few days later, SZDSZ passed a call for a roundtable of independent organizations, but withdrew it when a similar initiative was proposed by the Independent Lawyers Forum.

The Opposition Roundtable was formed on March 22, 1989, by the organizations invited by the Independent Lawyers Forum at the Law Department of Etvs Lornd University, in the library of the Department of Criminal Law.

There were eight founding organizations: the Hungarian Democratic Forum (MDF), the Alliance of Free Democrats (SZDSZ), FIDESZ (the Fiatal Demokratk SzvetsgeMagyar Polgri Szvetsg or Federation of Young DemocratsHungarian Civic Alliance), the Independent Smallholders Party (FKGP), the Hungarian Peoples Party (MNP), the Hungarian Social Democratic Party (MSZDP), the Endre Bajcsy-Zsilinszky Friendship Society (BSZBT) and the Independent Society. A ninth, the Christian Democratic Peoples Party (KDNP) joined later.

Despite several attempts by the MSZMP to fragment the opposition, and differences among the EKA itself, on June 10, an agreement between MSZMP and EKA was signed in the White House, the communist partys headquarters. The two parties agreed to start a trialogue on the reform of the constitutional system, involving the State Party, the Round Table and social organizations and movements (also known as the Third Side). The parties stated that power was based on the peoples sovereignty and that no political power could acquire that sovereignty.

Our aim is to not share power with its current owners, but that the citizens decide who they place their trust in for four years between elections, Imre Knya, head of the EKA delegation said when sharing the organizations declaration of intent with the representatives of the regime.

We must agree on the conditions of the amicable transition into democracy. [...] The will of the people must be manifested at an open election, he added.

Erzsbet Szalai is a sociologist and expert of the system change. The Kdr-regime was an authoritarian system, not a dictatorship, which had been disintegrating from the beginning of the 80s, she tells the Budapest Business Journal. The fact is that different social counter-elite groups were created during the death of the Kdr-system, she adds.

Among them were the late-Kadarian technocrats, who worked within the state bureaucracy and were advancing in rank with the years, including Mikls Nmeth, who served as Prime Minister of Hungary from November 24, 1988 to May 23, 1990 (the last man to hold the post before the system change), Lajos Bokros (Minister of Finance between 19951996 in the government of Gyula Horn) and Gyrgy Surnyi (president of the Hungarian National Bank between 1992-1992).

Another group was the democratic opposition, which set itself outside the system and had the major role in creating political democracy, as opposed to the technocrats who prioritized the market, Szalai explains. They emerged from politically marginalized intellectuals of the great generation, that is, from those excluded from the institutions of power. When this group began to take shape, it adopted a fundamentally left-liberal set of values, the expert wrote in a study in 1999.

A third group, the new reformist intellectuals, hovered between the other two. Their views were very close to those of the democratic opposition but, unlike them, the new reformists had been able to keep their jobs (while democratic opposition members were dismissed).

This was the social elite, and EKA was basically a forum to discuss matters and negotiate the rules that would later govern politics. Talks were nominally about both politics and economics, but the majority of the work covered the former, where the legal and political details of the transition were discussed. Not much was done concerning the economic path as, by the time dedicated talks took place, the late-Kdrian technocrats had risen to political power and their views held sway, Szalai says.

In Szalais opinion, it was a mistaken notion in the process of the regime change to completely discard economic and social policy, and to adopt a doctrine of the less state, the better.

The starting point for discussions for EKA was that only cornerstones of the peaceful and democratic transition (e.g. electoral law, constitutional court amendment, party law, etc.) should be negotiated, while the ruling party recommended discussing all important political, economic and social issues.

EKAs reasoning for sidestepping some of the more detailed debate was that the existing Parliament was not legitimate and therefore should not be entrusted with fundamental issues not directly related to the transition, writes political scientist Andrs Bozki, in an article in literary journal Beszl.

As for the economy, EKA said it did not have sufficient information to be competent in the talks, nor did it want to give ideas to a regime already burdened with problems, as MSZMP would use the talks to share responsibility for the economic crisis between itself and the opposition, Bozki writes.

So, the forum that was, in theory, created for these elite groups to consult about the countrys future failed to hold discussions on economic questions, Szalai says.

The overriding view was that the market would take care of all the problems, which was a huge mistake, the expert claims.

Neo-liberalism, which basically says that state ownership should be minimized, everything should be privatized and the market should be given freedom, was a mainstream view at the time.

The liberals forming the social elite were invited to international conferences and had embraced these views, Szalai explains.

The liberals favored private ownership whereas the Third Side I also represented was thinking of mixed ownership: state, self-management and private ownership, Szalai says. She adds that this group soon found itself a minority as the incumbents and the opposition reached agreement. Part of the reason why the talks in the economic section dissolved fairly soon was this; that there was nothing to discuss, Szalai notes.

The discussion concerning politics was more interesting and intense, not least because there were many differences within EKA regarding on basic questions. The debates, which began in June, revolved around the amendment of the constitution (including the position of President of the Republic and the Constitutional Court), party law and party financing, electoral rights, principles for amending criminal law, publicity, information policy and guarantees of non-violence in transition.

There were serious disagreements, and the talks broke up several times, but over time the MSZMP became more inclined to give some concessions. Still, there was heated debate, for example, about elections, the nomination process and the introduction of the quota system, constituencies and lists, and the institution and election of the president. During the summer of 1989, the MSZMP, led by the Reform Party, negotiated a peaceful transition program to call for multi-party free elections with the Opposition Roundtable.

By September 1989, the relations between the parties in the Opposition Round Table had become increasingly tense, writes Bozki. Since the organization could only take a decision if all its members agreed, a potential split became more realistic than ever.

Five parties (the Bajcsy-Zsilinszky Friendship Society, Independent Smallholders, Christian Democrats, Democratic Forum and Peoples Party) believed that the results achieved during the talks until that point should not be risked and that they needed the sign an agreement with Socialist Workers Party, which included several trade-offs.

Four other members (FIDESZ, the Social Democrats, Free Democrats and the Trade Unions League), however, thought that that a democratic state under the rule of law could not be created if the Workers Militia continued to exist; if the election of the President of the Republic were to proceed the parliamentary elections; if MSZMP did not provide an inventory of their assets and leave office and they did not want to enter into bargaining.

By September 18, the day set for the signing of the agreement, only two parties still refused to sign the agreement (FIDESZ and the Free Democrats). That day, the real story of EKA ended, Bozki writes. Formally, the organization remained together until the free elections in 1990, but its role in the democratic transition ended. Those questions that remained unresolved on September 18, including the election of the president, were decided on a referendum on November 26.

Go here to see the original:

30 Years of Freedom: The Opposition Roundtable Laying the Groundwork for Democratic Hungary - Budapest Business Journal

Around the world governments are fighting the COVID-19 outbreak with a variety of social control measures aimed at minimising contact between people and tracking down individuals who are the source of infection.

Increasingly, governments are relying on digital technologies to implement these social controls. Should citizens be worried about their privacy and freedoms?

Citizens probably dont need to be concerned about technology like self-installed and operated apps that provide public announcements, updates and contact information on the crisis. But data can be collected from smartphones to monitor peoples movements through cities, towns and regions. Daily interactions leave a record of data, like card payments at a caf, or number plate readers at a tollgate. Even more nuanced data is being collected from self-monitoring apps now emerging in a number of countries.

With this data, high-performance computers can model movements to create an accurate picture of where people were and who they were with.

Read more

Some countries are even making use of CCTV cameras and facial recognition technology to monitor the location of people supposed to be in isolation and the identity of people who they have come in contact with.

The public health benefits of using this surveillance technology are obvious, but so too are the threats to individual privacy, and autonomy. The important question we are now confronting is whether the need to reduce person-to-person transmission of COVID-19 should justify the loss of privacy and accompanying freedoms.

And perhaps more pertinently, how to ensure that measures that limit individual rights in times of emergency dont become the new standard once the threat is over.

Here are some of the approaches being adopted by other countries:

In South Korea the government is using mobile phones to keep tabs on the whereabouts of people in self-quarantine. The app allows patients to report their symptoms to health authorities, while also monitoring their whereabouts, alerting individuals and the government should a patient go outside their quarantine zone while carrying their mobile phone.

Singapore has taken a different approach, relying on citizens to download an app, TraceTogether, to undertake contact tracing. The app records when it comes into contact with other phones that use the app. This data is picked up through Bluetooth. The app then stores a log of those connections. Should a person be diagnosed with the virus, it provides an alert informing those who have associated with the infected person and suggests appropriate action, such as the need to commence self-isolation.

Read more

New Zealanders have been ask to consent to police tracking their mobile phones for location information.

Israel has repurposed location data collected from mobile phones for counterterrorism purposes to map the movements of people with COVID-19 and those they have encountered. Under this system the governments counterintelligence agency Shin Bet is sifting through phone metadata to identify individuals with the virus and their contacts, and then sending an alert with instructions.

In Moscow the government is using the citys CCTV network of 170,000 cameras to monitor people with facial-recognition software and punish those not complying with quarantine and self-isolation restrictions. This approach cannot be circumvented by citizens leaving their phone at home. Similar approaches have been used in China.

It is difficult to argue against heightened surveillance in the middle of a deadly viral outbreak, but commentators across the globe are already raising concerns about what happens after the pandemic finally fades. There is a risk that once mass surveillance regimes are enabled, they are unlikely to be watered down because they will have been legitimatised as socially useful.

The use of this technology therefore raises ethical concerns about what are the appropriate governance and safeguards that need to be in place.

Consent-based models, in which people have the choice to participate in tracking and monitoring may seem like the best compromise between the competing concerns of controlling the virus and respecting fundamental values like privacy. But there are flaws in this approach. Most obviously from a public health perspective, if many people refuse to opt-in then the tools will be ineffective.

Read more

Individuals are more likely to consent to sharing their data in exchange for a service they find useful. One example is sharing location data to ensure that a mapping service optimises your route to the supermarket. But use of that data for a purpose other than specified goes against the ethical principles of good data collection. Privacy and data protection laws provide a framework for the collection, use and disclosure of personal information, often restricting the secondary uses of data.

Concerns have also been expressed that many citizens will be nervous of using of COVID-19 tracking apps because they fear social stigma, job loss or and other negative consequences should they become infected and publicly outed.

Additionally, simply requiring people to accept the terms and conditions of a tracking app as a way of securing consent is of limited ethical value given that most people dont read the fine print in online transactions anyway.

Mass digital surveillance is clearly helping to control COVID-19. States like China and Russia have highlighted the potential of their surveillance regimes to ensure social control within their societies. But these approaches are in tension with the liberties and freedoms afforded within liberal democracies.

The repurposing of data from existing digital devices be it metadata of who we have communicated with to understand our social connections, our location via GPS, or our identity through facial recognition can increase the ability to model and identify high-risk individuals to ensure compliance with social control orders. But this surveillance still needs to be done in accordance with the law.

In a time of crisis, exemptions to the laws may be felt to be justified. But the danger is that once the scope is increased and exceptions are put in place, they are difficult to wind back. This is especially so if, in the wake of a public health crisis like COVID-19, lawmakers are inclined to view mass surveillance technology as simply a tool for good.

Read more

The vital question then is how willing societies are to be enrolled in mass surveillance? There is no one answer as it involves social, political and cultural values, reflecting an unavoidable tension between rights enhancing individual autonomy and those focused on the good of communities.

What the Australian community decides as appropriate is likely to differ to what our neighbours decide. Other states and communities will likely take different approaches. And the technology itself is constantly advancing, posing new questions for society and law makers. Indeed, the role of technology may well develop to assist with rights-based concerns.

There is no easy answer. When faced with a crisis we shouldnt shun the technologies that may assist us. However, we need to remember the important role of law and ethics in guiding responsible use.

The newly launched Centre for Artificial Intelligence and Digital Ethics at the University of Melbourne is a cross-disciplinary initiative to research and explore the tensions between technology and society, and provide leadership on good digital citizenship.

Banner: Getty Images

Visit link:

The cost to freedom in the war against COVID-19 - Pursuit

There is now the terrible possibility that Britain may match or even overtake Italy and Spain as the country in Europe that suffers most from the coronavirus pandemic. This tragedy has a political, as well as a biological, epidemiology. Those seeking to trace its path may look back on a telling moment paradoxically the one at which the government finally changed course and fell into line with most of the rest of Europe. On 20 March, Boris Johnson announced the closure of pubs, clubs and restaurants. Even as he did so, however, he made it clear that this decision was an assault on the national character.

Were taking away the ancient, inalienable right of free-born people of the United Kingdom to go the pub, he said. And I can understand how people feel about that. Lest his anguish be in any doubt, he underscored the point: To repeat, I know how difficult this is, how it seems to go against the freedom-loving instincts of the British people. The message was what exactly? You must not go to the pub but your right to do so is inalienable (which is to say absolute and irrevocable). You must stay at home but, if you so do, you will be a disgrace to your freedom-loving ancestors.

The Sun reported the prime ministers remarks rather differently: Mr Johnson said he realised it went against what he called the inalienable free-born right of people born in England to go to the pub. In this version, the freedom to go to the pub was conferred by genetics and history, not on the people of the United Kingdom or the British people, but on people born in England. It does not apply to Scots, Welsh or Northern Irish people and certainly not to the 9.4 million people living in the UK who were born abroad. It is a particular Anglo-Saxon privilege.

And since we are in the terrain of the ludicrous, the Suns version actually made more sense. There is, of course, no ancient and absolute right to go to the pub inns and public houses have been regulated in England at least since the 15th century. But what Johnson was really evoking was a very specific English sense of exceptionalism, a fantasy of personal freedom as a marker of ethnic and national identity.

That exceptionalism is not, alas, mere rhetorical self-indulgence. It helped to shape official policy towards the Covid-19 crisis. It lies behind both the idea that there should be a distinctive British response to this global challenge, and the assumption that there was something peculiarly unnatural in expecting Brits to obey drastic restrictions. Its legacy is the globally discredited policy of herd immunity and the late introduction, squandering Britains head start, of the lockdown.

The prime minister himself has long cultivated the notion that he does not just espouse this freedom-loving exceptionalism he embodies it. In the early stages of the crisis, Johnsons admirers could see it as his Finest Hour, the moment when his Churchillian posturing would become real and he would save his country. When the prime minister was hospitalised, his overwrought friend and fan Toby Young confessed in the Spectator to a kind of mystical belief in Britains greatness and her ability to occasionally bring forth remarkable individuals who can serve her at critical junctures. Ive always thought of Boris as one of those people not just suspected it, but known it in my bones.

Johnsons Churchill impersonation has always been a way of claiming that his own waywardness is not mere self-indulgence but the mark of a special (and idiosyncratically English) destiny. In his book, The Churchill Factor, he wrote of his idol: There is a sense in which [Churchills] eccentricity and humour helped to express what Britain was fighting for what it was all about. With his ludicrous hats and rompers and cigars and excess alcohol, he contrived physically to represent the central idea of his own political philosophy: the inalienable right of British people to live their lives in freedom, to do their own thing. Guess who this was meant to bring to mind for contemporary readers?

Being drunk on freedom is one way for the chosen people to do their own thing. Adopting a distinctive national approach to a global pandemic is another. The myth of a unique and defining love of personal freedom as a badge of nationhood underpinned a profound reluctance to impose life-saving restrictions on movement and social gatherings. Other people might put up with that sort of thing, but not the English. On the altar of this exceptionalism, lives have been sacrificed.

This innate, genetic resistance to conformity is a myth. This is obvious from the persistence of an equal and opposite cliche of Englishness: the queue. George Orwell could rhapsodise the gentle-mannered, undemonstrative, law-abiding English and the orderly behaviour of English crowds, the lack of pushing and quarrelling, the willingness to form queues. The anthropologist Kate Fox wrote: During the London riots in August 2011, I witnessed looters forming an orderly queue to squeeze, one at a time, through the smashed window of a shop they were looting. Orderliness is just as prominent as waywardness in the English self-image which suggests that neither of these truisms is ancient, inalienable or worth a damn when you are making policy in a time of plague.

The exceptionalist freedom-loving instinct has little to do with history and much more to do with current politics, specifically the politics of Brexit. Johnson described as magnificent a 2014 book by the arch-Brexiter Daniel Hannan called How We Invented Freedom we being the Anglo-Saxons. Hannan expressly reclaimed the idea of exceptionalism, the freedom-loving Anglo-Saxons being the exception especially to European slavishness. Brexit, as he argued, was one imperative of this dichotomy. Tragically, a notion that the UK could ignore the World Health Organization and do its own thing with the virus was another.

Covid-19, as Johnson himself discovered in the most awful way, doesnt make exceptions. The threat is universal. And the shield against it the NHS is cosmopolitan and global. There are 200 different nationalities represented in its ranks by 150,000 doctors, nurses and ancillary staff. One consolation in this disaster is the realisation that Britain is exceptionally lucky to have them.

Fintan OToole is a columnist with the Irish Times

Read more from the original source:

Coronavirus has exposed the myth of British exceptionalism - The Guardian