Our 50 states can experiment with policy, as long as they stay within the constraints of the U.S. Constitution, their state constitutions and so on. This federalism allows state governments to find new solutions to emerging problems. Depending on the results, other states can then emulate, avoid or try a different version of a policy. This freedom to innovate creates healthy competition among the states for businesses and taxpayers. All of this state-by-state policy diversity is mostly a healthy thing as long as local governments dont infringe on a right thats specifically protected in the U.S. Bill of Rights.

The trouble is some states have behaved as if the Second Amendment is not even in the U.S. Constitution. The District of Columbia (D.C.) was so blatant about taking away this right that residents of D.C. decided to sue the District for violating their rights.That case, a dozen years ago, made it to the U.S. Supreme Court asDistrict of Columbia v. Heller. The high court ruled that the Second Amendment does indeed protect an individual right.This threw out D.C.s most-egregious restrictions, but it was hardly the end of the struggle for freedom in D.C., as the District continued to use other means to prevent people from utilizing their rights.

Soon after theHellerdecision, inMcDonald v. Chicago(2010), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the Second Amendment also restricts state and local governments. Still, though this helped, it didnt end many local infringements on this basic constitutional right.

As this was being written, the U.S. Supreme Court was considering another case (NYSRPA v.NYC) that could have a big impact on how the Second Amendment is treated by the state and local governments. Well let you know at A1F.com and in these pages what the Court decides. Potentially, this is a big deal, because for the past decade, the U.S. Supreme Court has turned down cases that would have allowed it to rein in the states and municipalities that continue to treat this constitutional right as if it can be regulated away into being a right in name only.

One problem with this is that an American citizen who wants to travel to a shooting competition, to a hunt, or just to bring a gun along for self-defense purposes has to wade through a lot of legal language to make certain they wont break any local restrictions. Thanks to lobbying from the NRA, there is federal protection in place for those who travel from one state or jurisdiction with a legally owned firearm to another place where they can legally have the firearm; nevertheless, a few states and cities have still arrested or detained law-abiding citizens as they traveled with firearms.

Americas complex legal patchwork of laws places an immense burden on individual gun owners. Making a mistake can lead to a felony conviction, lengthy jail time and a lifetime loss of a persons gun rights; as a result, we must know every law and be aware of the discretion local authorities have and how they use that discretion before we travel.

It shouldnt be this complicated. We should be able to carry firearms for personal protection around this great nation. The Second Amendment should be enough of a legal remedy to protect us as we do. One way to resolve this legalistic gauntlet is for Congress to pass, and for a president to sign, federal reciprocity legislation. To protect gun owners and allow people to universally exercise their fundamental rights, the NRA continues to lobby for such legislation.

Read the original here:

From The Editor: Barriers to Freedom - America's 1st Freedom

On April 27 1994, millions of South Africans gathered at voting stations to exercise their hard-won right to vote in a free and democratic election.

They had the opportunity to choose their own destiny and to establish a way of life and a national culture of freedom, equality, empowerment and respect for everyone.

The irony of celebrating Freedom Day in 2020, while we are in a national lockdown due to the Covid-19 coronavirus, is not lost on us.

However, it is because of our collective freedom and a desire to protect the greater good of all South Africans that the government has temporarily curtailed that freedom.

Over the past 26 years, our democracy has thankfully brought us closer together in agreement with the idea that everyone is important, and that all our lives carry equal value.

Every member of society must take the necessary precautions and obey the rules of the lockdown in order to curb the spread of Covid-19 among our people, so that we may continue to enjoy our freedom in the future.

We must, though, remain mindful of and continue to raise our voices against reports of abuses perpetrated by those meant to enforce regulations in a lawful manner that respects everyones human rights.

Over the past 26 years, our democracy has thankfully brought us closer together in agreement with the idea that everyone is important, and that all our lives carry equal value

Freedom for South Africa was a long and hard battle. There are many untold stories of pain and suffering which resulted from the unfairness and oppression of the past.

There are many stories of sacrifice, resistance and resilience that have not been told. May we never repeat the mistakes of the past, and may we always appreciate what we have achieved.

Later, on Friday, May 1, we will also commemorate Workers Day, alongside many other countries across the world.

This day is dedicated to appreciating and understanding the plight of workers around the world who are subjected to inhumane working conditions. In recent weeks, the crises stemming from the Covid-19 pandemic have highlighted the work of essential staff.

We are grateful for healthcare workers, including hospital janitors, receptionists, security guards and cleaners, who are at the forefront of the struggle against the virus.

We are equally grateful for the retail staff in supermarkets and petrol stations, who continue to work despite the risks they are exposed to.

As we commemorate these two national holidays, let us be cognisant that the rights of workers and our collective freedom are interlinked.

Read:This pandemic must teach us that every one of us needs the other to survive

We cannot call ourselves truly free until we have helped to create a prosperous, just, equitable and equal society in which we protect and sustain each others humanity. We do this by making today matter for the greater good.

I hope that, as we continue to work from home as best we can, we spare a thought for the many people who are not in formal employment, or those who work as day labourers who have been unable to ply their trade during the lockdown.

They have all suffered financially under these conditions. We have many students who come from single-income households and are suffering.

As we race around the clock to equip our students with internet-enabled devices to continue their studies wherever they are, we hope that we continue being kind, empathic and understanding, and fostering resilience in our students and each other in these uncertain times.

Let us focus on our hope that medical research and clinical trials will lead to the development of a vaccine. Just as many decades ago it seemed we might never attain freedom until we did so too will we defeat this virus.

Kupe is vice-chancellor and principal at the University of Pretoria.

Read more:

Freedom binds us all. Today is all about the greater good - News24

PARIS (AP) Media watchdog Reporters Without Borders is sounding the alarm that the coronavirus pandemic poses a threat for press freedom around the world.

In its annual evaluation of global media freedoms, the group warned Tuesday that the health crisis could serve as an excuse for governments to take advantage of the fact that politics are on hold, the public is stunned and protests are out of the question, in order to impose measures that would be impossible in normal times.

North Korea ranked bottom of the groups press freedom index. As in 2019, Norway again topped its ranking of 180 countries and territories.

Overall, the report judged press freedom to be satisfactory in the United States, but also said public denigration, threats, and harassment of journalists continued to be a serious problem last year. The U.S. ranked 45th on the groups list, behind countries in Europe, Africa, Asia, Oceania, Latin America and the Caribbean.

The report highlighted U.S. President Donald Trumps hostility toward some journalists and media outlets and said his oft-deployed fake news phrase has now been deployed by leaders around the world as a tool to crack down on the media.

Hostility toward journalists and news outlets in the United States deepened and intensified, and few attacks were as vitriolic as those that came from the president, the group said. The abuse is only getting worse amid the coronavirus pandemic in 2020, as journalists covering the Trump administrations response to the crisis are subjected to the presidents attacks during his press briefings.

Other threats to the future of journalism are economic, with job cuts gutting newsrooms, the group said. And the weak regulation of digital technologies has created information chaos, blurring lines between fact, fiction, propaganda and advertising.

The pandemic has amplified the spread of rumors and fake news as quickly as the virus itself, the report noted.

For this decisive decade to not be a disastrous one, people of goodwill, whoever they are, must campaign for journalists to be able to fulfill their role as societys trusted third parties, it said.

___

Follow AP coverage of the pandemic at http://apnews.com/VirusOutbreak and https://apnews.com/UnderstandingtheOutbreak

Continued here:

Watchdog: Pandemic worsening threat to global media freedom - The Associated Press

Offense, the situation on the Internet and hatred are the first things that come to mind when we talk about freedom of expression. This is what Human Rights Defender of Armenia Arman Tatoyan stated during a discussion on the annual report on the activities of the Human Rights Defender of Armenia and the protection of human rights and freedoms held as part of the session of the Standing Committee on Human Rights Protection and Public Affairs of the National Assembly of Armenia today.

Of course, the situation is troubling, and there is especially a lot of aggression from fake users and groups. There is almost no healthy discussion on any issue. Even when there are two viewpoints, the groups use swear words and offend each other.

I call on citizens to not become engaged in such discussions because they are dangerous in that they can present a danger in real life. There was a case when a citizen had mocked a woman online, the womans relatives had found the citizen and had used force to settle a score with the citizen, he said.

According to him, this creates obstacles for journalists as well since a journalist is often identified with the person from whom a journalist can take an interview and who can target the journalist.

Read the original post:

15:32 Armenia Ombudsman on freedom of expression in the country - Information-Analytic Agency NEWS.am

Heres what the staff of the Technology and Press Freedom Project at the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press is tracking this week.

Last week, the Reporters Committee and 29 media organizationsfiled an application for leave to interveneinBiancardi v. Italy, a right to be forgotten case before the European Court of Human Rights.

The right to be forgotten in Europe, also known as the right to erasure, is codified in the EUsGeneral Data Protection Regulation. It gives individuals the right to request that a person or entity in control of their personal data erase the information when, for instance, it is no longer relevant to the purposes for which it was collected.

The controversial right was at the center of a 2014 case (under an earlier data privacy regulation) before the Court of Justice of the European Union, whichruledthat Google had to remove links to personal information from its search results unless public interest in that information remained. In asubsequent casein 2019, the CJEU held that the search engines obligation to delist, or take down, links under the Europe-wide right to erasure does not extend beyond Europe.

The latest case before the ECtHR goes further than just delisting. The central question is whether a news outlet itself has to delete content in response to a right-to-erasure request.

In 2008, an online news site, Primadanoi, reported on a stabbing incident between two brothers at a local restaurant. A little over two years later, one of the brothers, who is also the manager of the restaurant, requested that the article about the incident be taken down. Primadanoi initially refused to comply with the request, but agreed to do so during the initial court proceedings. Despite Primadanoi removing the article, the highest court in Italy affirmed the lower courts order assessing 10,000 in reputational damages to the brother and the restaurant, caused by the initial refusal to delete the article.

Biancardi, the editor-in-chief of the news site, appealed the case to the ECtHR, but the large judgment and legal fees forced him toshut downPrimadanoi.

In the application for leave, the Reporters Committee and co-intervenors, represented by the law firm Covington & Burling LLP, are proposing to focus their written submission on the balance between the right to privacy and the right to freedom of expression by providing an overview of how these rights have been interpreted and applied in various jurisdictions.

Linda Moon

The U.S. Supreme Court last weekagreed to hearVan Buren v. U.S.and, for the first time, may review the scope of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, the U.S. federal anti-hacking law. The challengers have argued that the broad interpretation of the law adopted by some courts improperly criminalizes conduct beyond hacking, including, for instance, theautomated collection of publicly available information on the internet, something that data journalists routinely do.

The Supreme Court alsorecently announcedthat, due to the COVID-19 outbreak, the Court will conduct oral arguments for upcoming cases via teleconference. Alive audio feedof the arguments will be made available to the public.

A federal district court judge dismisseda lawsuitbrought by Twitter challenging the governments decision to classify the aggregate number of national security surveillance requests the company receives. Though the judge held that the government had demonstrated a compelling need to classify this information, she left open the question of whether Twitter could constitutionally publish the information, even if properly classified.

Officials with the New York Police Department recentlyconfiscateda journalists drone, issued him a misdemeanor summons, and attempted to seize his photos and phone after he tried to document mass burials on Hart Island, a piece of land separated from New York City by Long Island Sound. The aerial photographer flew the drone from a City Island parking lot to take pictures of the island, which is used by the city to bury unclaimed and anonymous decedents. The NYPD cited a 1948avigationlaw that prohibits aircraft from taking off or landing anywhere other than an airport.

The Pentagons Office of the Inspector General earlier this monthissued a reportstating it found no undue influence or pressure by White House officials on the Department of Defenses decision to award a cloud-computing contract to Microsoft over Amazon.

The Internet Corporation of Assigned Names and Numbers, or ICANN,delayedconsideration of the sale of the .org domain to a private equity group to early May. (ICANN is responsible for the internets domain name system.) The delay followsa letterfrom Californias attorney general raising concerns that the sale could cause financial issues for the domain and, in turn, disruption of the websites hosted.

Smart read

The Stanford Internet Observatory haslaunched a serviceto assist journalists covering cybercrime and other information technology incidents by offering tools to better understand how to properly determine the origins of a cyberattack, including who was behind it.

Gif of the Week: The Supreme Court quick hits remind us of a 2014 push byJohn Oliverto combine audio of arguments with exciting footage of the justices.

Like what youve read?Sign up to get This Week in Technology + Press Freedom delivered straight to your inbox!

The Technology and Press Freedom Project at the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press uses integrated advocacy combining the law, policy analysis, and public education to defend and promote press rights on issues at the intersection of technology and press freedom, such as reporter-source confidentiality protections, electronic surveillance law and policy, and content regulation online and in other media. TPFP is directed by Reporters Committee Attorney Gabe Rottman. He works with Stanton Foundation National Security/Free Press Fellow Linda Moon and Legal Fellows Jordan Murov-Goodman and Lyndsey Wajert.

Continue reading here:

This Week in Technology + Press Freedom: April 26, 2020 - Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press

He served in the US Army during World War II. One of the first black photographers in the White House, he took photos of US Presidents Harry Truman, Dwight Eisenhower, John F. Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson, as well as Queen Elizabeth II.

But he was perhaps best known for an assignment he undertook for Jet Magazine in 1961: documenting the Freedom Riders as they journeyed to the Deep South to challenge racial segregation.

"We kept saying that he survived World War II, survived the struggle of civil rights, he survived a heart attack," his wife Maria Santos-Gaffney said. "We were praying that he would survive this too, but his body could not handle the severity of the virus infection."

He showed the world the Freedom Rides

"I didn't want anybody to know I was a photographer either," Gaffney said in the interview. "That was more dangerous than being a Rider because they don't want documentation of things that happened, whether you're a black or white photographer."

He was afraid that the further South he traveled, he said, if people found out he had a camera, he might not come back -- and his fears were nearly realized.

From Atlanta, the riders split off into two groups as they boarded buses for Anniston, Alabama. Some riders got on a Greyhound, while the others, Gaffney among them, hopped on a Trailways bus that left an hour later.

The violence in Anniston and Birmingham made headlines. The Freedom Riders tried to continue their journey the next day, but found that no bus driver would agree to transport them. Eventually, Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy arranged for the group to fly from Birmingham to New Orleans -- which came as a relief for Gaffney.

"I'd never flown before, but it felt good when that plane got off that runway," he said in the documentary. "I'd rather take a chance on getting killed in a plane crash than to get beat to death by hoodlums with iron pipes."

His work was informed by his ancestry

Though Gaffney said in the PBS interview that he didn't consider himself to be an activist, his cousin Patricia Johnson said his career was largely informed by his family history.

His great-grandparents had been enslaved on a plantation in South Carolina, and his grandparents were sharecroppers in the town of Gaffney, Johnson told CNN. In the 1920s, Gaffney's parents migrated from South Carolina to Washington D.C. for better opportunities. Gaffney was born in 1927.

In 1945, Gaffney enlisted in the Army. Johnson said he would tell his cousins stories about the segregation he experienced during his service. He was also close to his uncle, Johnson's father, who she said had once faced a lynch mob in Montgomery, Alabama.

Those experiences were part of why he felt compelled to document the civil rights struggle of the 1960s, according to Johnson.

Gaffney was a "legendary figure" in the family, Johnson said. Despite his achievements though, his family members said he was always learning, and encouraging others to do the same.

Johnson recalled that as a young girl, Gaffney took her along to state dinners when he was on assignment at the White House, introducing her to world leaders and dignitaries.

"He wanted to make sure we were afforded every opportunity we could get," she said.

When he wasn't taking snapshots at the White House, on Capitol Hill or across the Deep South, Gaffney's career sometimes landed him in more far-flung places. In the 1980s, a research project on the African diaspora took him to Brazil, where he met the woman he would marry, Santos-Gaffney.

Gaffney is survived by her and their two sons, Theodore and Walter.

Read more from the original source:

Theodore Gaffney, who photographed the Freedom Riders as they protested segregation, dies of Covid-19 complications - CNN

The country that gave the world the Magna Carta has reacted to the pandemic by allowing centuries of hard-earned personal and financial freedoms to be stripped away in the name of safety.

We Brits like to think of ourselves as a freedom-loving people. Two world wars, a 50-year Cold War, and interventions in the Middle East against totalitarian regimes, were all conducted in the name of liberty.

The myriad of nations once in our empire are now some of the freest countries in the world. The US, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, even the planets largest democracy, India, were all born out of what is often thought of as a distinctly British attitude to freedom. The Magna Carta, John Lock, John Stuart Mill and Adam Smith all emerged from this small island off the coast of mainland Europe, and we should damn well be proud of that.

However, the coronavirus outbreak seems to have shown that the UK may well have exported its last drop of that sort of spirit. After initially resisting the continental response of lockdown to stop the spread of the virus, the British people have embraced their new restrictions in frighteningly supine and lamb-like fashion. The eagerness of freeborn Brits to acquiesce to the greatest suspension of their liberties has been breathtakingly sad to witness.

It was once said that an Englishmans home is his castle. Well, that may once have been true, but recent months have turned that Englishman into Edward V, and that castle into the Tower of London prison. We have willingly and almost gleefully accepted our effective house arrest with barely a whimper of dissent. Daddy government told us to go to our room and we raced up the stairs as fast as our feet could carry us.

There has been no opposition from any political party, big or small, to the lockdown imposed on Britain. Police are now stopping people who dare to leave their homes, questioning them and handing out fines if they dont have a good enough reason. And theres barely a murmur about the police state we find ourselves in.

Sunbathing in a park is now looked upon as a reckless and criminal act, and even if the police dont move you along, self-appointed Twitter commissars will photograph you and brand you a Covidiot.

Then there is the bizarre British trait of deifying the National Health Service. It is not an exaggeration to say that the NHS is the closest thing Britain has to a national religion. This was the case before the Covid-19 outbreak, but the pandemic has cemented the organisation as almost the sole object of universal veneration in the country.

Every Thursday at 8pm, people dutifully line the streets of towns and cities to applaud our NHS. Every worker pays a tithe to it in the form of National Insurance, and anyone who even remotely criticises it is immediately excoriated for blasphemy. We are even sacrificing our economy on the altar of this socialistic health care delivery system, as instructed to by the new Orwellian mantra of the nation: Stay at home. Protect the NHS. Save lives.

Lauding healthcare workers is obviously something we should do, particularly in a time such as this, but instead, Britain is praising the antiquated, inefficient system in which they work, in a way that has not been replicated in any other country. This may seem pedantic, but it is an important difference; the NHS is an arm of the state, and no part of a government in a proper democracy should be immune to criticism or adored with such blind faith.

Our mainstream media has been the worst offender of all. With the exception of a smattering of brave commentators, such as Peter Hitchens and Toby Young, news outlets have pleaded for ever stricter controls on our freedoms. Rather than question the sense of the government engaging in the worst act of economic self-harm in history, commentators best exemplified by that loudmouth Piers Morgan screech at government ministers to do more, restrict us more, spend more, because people are dying, as if this is not an unavoidable a fact of life, while the weekly death totals are no higher than they have been before.

This even extends to their coverage of other countries. The sneering faux-bafflement with which Sky News and the BBC et al have covered the protests against the lockdown in the US has been repugnant.

In various states across America, people have taken to the streets to demonstrate against what they legitimately see as enormous government overreach, and for the restoration of liberties.

It may be easy to sneer at these people with their Dont Tread On Me flags, their guns and their pick-up trucks, but that doesnt mean they dont have a point. They want to get back to their jobs and their lives, while over on our side of the pond we are all too happy to placidly accept being furloughed from our jobs on the largesse of the state because the science is settled on Covid-19.

But it isnt, and the people questioning that arent conspiracy theorists vandalising 5G masts. Scientists are divided as to whether or not lockdown is having any real impact at all. One study from the University of Oxford suggested that up to half the population may have already had the disease. When Sweden emerges from its methods, without having totally wrecked its economy and its businesses, how will our politicians justify their over-the-top reactions? The patient may be dead, but the operation was a complete success?

It is not just the notoriously freedom-loving Americans who have been stirred up into protests against lockdowns. Brazil, Russia, France and even Germany have seen unrest or demonstrations against the draconian social distancing measures brought in. But our docile compliance has even surprised the governments own scientists who have said that they had seen even larger reductions in normal behaviour than they could have hoped for.

While mass public unrest would obviously be counterproductive it is alarming at how willingly the British have accepted these new restrictions, and public support for them shows no sign of waning. According to recent opinion polls, just six percent of Britons think the current restrictions are too severe, while 44 percent believe they have not gone far enough.

Perhaps most surprisingly, support for the measures is strongest among those who feel very strongly English, according to research by Bristol University. This is a damning indictment on the notion of the once proud tradition of English liberty and self-reliance.

It is also a particular blow to those who, like me, supported Brexit in pursuit of less government. Far from sticking two fingers up at the establishment, it appears a great many of those who voted to leave are all too happy to let the government crack the whip as long as its Westminster that wields it, not Brussels.

For all our national mythology of being a devil-may-care nation of risk-takers who have resisted authoritarianism for centuries, Covid-19 has so far shown us to be an easily cowed people who value safety above all else.

Michael Gove once famously said that Britain had had enough of experts, but alas, we have turned our nation over to them and allowed them greater control of our lives than they have ever had before. Shame on us.

Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.

Read more:

From lions to lambs: Covid-19 reveals supposedly freedom-loving British to be anything but, as we happily clap away our liberty - RT

At a string of small reopen America protests across the country this week, mask-less citizens proudly flouted social distancing guidance while openly carrying semiautomatic rifles and waving American flags and signs with ironic swastikas. They organized chants to lock up female Democrat governors and to fire the countrys top infectious disease experts. At one point during protests at the Michigan Capitol, the groups orchestrated gridlock blocked an ambulance en route to a nearby hospital.

For those whove chosen to put their trust in science during the pandemic its hard to fathom the decision to gather to protest while a deadly viral pathogen transmitted easily by close contact and spread by symptomatic and asymptomatic people alike ravages the country. But it shouldnt come as a surprise. This weeks public displays of defiance a march for the freedom to be infected are the logical conclusion of the modern far-rights donor-funded, shock jock-led liberty movement. It was always headed here.

Few demonstrate this movement better than Alex Jones of Infowars one of the key figures of Saturdays You Cant Close America rally on the steps of the Capitol building in Austin, Tex. For decades, Mr. Jones has built a thriving media empire harnessing (real and understandable) fear, paranoia and rage, which in turn drive sales of vitamin supplements and prepper gear in his personal store. The Infowars strategy is simple: Instill a deep distrust in all authority, while promoting a seductive, conspiratorial alternate reality in which Mr. Jones, via his outlandish conspiracies, has all the answers. Hes earned the trust of a non-trivial number of Americans, and used it to stoke his ego and his bank account. And he never lets reality get in the way (case in point, holding a stay-at-home order protest in Texas the day after the state announced it would begin efforts to carefully reopen in coming weeks).

Former employees have described Mr. Jones to me as master of manipulating the truth into a convenient worldview in which Infowars and its listeners are constantly victimized by powerful institutional forces. We kept saying Were the underdogs that was our mantra, one former employee told me in 2017. To make this work, Mr. Jones molds the days news into conspiratorial fables.

A novel virus about which so much is unknown and where expert opinion is constantly shifting is a near perfect subject for Infowars to fit the news to its paranoid narrative. Uncertainty over the viruss origins in China is a springboard to float unproven theories about bioweapons. Discussions about a vaccine to end the epidemic become conspiracies about billionaire tech leaders pushing population control. Changing epidemiological models that show fewer projected Covid-19 deaths (because social distancing has worked to slow infections) provide an opening for Mr. Jones to rant about stay-at-home lockdowns. Genuine fears about deeply unfair job losses and economic recession become reckless theories about Democrat-led plans to punish American citizens by driving them into poverty.

Jones opportunistic rantings fit neatly into a larger right-wing strategy, which has grown alongside Infowars. Just as Infowars rallies are tied to the media outlets financial interest in antigovernment paranoia, a few of this weeks rallies have been underwritten by political organizations with ties to the Republican Party and the Trump administration. Regardless of whos behind them, the intent is to sow division and attempt to reshape public opinion. As Voxs Jane Coaston wrote, theyre designed to pit Republican-voting areas of states against their Democratic-voting neighbors, even rural Republicans against urban Republicans.

Its important to note that the reopen protests have been generally small (at most, hundreds of people in states of millions of citizens responsibly staying at home) and dont even reflect the polled opinions of many conservatives. But they fit neatly into a larger campaign playbook and take on outsize importance. They take place frequently in swing states or states with Democratic governors and are plastered across social media, reported in mainstream organizations, openly cheered on by Fox News and right-wing media, and ultimately end up amplified (tacitly or explicitly) by the president. The strategy has worked well in recent years, consolidating support among the Trump base.

As a political movement, the Make America Great Again crowd relishes turning criticism from ideological opponents into a badge of honor. Confrontation of any kind is currency and people taking offense to their actions is a surefire sign that theyre correct. The MAGA mind-set prioritizes freedom above all especially the freedom from introspection, apologizing or ever admitting defeat. But the movement, which has been building since the Tea Party protests, has created a reflexive response among both Joness audience and far-right Trump supporters.

This response is disguised as an expression of liberty, but its a twisted, paranoid and racialized version. Slate editor Tom Scocca defined it recently as a political ideology where supporters are conditioned to believe that thinking about other peoples needs or interests in any way is tyranny by definition. This wholesale rejection of collective thinking is, as Vices Anna Merlan notes, the cornerstone of the anti-vaccine and health freedom movements, which reject public health because they dont think their choices affect other people.

Unmentioned by the protesters are the workers actually keeping America open, many of them afraid for their health, with no choice and in communities devastated by the virus. The result, as my Times colleagues described Saturday, is images of nearly all-white protesters demanding the governor relax restrictions while hoisting Trump signs and Confederate battle flags, as the virus disproportionately impacts Michigans black residents.

This coronavirus protest movement is merely the confluence of this perverted liberty ideology honed and pushed by Mr. Jones, right-wing interest groups and pro-Trump media and the dynamics of an online information ecosystem that prioritizes conflict to generate attention. When Infowars-style tactics meet online platforms the result is a flattening of all nuanced arguments of science and politics into a simplified struggle between patriots and tyrants. Small protests incorrectly blossom into a false national narrative.

And so here we are in 2020, protesting statewide lockdowns intended to save lives while thousands of Americans across the country grow sick and die each day. That a virus that demands a united front where our public health is only as strong as our least vigilant citizens should come at a moment of extreme polarization is a tragedy. But this moment is what weve been headed toward for years. And so the reopen America protests feel unconscionable and yet completely predictable. The playbook isnt new. The only thing thats changed are the stakes, which get higher every day.

The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. Wed like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And heres our email:letters@nytimes.com.

Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram.

Follow this link:

Protesting for the Freedom to Catch the Coronavirus - The New York Times

As almost six million children were able to leave their homes for the first time in 42 people took to social media to express their anger at the abuse of safety regulations by thousands of people across the whole country.

Hundreds of images from the countrys major cities were shared on social media pages showing people ignoring safety regulations: social distancing and personal hygiene as they mixed together on beaches and in parks in total ignorance of the government measures.

There was little evidence during the first day of this relaxation that many people were complying with the safety regulations as they bathed, played games together and walked along hand in hand with little or no regard for the new government order.

This has been denounced by many across the country through the hashtag # Niosenlacalle , which became a trending topic in Spain.

In Alicante the City Council took to Twitter to appeal to its residents warning people of the numerous breaches, the closure of parks and beaches, although these were largely ignored.

The rules were quite clear, respect the safety distances and do not play with other children. But these instructions were not fulfilled and the Police had to intervene in many areas to avoid any crowding in addition to warning both parents who were out with their child.

It certainly seemed as though failure to comply with the rules was widespread with people ignoring the one kilometre rule and taking to their cars to travel to the beaches where, in El Campello and Santa Pola, they were open.

Although the decree was clear, many families totally ignored it, especially in some of the larger cities such as Barcelona, Bilbao and San Sebastian.

Throughout the entire day you could see entire families with their children, some trying to circumvent the rules with the father walking with one child and the mother with another lagging behind.

There were also many older people walking alone and even sunbathing on the benches, parents taking advantage as they played sports, children together playing football with friends, groups of people with their children totally ignoring social distancing and appropriate security measures.

The number of irregularities were such, on this first day of relaxation, that police largely ignored the issue of sanctions which would have seen them completely over run.

In other areas, particularly in much of the Vega Baja, the law was more generally applied with little, or no evidence, of the disappointing scenes seen elsewhere. The mayors of Alicante and Elche both said that they considered the degree of compliance with the rules to have been acceptable, but they appealed to the responsibility of the families so that this week there is no setback and the area continues to meet the parameters needed to start the expected de-escalation.

Read the original here:

Outrage as thousands abuse guidelines on first day of freedom - The Leader Newspaper Online

Growing up, I loved reading.

One of my favourite books is 1984, George Orwells masterpiece. In it, the inhabitants of the fictional state of Oceania are constantly under the watchful eye of a totalitarian ruler known as Big Brother.

The inhabitants are kept safe from harm in the surveillance state as long as they obey Big Brother. They have near absolute safety, but no freedom.

Im afraid our obeisance to government in the current age of Covid-19 could be an ominous indicator of an impending world not unlike Orwells oppressive Oceania.

This is because governments the world over have learned a lesson they wont ever forget: At the first sign of danger, people will gladly give up their freedom in exchange for safety, or the perception of safety.

Many democracies, including Malaysia, have instituted nationwide autocratic lockdowns in the belief that itll stem the spread of Covid-19. Although some are unhappy about this, almost everyone agrees it is for our own good.

These governments, including our own, are acting like our all-knowing Big Brother protecting us and ensuring we dont misbehave for our own wellbeing. And Malaysians are showering the government with praise, now that it looks like we have mostly contained the virus.

We attribute our low death rate to swift government action shutting almost everything down and forcing us to stay indoors. But correlation does not mean causation. Obviously our valiant frontliners, rapidly ramped up testing and our good medical facilities have been huge factors in keeping the lid on the virus.

But I have my doubts about the necessity for a national lockdown, given that its impact will be felt for years, and wonder if other means, including specifically targeted lockdowns, would have worked as well, if not better.

The most cited success story is Wuhan, where the Chinese government initiated a lockdown on a scale the world had never seen isolating millions from the world and each other. The method, deployed in conjunction with many others, seems to have worked.

China and the World Health Organization (WHO) peddled its efficacy and in the process set the containment narrative for the world. This spurred many democracies, including Malaysia, to disregard civil liberties and follow Chinas lead.

However, we need to keep in mind that a lockdown is a heavy-handed method, one which would be expected as the method of choice in freedom-starved China rather than in democracies such as the US, Malaysia and much of the world.

One only needs to look towards South Korea, Taiwan and Hong Kong for a model that has worked tremendously well without having to resort to blunt and undemocratic lockdowns.

Lockdowns, which are the result of an escalation of government powers, have predictably led to many opportunistic governments using the Covid-19 crisis as a tool to strengthen their hold on power and their citizens.

Hungary just passed a Coronavirus Bill which gives their Prime Minister Viktor Orban the power to govern unchallenged for as long as he sees fit. It also allows the government to jail for five years those whom it perceives as spreading fake news about the outbreak.

Closer to home, the Philippines has granted President Rodrigo Duterte temporary emergency powers to fight off Covid-19. Theyll be in place for three months but can be extended by Congress. This has set off alarms in the activist and journalist communities there which fear these emergency powers will not be rolled back once the pandemic is over.

Similarly, many countries, including Turkey, Russia, Brazil, Iraq, Azerbaijan and Honduras, are using the Covid-19 panic to muzzle the press and control the spread of information.

Meanwhile in Kenya, more people have died due to the polices brutal enforcement of a nationwide lockdown, (12 deaths) than of Covid-19 (11 deaths) in the first two-weeks of its implementation.

Another alarming development is that the public has welcomed the adoption of movement tracking apps for the purposes of keeping tabs on those with infections and for identifying viral hotspots. Theres another name for this: a mass surveillance tool.

Countries such as China, South Korea, Singapore and Taiwan are already using contact tracing apps that track the movement of their citizens. The US, which has historically been sensitive to privacy concerns, is on the bandwagon as well, with tech giants Google and Apple working on bluetooth-enabled contact tracing capability for Android and iOS.

At home, the Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission (MCMC) has released a Covid-19 contact tracing app of its own, GerakMalaysia. According to them, Since Covid-19 can be easily transmitted by being close to infected individuals, this movement app will be a valuable tool for the ministry of health to protect you and your loved ones.

According to a Malaysian daily, the app requires personal details, including the users full name, MyKad or passport number, residential address and email. Users also have to give permission to track their location at all times via the phones GPS.

Edward Snowden, the erudite NSA whistleblower says: as emergency laws proliferate, as we sacrifice our rights, we also sacrifice our capability to arrest this slide into a less liberal and less free world. Do you truly believe that when the first wave, the second wave, the sixteenth wave of the coronavirus is a long forgotten memory, that these capabilities will not be kept, that these datasets will not be kept?

He adds: these kinds of emergency powers that are born out of crises have a perfect history of abuse. I mean down the board, when you look at these things, the funniest part about it in a dark way is, the emergency never ends it becomes normalised.

Hes right on the money. Malaysia is no stranger to this. The infamous and rightly maligned Internal Security Act (ISA) was the descendent of the Emergency Regulations Ordinance 1948 which was enacted to fight the Malayan Communist Partys insurgency. Introduced in 1960, it continued till 2012 when it was repealed, after years of activism by human rights groups.

The rights groups had argued that the government was using it as a tool to squelch dissent, long after the communists were a non-concern. It was used to imprison and silence government critics including opposition leaders, activists and academicians all without having to legally prosecute them.

So, the million dollar question is: What will the Covid-19 lockdown and the increased surveillance of population movements evolve into in Malaysia? Moving forward, will movement tracking apps become mandatory for the good of all? Will the government revive the Fake News Act, which was repealed by the previous Pakatan Harapan government?

The infringements on our privacy and freedom should raise alarms and stir up heated debates but they havent. Could it be that we are too afraid or too concerned about our safety to care much about our freedom? Or could it be that we feel this is not the right time to debate the freedom issue, as the disease is still a threat?

Will safety against the coronavirus provided by the lockdown make us more susceptible to, and accepting of, the government broadening its powers and its hold on us?

I fear there may be a tendency for our government, and governments of other nations, to adopt some of Chinas strong-arm ways of doing things, especially as we have seen how todays model of democracy the US is faring in the fight to contain Covid-19.

This is why I have a suspicion that, over time, Chinas biggest export in these troubled times will not be Covid-19 but rather a global shift towards suppression of freedom.

The views expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of FMT.

CLICK HERE FOR OUR LIVE UPDATE OF THE COVID-19 SITUATION IN MALAYSIA

Fake or not? Check our quick fake news buster here.

The rest is here:

Freedom, the first casualty in Covid-19 war - Free Malaysia Today

Hazel C. Boone (nee Dean), 90, of Freedom Township passed away at home, surrounded by her loving family. She was born August 1, 1929 in Gassaway, WV to Okey and Sarah Belle (nee Singleton) Dean.

She was a member of the Freedom Congregational Church, and the Ravenna American Legion. Hazels favorite times were spent crocheting and being with her family and friends. She was an amazing woman!

Hazel will be deeply missed by her loving children, Steve (Charlotte) Boone and Daniel (Diane) Boone; cherished grandchildren, Shannon, Heather, Holley, Daniel II and Stevie; 8 great grandchildren and brother Darrel (MaryLou) Dean.

She was preceded in death by her parents, loving husband Harper, granddaughter Carley, great granddaughter Sierra and siblings Ercel and Macel.

A Drive Thru visitation was held on Wednesday April 22, 2020 from 3:00 PM 5:00 PM at Mallory-DeHaven-Carlson Funeral Home & Cremation Services 8382 Center St. Garrettsville. If you are not feeling well, we ask that you do not attend. A private family burial was held at Drakesburg Cemetery on Thursday April 23, 2020.

View post:

Hazel C. Boone of Freedom Twp., OH - The Weekly Villager

Yanga Sibembe

About a month ago, I wrote a reflection piece for Human Rights Day, looking at how little progress had been made in terms of righting the wrongs and injustices of the past in South Africa.

Then, following a discussion with a friend about some of the failures of our democratically elected government thus far, I started to contemplate the realistic expectations of black South Africans when they went out to vote on 27 April 1994.

Those people who stood in voting queues as long as the reticulated python, What did they think would realistically happen with black people becoming free? We need to keep in mind the fact that South Africa was, and still is, a developing, or third world, country.

After decades of systematic oppression, were they hopeful the cross they put on that ballot paper would right the wrongs of the past instantaneously? If not, how long did they expect it would take?

After all, the country had been controlled by a minority for the longest time. And this minority primarily developed areas which they occupied, leaving the homelands and townships largely underdeveloped during the almost five decades of apartheid.

Granted, post 1994, black South Africans were able to move freely around the country, they could fraternise with whomever they wished, they could go to school wherever they wanted, they could pursue whatever career they wished to pursue; these doors were unlocked.

However, the systematically laid-out foundations of apartheid mostly remained intact. Especially the financial ones.

During apartheid, there were instances of black and white people doing the same job but, because whites were superior under the system, it was an insult for them to earn the same as their black counterparts.

These differences meant that, even when apartheid was over, the starting point was not the same. White people were years ahead of other races in the country, not just financially but mentally.

Lest we also forget, race-based oppression in South Africa can be traced back to the arrival of the Dutch settlers in 1652. When the Dutch were done, British colonists took over from the 18th century until 1910. This ultimately culminated in the system of apartheid.

So, again, the question arises: after centuries of oppression did the oppressed think all their problems would disappear because they now had someone who looked like them as the leader of the country?

Granted, the post-apartheid leadership has failed South Africans as well, with greedy politicians rewarding themselves for being part of the liberation struggle at the expense of those who had already suffered greatly in the past. And 26 years after liberation, South Africa is still considered one of the most unequal societies in the world.

The distrust between the leaders and the masses runs deep, too. Just a few days ago, when President Cyril Ramaphosa announced a R500-billion stimulus package, in light of the Covid-19 pandemic, jokes went around on social media that a huge chunk of that money would end up in the pockets of greedy comrades and not in the hands of those that desperately needed it.

It will take a few more generations, as well as some commendable and selfless leadership, to right the inequalities if it is even possible. For now, we can only dream and fantasise about what a truly free and equal South Africa would look like. DM

This article is part of a series of reflections from Young Maverick writers about what Freedom Day on April 27 means to them.

Please note you must be a Maverick Insider to comment. Sign up here or if you are already an Insider.

Read the original:

Freedom Day: We have a way to go to be truly free - Daily Maverick

In March 2019, Ms. Bui Thi Kim Phuong, a Hoa Hao Buddhist from Vietnam, prepared to board a flight to the United States for a series of meetings on the deteriorating human rights and religious freedom conditions in Vietnam. Ms. Phuong was stopped by Vietnamese security authorities at Tan Son Nhat airport and forced to return home. Her offense: she is married to Nguyen Bac Truyen, a prominent prisoner of conscience and religious freedom advocate.

Nguyen Bac Truyen founded the Vietnamese Political & Religious Prisoners Friendship Association, an organization dedicated to assisting prisoners of conscience and their families. For many years, he served as a lawyer and advocate, primarily for his fellow Hoa Hao Buddhists. But in July 2017, he was kidnapped by Vietnamese authorities. Nine months later, he was tried for activities attempting to overthrow the State. The trial took less than a day. Truyen was sentenced to 11 years in prison.

Through the Defending Freedoms Project of the congressional Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission and the Religious Prisoners of Conscience Project of the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF), we are advocating for Truyens release.

Truyens sentence marks a troubling time for religious freedom in Vietnam. The number of prisoners of conscience in Vietnam has surged in recent years. Authorities are reportedly retaliating against Hmong and Montagnard Christians who refuse to renounce their religion. Independent Hoa Hao Buddhists, Cao Dai adherents, and Khmer Krom Buddhists have been intimidated, harassed, and physically assaulted for attending religious ceremonies. The 2016 Law on Belief and Religion has imposed significant bureaucratic obstacles to establishing new houses of worship and requires, among other things, all religious groups to register with the government; many refuse to do so out of concern for their independence.

We acknowledge that the Vietnamese government has made some progress over the past year. Registered religious organizations have been allowed to hold large festivals in public. Attacks by government-affiliated groups against Catholic communities seem to have decreased from previous years. The national government has investigated abuses by local officials against religious communities.

Yet, Mr. Truyens continued detention with his health deteriorating and with severe, draconian restrictions on visits and on receiving food and medical supplies stands counter to the fundamental human right of all persons to worship as they choose. His immediate and unconditional release is necessary to demonstrate the Vietnamese governments stated commitment to religious freedom.

If the Vietnamese government does not release Mr. Truyen and take action to stop ongoing religious freedom violations, we strongly recommend that the U.S. State Department designate Vietnam a Country of Particular Concern under the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998. In addition, the State Department and USAID should provide funding for programs in Vietnam that educate local officials about the importance of religious freedom. Finally, we urge all U.S. government officials, including members of Congress, to consistently raise religious freedom concerns during meetings with Vietnamese officials.

The ties between the United States and Vietnam have deepened over the past 25 years since diplomatic ties between our countries have been restored. The ongoing violations of religious freedom and detention of Nguyen Bac Truyen prevent an even closer bond. Mr. Truyens release is an important goalpost for a different path forward.

Anurima Bhargava is a commissioner on the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom. Harley RoudaHarley Edwin RoudaThe rising cost of religious freedom in Vietnam Democrat Harley Rouda advances in California House primary Let engineers make engineering decisions on local infrastructure projects MORE represents the 48th District of California.

Go here to see the original:

The rising cost of religious freedom in Vietnam | TheHill - The Hill

Reporters without Borders (RSF) publishes the World Press Freedom Index annually. Thanks to its reputation as a transparent body, governments around the world take it seriously. The index has become a point of reference quoted by international media and organizations throughout the world. The latest index shows some alarming decline in ranking for Pakistan which has lost three ranks, and is placed at 145 among the 180 countries and territories surveyed. It is no consolation for us that South Asia generally performed poor on the index as Bangladesh dropped one place to be perched at 151, and India lost two point to be ranked 142nd. Essentially, this index measures the level of freedom available to journalists in countries and regions by giving a snapshot of the media freedom situation. This freedom is evaluated with the indicators concerning the independence of the media, pluralism, and quality of legislative framework and safety of journalists.

We are more concerned about Pakistan as we have seen a renewed onslaught on media and journalism, both electronic and print. The independence of journalists or the media is ensured by at least two major factors: one, the government and state institutions remain dispassionate, impartial, and transparent; and two, no victimization takes place under various guises to curtail the freedom of expression. In the first case, the government in power must enact and enforce legislations and policies that guarantee the safety and security of journalists, media professionals and owners. In the second, the governments must prevent any discriminatory or preferential treatment with selected media houses. That means a fair and equitable distribution of advertisements, complete abidance of laws while dealing with media persons and owners, and finally making sure that no government entity violates its own principles to victimize any media house whimsically.

Unfortunately, we have not displayed any enviable performance on any of the points mentioned above. The arrest and continued detention of Mir Shakil-ur-Rahman by NAB is a case in point that is further tarnishing the image of Pakistan internationally. When any countrys ranking slides down on the freedom index, it reduces its dignity and respect within the international community. If Bangladesh, India, Pakistan or even the USA drop their rank on the index it raises serious question about the way journalists are being treated in that country by both state and non-state actors. In Pakistan a draft law for the safety of journalists was diligently prepared by the Ministry of Human Rights led by Shireen Mazari, in consultation with most stakeholders, but when it reached the cabinet level, it was stuck there for mysterious reasons. There is an urgent need for the government of Pakistan to take this slide in ranking seriously and to not only pass the legislation but also restrain anyone from targeting the media; that would include the government too

Follow this link:

Whither freedom? - The News International

Wrexham.com > News

Posted: Mon 27th Apr 2020

Calls have been made for NHS workers to receive the Freedom of Wrexham for their tireless bravery during the Covid-19 pandemic.

Plaid Cymru councillors have written to Wrexham Councils Chief Executive to formally make the request.

The Freedom of the Borough is a special honour that can be given to an individual or organisation.

A petition has also been launched to gain support from local residents. It reads:

NHS workers deserve the Freedom of Wrexham for their tireless bravery during the Covid-19 pandemic.

Like many other key workers, they have put the safety and well-being of others first and for that deserve this recognition from the people of Wrexham.

The Freedom of the Borough is a special honour that can be given to an individual or organisation.

Once it is safe, we call on Wrexham Council to grant the Freedom of the Borough to all NHS workers, while also recognising the vital work also carried out by care workers and all other key workers during the pandemic.

Cllr Marc Jones, leader of Plaid Cymru on Wrexham Council, said: Frontline NHS workers locally have lost their lives dealing with this pandemic, many others have put the wellbeing of others before their own health.

Weve saluted them with a weekly clap and we believe they deserve far more a pay rise and increase in resources would be a good start.

From a council perspective, granting the Freedom of the Borough is the most special tribute it can provide and thats why were proposing it.

Theres still a very long way to go with the pandemic, but this is a permanent way for Wrexham to say thank you to all NHS workers.

You can sign the petition and show your support, here.

Spotted something? Got a story? Send a Facebook Message | A direct message on Twitter | Email News@Wrexham.com

Read more from the original source:

Calls for NHS workers to receive the Freedom of the Borough for their tireless bravery - Wrexham.com