When The S*** Hits the Fan

This Viral #Green 4/20 #Moon Meme Is Everything That’s Wrong with the Internet

by

 

One wonders about the education system…a funny joke that takes on a life of its own.

Claire Bernish
April 11, 2016

(ANTIMEDIA) Apparently, the internet can’t take a joke. After weathering an increasingly cynical and cantankerous general populace on April Fool’s Day, a friend of mine crafted a satirical meme about a Green Moon ostensibly occurring on April 20 — but once the meme began to go viral, it quickly became clear the joke had gone, well, laughably awry. Along with the image of an intensely green-tinted moon, the meme reads:

“On April 20th 2016 several planets are going to align which will cause the Earth’s moon to appear green for about 90 minutes. This phenomenon is known as ‘Green Moon’ and only happens once every 420 years. Please share this event.”

green-moon

Intended as satire for what’s known by cannabis enthusiasts as Weed Day, the internet, for the most part, missed the obvious reference — though that didn’t entirely surprise the meme’s creator, Johnny Liberty (yes, that’s an obvious pseudonym, but in light of the topic at hand, I feel it must be said).

What began as a request from his brother for a cannabis-themed green moon meme — in the same vein as common memes heralding Blood Moons, Pink Moons, and the like — turned into a humorous challenge when he jokingly suggested I share it to see how many people would be fooled.

I bet him it would take three minutes for someone to take it seriously — it took twelve — but that wasn’t the end of it. Not by far.

truth-cancer-ad

Without rhyme or reason, the meme went viral. Incredibly viral. Posted in the evening on April 2, in just five hours the meme had been shared from my personal Facebook profile over 900 times. When it hit the eleven-hour mark, the number had jumped to over 2,300 and was growing exponentially — with a rather embarrassing number of people taking it seriously.

In fact, we were so astonished at its ‘success’ rate, Johnny opted to post the Green Moon on a Facebook page with millions of followers — just to see what would happen. In eight days, the meme had accumulated more than 10,000 shares from my timeline and well over 400,000 from the large page — but even that wasn’t the end of it.

To our mutual bewilderment, the Green Moon meme became the subject of ostensible debunking by the mainstream media. Yahoo News, International Business Times, CNet, Inquisitr, Mic, and others have now all printed articles supposedly hoax-slaying the meme that was never a hoax to begin with. Though some of those outlets appeared to grasp the funny, the fact a joke meme necessitated such articles is a terribly troubling commentary far beyond people’s gullibility. All joking aside, it unintentionally turned the meme into a telling social experiment.

“I can’t believe it. I still can’t believe it,” Johnny told me, laughing, when I interviewed him for this article. When he created the cannabis-themed meme, he hadn’t been aware of an unrelated moon meme arbitrarily claiming the moon will turn green on May 29, which had been posted by a Facebook user on March 25 — though we both learned of that meme when people posted its debunking by Snopes on the cannabis version.

Incidentally, Snopes has since included the April 20 date from Johnny’s meme in its post about Green Moons, but failed in its research by assuming it was simply another derivation of the post with the May 29 date.

“You know, I made the moon meme right in the wake of that whole April Fool’s thing, and The Free Thought Project, Anti-Media, and several outlets put out joke stories — and people were very, very mad. There was a lot of anger in response to the April Fool’s jokes,” he explained. Past experience with a mathematically-inaccurate meme going incredibly viral and satirical April Fool’s Day articles being shared tens of thousands of times appeared to prove, he explained, that people will share anything — without even reading an article or critically considering information presented in a meme.

Asked whether he views this more as a symptom of the so-called dumbing down of our society or just unadulterated laziness, Johnny theorized:

“In my opinion … there’s a part of this that’s just intellectual laziness. A lot of people watch television, and they get information just spoon-fed to them — so they see a meme or they see a headline” that catches their eye, and people will blindly share it “without doing any independent research, whatsoever; and that’s got to change, as a society.”

People, he lamented, seem to have lost the drive to bother with researching information for themselves — and that’s likely due to the education system’s emphasis on regurgitating information and agenda-driven corporate media’s regimented, governmental narrative.

“I made [the Green Moon meme] so it would be blatantly obvious it was a joke,” he continued. “I could not have made it any more obvious it was a joke.” Johnny said he even captioned the meme on the large Facebook page, “Seems legit,” and included three laughing, tear-faced emojis for emphasis — but the top comment, itself garnering over 1,000 likes, was made by someone who had taken the meme seriously.

“I find it incredibly funny that this joke, my little joke — which maybe took me five minutes to throw together — turned into a pretty hilarious social experiment,” Johnny said.

Mic thought itself clever with its theory on the motivation for his meme, saying, “Perhaps out of preemptive excitement, a Weed Day partaker got high and decided to spread an astronomical rumor about the moon turning green on April 20 — as if the cosmos wanted to vicariously celebrate the wonders of marijuana with us.”

When I asked Johnny to comment on this notion, he stated, er, bluntly, “Why does there always have to be some deep-seated reasoning? Don’t people just tell jokes anymore?”

‘Nope,’ the internet apparently replied.

This article (This Viral Green 4/20 Moon Meme Is Everything That’s Wrong with the Internet) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Claire Bernish and theAntiMedia.org. Anti-Media Radio airs weeknights at 11pm Eastern/8pm Pacific. If you spot a typo, email edits@theantimedia.org.

0 Total Shares

From theantimedia.org Team

Jailed #Bankers Freed Early as #Icelandic Government Implodes Over #PanamaPapers

by

Carey Wedler
April 7, 2016

(ANTIMEDIA) Iceland — The world watched in admiration last year when over two dozen Icelandic bankers who played a role in causing the 2008 financial crisis were sentenced to prison. Less than a year later, three of those bankers have been released — years earlier than expected. Their release was predicated on a change to current law regarding maximum penalties, but at least one lawmaker has suggested those who pushed the change through “handcrafted” it precisely to help bankers. News of their highly reduced sentences coincides with an ongoing scandal revealed by the Panama Papers this week regarding the Icelandic prime minister’s previously secret, offshore holdings in banks implicated in the collapse.

Icelandic outlet Stundin reported Thursday, as translated to English by the Icelandic Review, that three bankers from the Kaupthing Bank who were sentenced last year have been released. Former Kaupthing Chairperson of the Board Sigurður Einarsson, former Kaupthing Luxembourg CEO Magnús Guðmundsson, and former investor and 10% owner of Kaupthing Ólafur Ólafsson were convicted last year for their role in market manipulation and fraud. As the Reykjavík Grapevine summarized, “they artificially inflated the value of the bank, deliberately deceiving investors and depositors alike, and contributed significantly to the late 2008 collapse of the Icelandic banking system.”

They have each served roughly a year of their prison sentences, which ranged between four and five years, but because of a change to the law made March 16 regarding maximum penalties, they were released Thursday.

The Icelandic Review explained:

“The main part of the law change is to allow prisoners to double the amount of their sentence they serve at home, under electronic surveillance (i.e. tagged). The parliamentary bill was changed in committee to allow five days of electronic monitoring for every month of a prisoner’s sentence, instead of 2.5 days as it has been. This means that a prisoner sentenced to one year in prison can now spend the last 60 days electronically tagged and in the community, instead of 30 days. The rule change means criminals can now be released earlier from prison.”

Stundin reported they will be able to finish out their sentences at a “halfway house,” where they will be expected to spend every evening but will otherwise be free. After they have completed this phase — Stundin did not specify the exact length — they will be allowed to finish their sentences via electronic surveillance as determined by the new five-day guideline established by changes to the law.

truth-cancer-ad

The change to the law was, according to Stundin’s sources, pushed through the legislature by Unnur Brá Konráðsdóttir, chair of the Alþingi (Parliament) General Committee and MP for the Independence Party.

But not all lawmakers viewed the decision in a positive light.

“I don’t think this is a good time for this legislative change, in light of the situation surrounding these particular prisoners,” Left-Green MP Bjarkey Olsen Gunnarsdóttir said of the modification. “This seems to have been handcrafted for them. I generally support the increased use of electronic surveillance [as opposed to prison]. But we need to have a discussion about what crimes this new law would apply to.”

Though the world celebrated the sentences of the bankers last year, the financial convicts complained of unfair treatment at their low-security prison, in spite of, as the Grapevine noted, “all evidence of their wrongdoing, their lenient sentences, practically idyllic living conditions, and – most galling of all – their continued assertions that they did nothing wrong.”

In a televised interview with the bankers from prison conducted this January, they expressed disbelief they had ended up behind bars.

“We made a big mistake, our lawyers and us, in trusting the system. We trusted the courts, and put our trust in the Supreme Court to sentence according to the law. There is our mistake,” Ólafsson claimed. The ex-banker, who has been called a “corporate Viking,” also complained of the ongoing backlash against bankers. “The community is responding to a certain social group. They are subjecting a certain social group to bullying,” he said. Twenty-six bankers were sentenced last year, receiving a combined total sentence of 74 years — an average of slightly less than three years per banker.

Regardless, the Kaupthing bankers have been now released from jail. The news comes the same week Icelandic Prime Minister Sigmundur David Gunnlaugsson came under fire amid evidence of corruption highlighted in the Panama Papers leak; Gunnlaugsson was revealed to have holdings in an offshore company — one tied to the banks implicated in the financial collapse for which the bankers were convicted. He initially refused to officially resign, instead “step[ping] aside for an unspecified amount of time.” Sigurdur Ingi Johannsson, deputy chair of the Progressive party Gunnlaugsson chairs, will now serve as Prime Minister. Gunnlaugsson will remain chair of the party.

The Panama Papers revelations inspired mass protests in Iceland as 22,000 gathered in the capital city of Reykjavík on Monday evening, many demanding new elections to wipe the slate clean after corruption reached the highest office. The protests have continued throughout the week, though the size of the crowd has grown smaller.

As the current government remains mired in scandal and attempts to salvage its image, news of the freed bankers highlights deep-rooted issues with accountability in Iceland prior to the Panama Papers scandal; Stundin also reported that last week, before they were released, the bankers were allowed to leave their confinement center to go out for ice cream.

This article (Jailed Bankers Freed Early as Icelandic Government Implodes Over Panama Papers) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Carey Wedler and theAntiMedia.org. Anti-Media Radio airs weeknights at 11 pm Eastern/8 pm Pacific. If you spot a typo, please email the error and name of the article at edits@theantimedia.org.

 

From theantimedia.org Team

Verge of #Revolution: The Story You Aren’t Being Told About the #Brazil Uprising

by

Clarice Palmer
March 31, 2016

(ANTIMEDIA) São Paulo, Brazil — As online publications have hailed the major protests overtaking the streets of Brazil at the outset of an apparent political revolution, few discuss the problems that have been brewing for decades in South America’s largest nation.

While Brazilians are angry and tired of their economic hardships, they are also incensed at the country’s history of corruption, which now includes a massive presidential scandal carried out by politicians and lobbyists during the current and previous administrations. This misconduct has given residents of all walks of life enough incentive to take their demands to the streets.

But are the politicians listening?

The History of Brazil is a History of Corruption

Local sociologists often tout Brazil’s corruption problem as a “genetic disposition” to crookedness. But late economist Ludwig von Mises disagreed. In Human Action, the famed economist claimed that corruption is simply a consequence of government’s heavy intervention in all public matters. “Corruption is a regular effect of interventionism,” he wrote — not the root of a country’s woes.

As Brazilian newspapers and talking heads tend to focus on corruption scandals as the root of the political and economic issues the country faces, they are, in fact, some of the consequences of heavy government intervention — not the foundation of the nation’s ongoing problems.

Between 1930 and 1945, the country was under the rule of the populist tyrant Getúlio Vargas, whose rise as a dictator was also tied to a series of corruption scandals, political persecution, and oppression. Nicknamed “the Father of the Poor,” Vargas and his administration used images of hope and harmony to sell the leader as the country’s grassroots hero.

But the individual behind the facade and popular image was the first of many political leaders to promise — though never deliver — peace and prosperity. Vargas also maintained an amicable relationship with Germany prior to World War II, prompting the United States to wonder whether Brazil would enter the Axis orbit. The Vargas administration even aided Nazi Germany by sending Jewish refugees back to their home country, such as the revolutionary militant, Olga Benário Prestes, a German Jew who ultimately died in a concentration camp.

brazilian propaganda

Propaganda by the Getulio Vargas administration teaching children to love country first.

Getúlio Vargas is particularly relevant because Brazil’s last president, Luiz Inácio “Lula” Da Silva, who held office between 2003 and 2011, is often remembered by many as the second coming of the 20th century dictator. Lula is currently implicated in the high-level scandals currently plaguing Brazil.

Long before Lula took office, however, the anti-communist “Red Scare” mindset — the culture of fear tied to communism that existed between 1919 the late 1950s in America — finally settled in Brazil. The country began to fear the possibility that communist agitators would take over the country. With the help of democratically-elected president, João Goulart (Brazilian Labour Party), the country’s military leaders took over, replaced Congress with the National Constituent Assembly, deposed opposition members, and drafted a new Constitutional Charter. The 1964 military coup lasted until 1985.

Once Brazilians had the chance to elect a new president, they put young Fernando Collor de Mello in power, a right-wing politician who froze thousands of Brazilian savings accounts and converted them into government bonds, inciting a wave of anger across the nation.

It was only when Collor was accused of having played a role in an influence-peddling scheme that many started paying attention.

Afraid of what Congress could do to his presidency, Collor allegedly paid $2 million for falsified documents, an act that, once discovered, prompted Congress to vote for his impeachment. Only three senators voted in Collor’s favor. Seventy-three voted for his removal.

Whether or not this was a sign of things to come, Brazil’s first democratically-elected president after the military rule became the first to be impeached.

As privatization policies were put in place by President Fernando Henrique Cardoso in the 1990s, the country’s economy picked up steam. People suddenly believed they had a good, competent administration in place, despite issues with the ongoing drug war. The many years of privatization and inflation-taming measures, however, prompted younger Brazilians to become attached to the ideology behind progressive politics. Enter Lula.

In 2003, young Brazilians cheered the the election of the Workers Party’s Lula. After all, they believed a “man of the people” had been picked as the country’s president. He was the same man who would go on to become the country’s “lobbyist in chief.”

After Lula’s two terms, the Workers Party managed to get Dilma Rousseff elected. Her rise to the presidency was mostly due to her proximity to Lula. She has often referred to him as  “[her] president and leader.”

Unemployment, Poverty, Inflation, and High Taxes: Brazilians are Fed Up

Brazilians experienced an economic miracle in the 1990s. But as the Rousseff administration upped sales and consumption taxes while relying on inflation, the increase in the money supply. As the country hosted the World Cup in 2014, businesses and consumers began to suffer. The first ones to feel the consequences were the poor.

Currently, Brazilians pay about 36 percent in sales taxes on most goods and services — a regressive tax that ends up hurting the poor the most. Brazilians give up about 28 percent of their income yearly. With the increase in taxes on large net gains and the country’s protectionist policies, many believe investors will begin to flee the country.

Tension built up due to the economic difficulties consumers face only worsened when the country’s judiciary launched an investigation into Rousseff’s embezzlement and crony capitalist scheme, which has made global headlines.

“Car Wash” Corruption Scheme and Its Investigation: the Beginning of the End for Dilma Rousseff

The “car wash” investigation is the largest probe of its kind in Brazilian history.

Its name comes from the network of laundromats, gas stations, and currency exchange businesses participants in the scheme used to launder money.

From Brazilian writer Alice Salles at FreedomWorks.org:

“Trouble began to brew when authorities launched an investigation into a network of currency exchanging businesses connected to Alberto Youssef. He was accused of forging contracts and moving billions of Brazilian Reais domestically and abroad using front companies and foreign bank accounts.”

Once the investigations were deepened, authorities “learned that Youssef had business relationships with Paulo Roberto Costa, the former director of the state-controlled oil giant Petrobras, major contractors and their lobbyists, and other Petrobras servicers. On March 2014, both Costa and Youssef were arrested.” Once Costa agreed to take part in the investigations in August of 2014, “Brazilians learned that he and several other directors of Petrobras received bribes and passed them along to politicians for their campaigns.” In a few weeks time, the authorities convinced Youssef to join Costa, “and revelations about one of the largest embezzlement schemes in the history of the country started flooding the news.”

Soon enough, the authorities learned the names of contractors involved in the scheme, which happened to be the country’s two top construction companies: Odebrecht and Andrade Gutierrez. André Estevez, owner of Latin America’s largest investment bank, BTG, was also involved.

By March of 2015, authorities learned 53 politicians had participated in the scheme. Even José Dirceu, the former prime minister under President Lula, was “accused of receiving payments from Odebrecht and Andrade Gutierrez.” Lula’s close friend, the farmer José Carlos Bumlai, and Senator Delcídio Amaral of the Workers Party, known as PT, were arrested. The President of the Chamber of Deputies, Eduardo Cunha, a member of the Brazilian Democratic Movement Party (PMDB) was also targeted, along with several other PMDB party leaders.

According to what the investigations have unearthed thus far, the embezzlement scheme benefitted political parties in charge of Petrobras’s leadership appointments.

Salles reported that “as federal judge Sérgio Moro showed signs he believed former president Lula had profited from the scheme, prosecutors from the state of São Paulo added insult to injury by accusing Lula of ‘hiding his ownership of a beach-front condominium.’” But the rumors about his future finally hit the news, and Rousseff decided to appoint her predecessor as her chief of staff. The Economist claimed Lula is a “canny political operator,” which may have helped Rousseff make the decision to bring him on board to boost her reputation. However, as Salles noted, “what the cabinet position means to Lula may have served as the sole incentive.”

As the country’s call for impeachment intensifies, a strong opposition movement in Congress is taking shape. The country’s top association of lawyers, Ordem dos Advogados do Brasil, has also announced it will present an impeachment proposal to Congress, making matters worse for Rousseff.

The proposal claims the current president has “authorized … the country to delay its payments,” and it also accuses the president of unilaterally lifting tax obligations tied to the Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) during the 2014 World Cup. OAB attorneys also claim Rousseff may have “interfered with the ‘car wash’ probe, which includes her appointment of former president Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva as chief of staff.”

Unclear Future: Impeachment Alone is Not the Solution

As the “car wash” probe unveils that billions of taxpayer dollars have been tied to investments abroad that didn’t benefit Brazilians — and that members of most Brazilian political parties were involved — many of the county’s residents are showing signs of fatigue.

Impeaching President Rousseff may offer momentary relief to Brazilians under pressure, but unless a cultural change takes shape, the expulsion of Rousseff from Brasília, the nation’s capital, won’t make a difference.

According to activist Kim Kataguiri, a key figure in the anti-Rousseff protests, “the smokescreens used by the Brazilian government to disperse the population are finally gone.” He believes impeachment will come — no matter what. Even so, Rousseff says she has enough friends in Congress to avoid her downfall. Only time will tell whether Brazilians will find a way to restrict government’s interference in the country, helping to keep corrupt politicians from finding reasons to steal from the taxpayer.

This article (Verge of Revolution: The Story You Aren’t Being Told About the Brazilian Uprising) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Clarice Palmer and theAntiMedia.org. Anti-Media Radio airs weeknights at 11 pm Eastern/8 pm Pacific. If you spot a typo, please email the error and name of the article to edits@theantimedia.org.

From theantimedia.org Team

#Snowden: #Brussels Attack AND #Boston Bombing Could Have Been Stopped

by

 

Claire Bernish
March 28, 2016

(ANTIMEDIA) Edward Snowden proffered a rather damning criticism of international intelligence during a lecture last week, arguing the terror attacks in Belgium were entirely preventable and could have been stopped. As Snowden explained:

“In all the talk of Brussels, there’s a story that just recently broke, which I’m not sure has gotten the same play as the others, which is that the attack was preventable; and it was preventable through traditional means, not mass surveillance. An allied intelligence service — in this case, in Turkey — warned Belgium that this individual was a criminal, that they were involved in terrorist activities, and this individual turned out to be one of the suicide bombers.”

As Snowden noted during the University of Arizona panel discussion, which also included Professor Noam Chomsky and journalist Glenn Greenwald, these reports surfaced almost immediately after the attacks claiming Belgian and other intelligence forces had been notified of the potential danger this individual posed. In fact, an exclusive, though unverified report by Haaretz claimed “The security services knew, with a high degree of certainty, that attacks were planned in the very near future for the airport and, apparently, for the subway as well.”

But what stands as a matter of crucial importance is that we’ve witnessed, yet again, not only a failure by intel to act on credible information, but a further example of the uselessness of mass surveillance to thwart any attack. It wasn’t surveillance that gave Belgian intelligence its information, rather, it had been Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan sounding the alarm. Turkey had previously deported one of the attackers as a “foreign terrorist fighter” — and Turkish officials notified the Belgian embassy in Ankara they had done so.

“In the United States, we have the same thing, in the Boston Marathon bombings. We were explicitly warned by foreign intelligence services that one of the brothers [who] was involved in the bombings would be engaged in that kind of activity,” Snowden added.

In fact, it was Russian intelligence that alerted the FBI about about Tamerlan Tsarnaev’s links to militant Muslim terrorist groups; but the ostensibly inept U.S. intelligence community failed to do anything — due to a spelling error in his name. Whether that was actually the case or something darker might have been afoot remains unclear, but the point is the same: even when the appropriate governmental agencies have the information necessary to stop a terrorist attack, they fail to do so — every time.

Tsarnaev had been investigated, and in June 2011, the FBI concluded he had “no links to terrorism,” NBC News noted. In September, according to the Independent, “Russia’s FSB sent a cable to the CIA restating their initial warning, and a second note on Tsarnaev was entered on the TECS [U.S. Customs and Border Protection database] system, but his name was misspelled ‘Tsarnayev.’”

A few months later, he was in ‘terror training’ in Dagestan after passing through Moscow. When he returned to the U.S. via New York’s JFK Airport, his name triggered an alert but, due to the misspelling, he wasn’t considered a top priority among the “100 other names on a ‘Hot List’ of people traveling through JFK that day.”

It appears the same fumbling took place surrounding the Brussels attacks: two of the brothers involved, Khalid and Ibrahim El Bakraoui, “were listed as a potential terror threat in U.S. databases,” NBC News reported, citing unnamed and unverified U.S. officials. Congressional committees have now requested to know which databases, for how long, and “whether and how the information was shared.”

Despite these multiple intelligence blunders concerning individuals known to be dangerous, politicians immediately proposed even further truncations of civilian liberties, both in Europe and the United States. In an interview with Democracy Now, Glenn Greenwald discussed the implications:

“I think it’s really important to note a couple of things about Brussels. Number one is, the Brussels attack is now the fourth straight attack, after Boston, the Charlie Hebdo massacre, and then the Paris attacks, where siblings, brothers, were at the heart of the planning. And just like in those three previous attacks that I just referenced, the attacks were carried out by people who live in the same communities, who live very close to one another, and who almost certainly met in person in order to plan them. And yet, the exploitive mindset of Western politicians is to say, every time there’s a successful attack carried out, it means we need to wage war on encryption, we need greater surveillance, we need more police in these communities. But the reality is … none of that will actually help detect the attack.”

Indeed, it appears such crackdowns — including Cruz’ and Trump’s call for patrolling Muslim neighborhoods and Clinton’s insistence on increased surveillance and police forces — serve, instead, to fuel resentment, which ultimately breeds more terrorist activities. Greenwald explained the most facile solution to terrorism by noting what drives it. For “15 years,” he said, the United States “has been declaring itself at war and bombing multiple countries and then acts surprised when people want to come and attack us back.

“And so I think, more than saying we need more intelligence and more surveillance and wage war on encryption and more bombing campaigns, we need to be asking whether there are things that we can be doing that reduce the incentive for people to kill us … and especially the support infrastructure that they get because of the anti-American and anti-European sentiment that gets generated when we engage in all of this violence in the world.”

Snowden, Greenwald, and myriad experts continue to warn of how this cycle not only creates more terrorists, but, almost by design, seems meant to make pliable the populace for increasing infringements on privacy rights. Ultimately — and perhaps because — these attacks were preventable by traditional means, and yet still were allowed to happen, we must be more suspicious than ever of programs initiated under the pretense of increasing security.

This article (Snowden: Brussels Attack AND Boston Bombing Could Have Been Stopped) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Claire Bernish and theAntiMedia.org. Anti-Media Radio airs weeknights at 11pm Eastern/8pm Pacific. If you spot a typo, email edits@theantimedia.org.

0 Total Shares

From theantimedia.org Team

New Eye-Opening Documentary Completely Exposes #Barbaric #Saudi Regime

by

 

Michaela Whitton
March 24, 2016

(ANTIMEDIA) United Kingdom — A British television crew recently filmed an undercover documentary in Saudi Arabia in an attempt to penetrate the world’s most secretive and murderous regime. Working with a team of undercover Saudi cameramen, the one hour eye-opener, Exposure: Saudi Arabia Uncovered, was broadcast by ITV on March 22. It reveals the hidden side of the regime, which buys billions of pounds worth of British arms, accepts training from British security forces, sells oil back to the U.K., and enjoys nothing less than red carpet treatment from the British royal family.

After setting up a fake company, the crew flew into Riyadh posing as businessmen, wielding carefully concealed hidden cameras. For cover, they said they were in the country to attend a business conference on cyber-security. What they discovered was a state that beheads — and even crucifies — its citizens; where women lack basic human rights and its children are indoctrinated. Patrolled by religious police, citizens are tortured, imprisoned, and sentenced to death for writing blogs and questioning authority. It sounds like the Islamic State, but it’s not — it’s the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. And it is fully propped up by Europe and the United States.

The mind-boggling documentary reveals how Saudi Arabia’s money and Wahhabi ideology has helped drive terrorism around the world. Shining a light on Britain’s shoulder-rubbing with the ruling royals, the production has pushed the U.K. government to admit they have provided more than 300 Saudi police officers with training since 2012.

“A necessary evil”

In January 2015, the Union Jack flew at half-mast at Westminster as a mark of respect for the death of Saudi ruler, King Abdullah. During the same month, young Saudi blogger Raif Badawi received 50 lashes in public. Convicted of insulting Islam after blogging about his government and religion, quoting Albert Camus, he wrote:

“The only way to deal with an unfree world is to become so absolutely free that your very existence is an act of rebellion.”

Comments like this earned the father of three 1,000 total lashes and ten years in prison.

“We don’t approve of what Saudi Arabia does, we don’t like what they do, but they are a necessary evil in combating other regimes,” former Head of International Terrorism, Colonel Richard Kemp, told ITV.

“And of course, ultimately they have a lot of oil,” he added.

Undercover cameraman Yasser is from an underground network of Saudi activists. He risked life and limb to provide a window into the brutal and secretive country where the King is all powerful, journalists cannot operate without a minder, and dissent is a cardinal sin. In the country, which is home of some of Islam’s holiest sites, the Saudi state oil company is worth £7 trillion. The royal family is worth billions. In contrast, an estimated quarter of the population lives in poverty, and numerous women were filmed begging and being beaten in the streets.

It is estimated that only one in five Saudi women of working age are employed. They are banned from driving and struggle to perform simple tasks, such as going to the doctor without a male guardian. But some are fighting back, and prominent human rights activist Loujain Hathloul has become the face of the Saudi women’s rights movement.

Moments after uploading videos of herself driving — as part of a campaign to change the ban against it — the activist was arrested for trying to enter Saudi Arabia from the United Arab Emirates while behind the wheel. Imprisoned for 73 days without trial, she remains banned from traveling. Terrorism charges also were filed against her. Facing persistent death threats towards her and her family, for some she is a hero. For others, she is a hate figure.

The Committee for the Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice

The religious police, officially known as the Committee for the Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice, patrol streets and shopping malls enforcing strict Islamic laws. Yasser films himself and his friend as they are violently stopped from playing a lute outside. Playing music in public is forbidden, and their instrument and hidden camera are smashed. In other instances, religious police force women to cover themselves and drive people out of cafes to pray.

This strict form of Sunni Islam is known as Wahhabism, and it is the religion on which Saudi Arabia was founded. It is thought that the majority of Saudis support the state ideology, and the activists film a preacher spreading hatred of other religions and the Shia minority. Children are shown being indoctrinated by school textbooks, made in Saudi Arabia and exported to the world.

“No country is the perfect ally, perfect partner, without any reservations whatsoever. Welcome to the real world, welcome to the premier league,” said former CIA Director, General David Petraeus.

Director of the Institute for Gulf Affairs, Ali al-Ahmed, said the Saudi education system was created as a security measure to protect the ruling family and mislead millions of students into hatred of other religions and cultures. Some say the state has made progress in removing some of the worst examples of hatred from its textbooks, but the books can still be found in mosques and schools around the world.

Al-Ahmed added, “It’s no wonder that thousands of Saudis joined ISIS and other terror groups because they were trained in Saudi schools.”

“Chop Chop Square”

In 2015, Saudi Arabia executed 157 people. Traditional punishments are employed, and executions are often carried out in public by one sword blow to the neck. Headless bodies are sometimes displayed publicly, and the documentary shows harrowing footage of a Burmese woman screaming for mercy as she is beheaded in the street.

Yasser says many Saudis are angry but cannot speak out due to fear of imprisonment, adding that the regime relies on secrecy; criticism of the government is considered an act of terror. The film crew visits one of Saudi Arabia’s most notorious landmarks, known as Chop Chop Square. It is the scene of many of the regime’s public executions and has drains in the ground for blood.

Since 9/11, Saudi Arabia has attempted to show the world they are tackling terrorism. The regime has clamped down on private donations to extremists from inside the Kingdom and carried out airstrikes against ISIS. They deny they are supporting the terror group, but many feel it is the underlying Wahhabi Salafi ideology that is the wider problem.

Former Director of Political Islam of the CIA, Emile Nakleh told ITV:

“The ideology of ISIS is not much different from the ideology that Wahabi Salafi Islam in Saudi adheres to. Unless the Saudis deal with this issue, we are going to constantly fight yesterday’s wars. Even if we defeat ISIS there will be another terrorist organisation, perhaps with a different name, as long as they have this ideology.”

Unwilling to tolerate dissent and fiercely opposed to sharing power, Saudi Arabia executed 47 people in January of this year — its largest mass execution since 1980. Some were convicted terrorists, but others were political activists. Footage smuggled out by activists has revealed that the executions sparked the largest public protests since the Arab Spring.

Since the mass executions, Yasser has stopped filming undercover. He claims it is just too risky continue, which, of course, is exactly what these public displays of punishment are all about. Although activists are being forced underground, the spread of mobile phones and cameras means it is becoming impossible for the regime to control what the world sees.

While in the country pretending to be traders, the filmmakers’ website was hacked, leading them to believe their cover was blown. As a result, they promptly left the country.

The documentary ends with a statement from the Saudi authorities condemning the covert filming by ITV:

“The kingdom of Saudi Arabia utterly rejects the partisan nature and sensationalist tone of this documentary which sets out to portray the country in a negative and unbalanced light. The Kingdom’s legal system is based on the due process of Islamic Sharia Law. The Kingdom is at the forefront of international efforts to combat terrorism and will pursue anyone who supports and funds terrorist activities. To suggest otherwise is a slur. In keeping with its biased agenda, ITV chose to undertake covert filming when they could have applied for and received a journalistic visa, like many of their counterparts.”

The full documentary, Exposure: Saudi Arabia Uncovered, can be viewed here.

This article (New Eye-Opening Documentary Completely Exposes Barbaric Saudi Regime) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Michaela Whitton and theAntiMedia.org. Anti-Media Radio airs weeknights at 11pm Eastern/8pm Pacific. If you spot a typo, email edits@theantimedia.org.

0 Total Shares

From theantimedia.org Team

CLAIM: Governments Had Prior Knowledge of #Brussels Attack, Did Nothing

by

 

0 Total Shares

Claire Bernish
March 24, 2016

(ANTIMEDIA) Brussels, Belgium — A startling allegation concerning Brussels emerged on Wednesday: according to Haaretz, Belgian and Western intelligence agencies had “advance and precise” knowledge about the attacks, which claimed at least 31 lives. Haaretz reported:
“The security services knew, with a high degree of certainty, that attacks were planned in the very near future for the airport and, apparently, for the subway as well.”

Though the news outlet does not reveal its sources’ names, the allegation mirrors similar reports that authorities knew attacks were imminent.

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan had warned on Friday that terror attacks in Europe would likely be forthcoming, specifically naming Brussels as a possible location.

“There is no reason why the bomb that exploded in Ankara cannot explode in Brussels, in any other European city,” Erdoğan stated during a speech to commemorate a famous World War I battle in Canakkale. It should be noted it’s possible he mentioned Brussels to make an analogy, as Ankara is Turkey’s capital city and Brussels is the de facto capital of the E.U.

Regardless, mounting reports indicate a number of strange coincidences surrounding the Brussels attacks.

“One of the attackers in Brussels is an individual we detained in Gaziantep in June 2015 and deported,” stated Erdoğan, who did not name the specific attacker in question. “We reported the deportation to the Belgian Embassy in Ankara on July 14, 2015, but he was later set free.”

He added, “Despite our warnings that this person was a foreign terrorist fighter, Belgium could not establish any links with terrorism.”
An unnamed official from the Turkish president’s office later claimed the deported attacker was Ibrahim El Bakraoui.

Ibrahim and his brother Khalid El Bakraoui have been named by Belgian authorities for carrying out the airport attack with a third attacker, Najim Laachraoui, who remains the subject of an extensive manhunt. Laachraoui could be seen accompanying the two brothers in airport surveillance footage, but managed to flee the scene after the bombs went off. According to Haaretz, Laachraoui “created the explosives vests used by the bombers” — and thus bears particular concern for authorities.

Erdoğan has waged an aggressive, relentless, and often controversial battle with the Kurds, who are seeking to establish an independent state. After the attacks in Brussels, Erdoğan — who has been accused of working in concert with Daesh (ISIL) — attempted to appear sympathetic with the victims in a written statement:

“The heinous attacks in Brussels have reiterated that terror cannot be a method of struggle for freedom, and once again underlined the need for the common struggle against all types of terror.”

This article (Governments Had Prior Knowledge of Brussels Attack, Did Nothing) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Claire Bernish and theAntiMedia.org. Anti-Media Radio airs weeknights at 11pm Eastern/8pm Pacific. If you spot a typo, email edits@theantimedia.org.

0 Total Shares

From theantimedia.org Team

We Throw so Much #Plastic into the #Ocean That Now We’re Literally Eating It

by

Claire Bernish
March 21, 2016

(ANTIMEDIA) Recent reports of a phenomenal quantity of plastic inundating the world’s oceans are alarming enough — but another aspect of the problem should snap everyone to attention: humans ultimately consume that plastic.

According to Plastic Oceans, this pollution and its effects are “an environmental catastrophe of our own making.” Indeed, humans produce in excess of 300 million tons of plastic each year — “equivalent to the combined weight of all adult humans on earth” — and nearly “half of this we use just once [and] then throw it away.”

Further, the perceived conveniences of tossing items into the garbage is pure illusion.

“There is no ‘away’ because plastic is so permanent and so indestructible,” said Sir David Attenborough, according to Plastic Oceans. “When you cast it into the ocean … it does not go away.”

For the benefits plastic originally appeared to offer, the untold number of products now made of or contained in plastic has created an environmental and health nightmare arguably unlike any other.

In 2015, the BBC reported eight million tons of plastic — enough to cover “an area 34 times the size of New York’s Manhattan Island to ankle depth” — finds its way to the planet’s oceans every year. Such a quantification of our plastic waste was finally possible thanks to a study published in Science Magazine and presented at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS).

“The quantity entering the ocean is equal to about five plastic grocery bags full of plastic for every foot of coastline in the world,” Dr. Jenna Jambeck, study lead author from the University of Georgia, told the BBC. Study researchers caution the findings and quantifications are a middle ground, as plastic — despite its indestructible traits — can still break down into smaller pieces and particles.

A more recent study by the World Economic Forum estimated the world’s oceans will contain more plastic than fish by 2050 — in part because a “staggering” 32 percent of plastic packaging “escapes collections systems.” Even so, only 5 percent of plastics are effectively recycled — making the WEF’s prediction for the use of plastic to double in the next 20 years even more dire.

Truthout noted recent “estimates indicate that upwards of 8 million tons of plastic are added to the planet’s oceans every year, the equivalent of a dumptruck full of plastic every minute. That is enough plastic to have led one scientist to estimate that people who consume average amounts of seafood are ingesting approximately 11,000 particles of plastic every year.”

Unless we turn to alternative and less toxic means for producing plastics — such as hemp — our failures in recycling will, indeed, come back to haunt us. As phytoplankton populations drop and overfishing remains an issue, marine plastic pollution simply compounds a massive catastrophe.

This article (We Throw so Much Plastic into the Ocean That Now We’re Literally Eating It) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Claire Bernish and theAntiMedia.org. Anti-Media Radio airs weeknights at 11pm Eastern/8pm Pacific. If you spot a typo, email edits@theantimedia.org.

From theantimedia.org Team

#Wikileaks Drops #Hillary Email Bomb That Could End Her Campaign but FB Censored It

by

Michaela Whitton
March 20, 2016

(ANTIMEDIA) United Kingdom — On Wednesday, a major archive containing over 30,000 of Hillary Clinton’s emails were released. Though the State Department began releasing the emails in May last year — after a Freedom of Information Act request — it is the first time the messages have been made easily available in a searchable format, courtesy of WikiLeaks. Before the launch, the FBI was investigating the Democratic candidate’s use of a private server during her tenure as Secretary of State. The archive contains over 7,000 emails written by Clinton herself.

The scary, albeit fascinating exposé on who’s in bed with whom in the halls of global power has expanded to include Facebook, according to WikiLeaks. The organization has accused the social networking site of censorship, saying Facebook is blocking users’ access to the latest Clinton dispatch.

wikileaks-hillary

As a result of the outing, Twitter users are calling Clinton wicked, a thug, and a hypocrite. The released emails uncovered that the presidential frontrunner was instrumental in spreading chaos and extremism in Libya. They also revealed that she pushed for oil privatization in Mexico and forwarded emails claiming a Sunni-Shiite war would be good for Israel and the West.

wikileaks-hillary-2

For those who are fascinated but don’t have the time or inclination to sift through more than 30,000 documents, here is a snapshot of what Clinton’s emails revealed:

This article (Facebook, WikiLeaks and Clinton’s Warmongering Emails) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Michaela Whitton and theAntiMedia.org. Anti-Media Radio airs weeknights at 11pm Eastern/8pm Pacific. If you spot a typo, email edits@theantimedia.org.

From theantimedia.org Team

#EaglesOfDeathMetal Frontman says Guards Knew About #Paris Shooting in Advance

by

Claire Bernish
March 10, 2016

(ANTIMEDIA) Eagles of Death Metal lead singer, Jessie Hughes, made a stunning statement in an interview with Fox Business Network: He believes it’s possible security guards at the Bataclan Theater knew about the Paris terror attacks in advance.

As a veteran performer, Hughes realized something was odd the night leading up to the attack, when the security guard for the backstage area didn’t make eye contact with him.

“When I first got to the venue and walked in, I walked past the dude who was supposed to be the security guard for the backstage,” Hughes recalled, noting the guard’s odd demeanor.

“I immediately went to the promoter and said, ‘Who’s that guy? I want to put another dude on,’ and he goes, ‘Well, some of the other guards aren’t here yet,’ and eventually I found out that six or so wouldn’t show up at all.”

Though Hughes refused to speculate at length “out of respect for the police investigating,” he added, “It seems rather obvious that they had a reason not to show up.”

On November 13, 2015, 89 people were killed — including the band’s merchandise manager, Nick Alexander — and 200 were injured, when attackers stormed the Bataclan during the Eagles of Death Metal show.

After the attack and a brief break, the American band returned to complete their European tour last month, though they recently canceled due to an injury.

Fox Business Network aired the first portion of Kennedy’s interview with Hughes on Wednesday, and the second part is scheduled for tonight at 8 pm, EST.

This article (Eagles of Death Metal Frontman says Guards Knew About Paris Shooting in Advance) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Claire Bernish and theAntiMedia.org. Anti-Media Radio airs weeknights at 11pm Eastern/8pm Pacific. If you spot a typo, email edits@theantimedia.org.

From theantimedia.org Team

#UN Begged to Intervene After #Refugees Sew Mouths Shut

by

Michaela Whitton
March 10, 2016

(ANTIMEDIA) Calais, France — Desperate volunteers in a Calais refugee camp have issued an urgent plea to the U.N. to recognise the plight of a group of Iranians who sewed their mouths shut a week ago. The extreme protest — joined in solidarity by a British volunteer — was initiated to draw attention to the atrocities being carried out by the French government.

The latest shocking tale to unfold from the Calais camp — known as The Jungle — began on March 1st to raise awareness of the human rights violations taking place. Homeless, jobless, and now hopeless, eight Iranian men aged between 17 and 46 sewed each other’s lips shut in the extreme form of protest against the forced evictions of the southern side of the squalid camp. Their bold move has been supported by British volunteer, Tom Radcliffe, who has joined in solidarity.

The decision by the French authorities to dismantle the camp has had significant implications for the 3,500 refugees living there, over three hundred of whom are unaccompanied minors. Legally, the authorities can only evict people if they are able to offer alternative accommodation, but France has grossly underestimated the numbers.

A few residents have moved into shipping containers and centres throughout France, while others have shifted to the northern part of the camp, which volunteers predict will be next to be cleared. Organisations on the ground believe there will be more temporary encampments as refugees continue to be hounded by the police. Volunteers report people camping in fields, churches, under bridges, and in abandoned buildings with no sanitation, water, access to aid, or other facilities.

Despite a ruling that the dismantling of The Jungle was to be humane, video footage from a volunteer showed residents running from clouds of tear gas. Eyewitnesses said the camp was lined with riot police and claim residents were given an hour’s notice to leave, many without alternative accommodation to move into. In general, most refugees in Calais have strong ties to the U.K., and many have family they are waiting to be reunited with. Others lived in Britain previously.

Since beginning the hunger strike, the men’s condition is deteriorating rapidly according to The Worldwide Tribe:

“These men were already weak from their traumatic journey across Europe. Many of the refugees in the camp are suffering from illness and infection, malnutrition and post traumatic stress syndrome. Although they are determined and focused, they are now gradually growing weaker by the day. They say they are prepared to die for this cause. It won’t be long before they do.”

In a desperate plea to the Office of the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights, a petition drawing attention to their plight has gathered thousands of signatures overnight. Demanding the United Nations assess the camp conditions and witness the human rights breaches taking place on European soil, it calls for a stop to the demolition of the camp until adequate alternatives are put in place. You can sign it here.

This article (UN Begged to Intervene After Refugees Sew Mouths Shut) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Michaela Whitton and theAntiMedia.org. Anti-Media Radio airs weeknights at 11pm Eastern/8pm Pacific. If you spot a typo, email edits@theantimedia.org.

From theantimedia.org Team

Chomsky: Trump Rising in Polls for Same Reasons Germany Embraced Hitler

by

Claire Bernish
February 24, 2016

(ANTIMEDIA) United States — Adolf Hitler rose to power during a period of similar social tumult as that which has currently garnered Donald Trump such fervent support, according to Noam Chomsky. In a recent interview with Aaron Williams for Alternet, Chomsky explained how fear, alone, does not sufficiently explain Trump’s surprising popularity:

“Fear, along with the breakdown of society during the neoliberal period. People feel isolated, helpless, victim of powerful forces they do not understand and cannot influence.”

Governmental control over the lives of the U.S.’ populace has increased tremendously in recent time.

[Read more…]

From theantimedia.org Team

Here’s the Robot That Is Going to Take Your Job

by

Jake Anderson
February 24, 2016

(ANTIMEDIA) Recently, the Anti-Media reported on new economic forecasts that predict robots and machine automation could replace 50 percent of the American workforce within two decades. Specifically, at least one major bank, Forbes, and legions of economists expect America to lose somewhere around 80 million jobs as artificial intelligence and advanced robotics make it financially lucrative for corporations to outsource labor to technology.

It seems that Google-owned Boston Dynamics may now be able to put a face to the future automated fleecing of America. This week the company fed the Terminator-inspired nightmares of people all over the world by releasing a video of Atlas, its new humanoid robot, which is seen completing menial factory tasks and traversing landscapes with ease.

[Read more…]

From theantimedia.org Team

This Restaurant Just Banned Bankers but Allows Dogs

by

Michaela Whitton
February 24, 2016

(ANTIMEDIA) France — Furious French cafe owner Alexandre Callet has taken the unprecedented step of banning bankers from his establishment after claiming that they have treated him like a dog. The 30-year-old restaurant owner is fuming with the morally corrupt industry after his request for a €70,000 ($78,000) loan to open a second restaurant was denied.

Callet said the requested amount of €70,000 is “nothing” given that his turnover for last year was €300,000. To express his disgust, the blackboard outside his Parisian restaurant which would normally display the day’s specials now reads: “Dogs welcome, bankers banned (unless they pay an entry fee of €70,000).”  [Read more…]

From theantimedia.org Team

Former Finance Minister Compares Current Financial Crisis to Great Depression

by

Claire Bernish
February 23, 2016

(ANTIMEDIA) Greece’s financial crisis, unprecedented in scope, reached a pivotal moment last summer when the Greek people voted overwhelmingly against further austerity programs — ostensibly imposed to help the country pay back enormous debt. Overseeing the matter was Syriza Party Finance Minister Yanis Varoufakis — a staunch opponent of the crippling austerity measures that had effected a stranglehold on the country’s economy.

Greece’s debt to the so-called Troika — the International Monetary Fund, European Commission, and European Central Bank — turned out not to be the true reason for the proposed austerity. As Varoufakis discovered, the Troika actually, if somewhat covertly, intended to decimate Greek organized labor and the country’s modest social safety net. After the Greek populace stunned the world with its ‘no’ vote, Varoufakis sensed the coming accession by Syriza to implement the plans — and he hastily and quietly resigned his post.

The Real News Network partnered with acTVism Munich for an exclusive interview with Varoufakis about those events. Discussing the lead-up to his resignation, Varoufakis said:

“The Greek people didn’t vote for yes. They voted as we were directing them to. Overwhelmingly they said no. And extremely courageously, for reasons I’m sure you know. That night [after the vote], when I spoke to my prime minister, it became abundantly clear to me that the pressure had gotten to him; and he was going to turn that magnificent no of the Greek populace into a yes. And I was not going to be a part of that. So I took my leave. I stole into the night. And since then I’ve been campaigning for that no.”

Varoufakis compares the Greek and global economic situation to that of Wall Street in the 1930s, and the impending stock market crash — with all the same social and political consequences. The first installment of the interview, How the Greek People’s Magnificent “No” Became “Yes,” can be viewed below:

[embedded content]

In the second installment of the interview, Varoufakis discusses the Origins of the European and Global Economic Crisis. As he explains:

“Capitalism requires surplus and recycling — just like the planet requires environmental recycling — so does capitalism require a mechanism that takes the surpluses, the profits if you want, from where they are being produced and invests them in areas that are in deficit, that have losses, where demand is low and unemployment is high. Unless you have this recycle mechanism, capitalism fails. These recycle mechanisms are part and parcel of every major state, or have been, for 200 years now.”

The former finance minister discusses the implications of the Bretton Woods System on past and current state of global economics, among a number of other related issues. You can view the second part of the interview below:

[embedded content]

This article (Former Finance Minister Compares Current Financial Crisis to Great Depression) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Claire Bernish and theAntiMedia.org. Anti-Media Radio airs weeknights at 11pm Eastern/8pm Pacific. Image credit: marclozano.If you spot a typo, email edits@theantimedia.org.

From theantimedia.org Team

Your Cell Phone Is Blowing up…Sperm Cells, a New Study Says

by

Everett Numbers
February 23, 2016

(ANTIMEDIA) Men who keep their cell phones within two feet of their testicles endanger their sperm, a new study finds — both in their quantity and quality. And it may not be enough to simply stop carrying one in a pants pocket, researchers advised.

Over 100 men took part in the study by Technion University researchers in Haifa, Israel. The findings were published in the journal, Reproductive BioMedicine, and showed those who regularly kept their cell phone in a pants pocket were more than four times as likely to suffer a lower sperm count than their general population counterparts.

Nearly half, or 47 percent, of the men carrying phones that close to their testicles were “seriously affected,” while those who kept their pockets cell phone-free showed lower sperm counts at a rate of only 11 percent.

Professor Gedis Grudzinskas, fertility consultant and author of the study, told The Telegraph, “If you wear a suit to work, put the mobile in your chest pocket instead of close to your testes. It will reduce the risk of your sperm count dropping or dropping so much.”

But Professor Grudzinskas didn’t stop there.

“And do you need to keep the phone right next to you on the bedside table. Some men keep their mobile in their shorts or pyjamas in bed. Is that really necessary?” he reasoned.

Yes, even keeping a cell phone on a bedside table had an impact on the test subjects.

“We think this is being caused by a heating of the sperm from the phone and by electromagnetic activity,” Technion University Professor Martha Dirnfeld said.

Sperm shortages have been a mainstream concern for decades. In 1991, in front of the World Health Organization, University of Copenhagen Professor Niels Skakkebaek contended that sperm counts of Western countries had been cut in half during the previous 50 years. Since then, everything from industrial chemicals to food to stress have been blamed, though no study has conclusively pinpointed what is behind the trend.

It is estimated that in 40 percent of cases where couples can’t conceive, the issue is with the man’s sperm — a statistic cited by the American Society for Reproductive Medicine and WebMD. Because women more often carry their cell phones in purses, it might be more under a man’s control to maintain healthy reproductive organs, though the study did not observe women.

“Men need to think about their well being and try to stop being addicted to their phones,” Professor Grudzinskas said.

While the findings were cause for concern, The Guardian questioned the study, citing its small sample pool of 106 men and chalking up the results to correlation just as much as causation.

“That isn’t very many men, so it could easily be a chance result. Nor is it good evidence anyway, since men who use their phone a lot might also be unusual in other areas, and it might be those areas, not their phone, that are responsible,” the article posited.

This article (Your Cell Phone Is Blowing up…Sperm Cells, a New Study Says) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Everett Numbers and theAntiMedia.org. Anti-Media Radio airs weeknights at 11 pm Eastern/8 pm Pacific. Image credit: twicepix. If you spot a typo, please email the error and name of the article to edits@theantimedia.org.

From theantimedia.org Team

Facebook’s New Tool to Help You Prevent Your Friends from Committing Suicide

by

Michaela Whitton
February 23, 2016

(ANTIMEDIA) United Kingdom — Over one billion people are active daily on Facebook, and as a result, the social networking giant is continually updating its products and services. The most recent attempt to expand resources available to users was rolled out last week in the U.K., with a feature that aims to reduce suicides.

Facebook Stats
— 1.04 billion daily active users on average in December 2015
— 934 million mobile daily active users on average in December 2015
— 1.59 billion monthly active users as of December 31, 2015
— 1.44 billion mobile monthly active users as of December 31, 2015
— Approximately 83.6% daily active users are outside the U.S. and Canada

We are more open and connected to others online than ever before. By now, many of us have stumbled across troubling posts by friends that leave us unsure as to how to respond, if at all. Maybe it is someone we don’t feel we know well enough to intervene, or perhaps we debate whether to send a private message but simply ignore the cry for help and scroll past. Well, Facebook has taken the dilemma out of our hands.

Hoping to help reduce suicides, the social media platform’s new tool offers assistance to those who may be at risk of harming themselves. Launched last year in the U.S. and Australia, the opportunity to report suicidal content on Facebook has now been launched in the U.K.

Built in partnership with the Samaritans, the tool has been developed to encourage users to help friends they feel may be at risk, as well as offer support for friends and family. While Facebook encourages people to contact emergency services first if they are worried about friends, the tool is intended to flag posts with troubling content.

Suicidal posts will be prioritised by a round-the-clock team, and when friends flag a post they are concerned about, staff will assess the best way to proceed.

The next time the user logs into their account, they will receive a message saying “a friend thinks you might be going through something difficult and asked us to look at your recent post.” Those who Facebook feels are struggling to cope will then be offered options for support. As with most resources on the social networking site, the support options can be ignored, should the person wish.

Samaritans CEO Ruth Sutherland said:

“If people can start to talk about the unbearable pain that they’re facing, we can interrupt that journey towards suicide. Suicide is not inevitable, it is preventable. This tool plays a really vital role in achieving that.”

If you have been affected by any of the issues raised in this article and need to talk to someone, visit samaritans.org or call 08457 90 90 90.

This article (Facebook’s New Tool to Help You Prevent Your Friends from Committing Suicide) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Michaela Whitton and theAntiMedia.org. Anti-Media Radio airs weeknights at 11pm Eastern/8pm Pacific. If you spot a typo, email edits@theantimedia.org.

From theantimedia.org Team

Is Britain About To Declare Independence from the European Union?

by

Michaela Whitton
February 22, 2016

(ANTIMEDIA) United Kingdom — Much like the relentless media coverage of the U.S. presidential race, the British media is already awash with the political posturing and in-fighting that was to be expected in the run up to the E.U. referendum. Still four months away, the vote on whether the United Kingdom should remain a member of, or leave the European Union, is scheduled for June 23. Is it any wonder that the public are dismayed when terms like “Brexit” and “Bremain” are being bandied about as sensible words.

Ask people in the street and many are confused as to what the being in E.U. has actually done for Britain. Others wonder what has it done to it. As usual, it’s almost impossible to ascertain what the practical issues are, beneath the propaganda and distraction of what appears to be rapidly becoming a civil war — not only between political parties, but within them.

Why is a referendum being held?

Shortly after Britain joined the E.U. — or the Common Market as it was then called — a referendum was held and the country voted to stay in. Since then, the public and politicians have called for another vote, claiming that the E.U. has changed so much in 40 years since many more countries have joined, and the institution has exercised more control. After initially resisting the calls, David Cameron changed his mind in 2013.

Who wants to leave?

Since September, the race has been fairly evenly split with latest opinion polls showing 51% wish to remain in the EU 51%, 49% want to leave. The U.K. Independence Party (UKIP), which won the European elections, campaigns for Britain’s exit from the E.U. In addition, about half of Conservative MPs, including five cabinet ministers, several Labour MPs, and the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) are in favour of leaving.

Why do they want to leave?

Many believe that the E.U. imposes too many rules and charges billions of pounds in membership fees for little in return. They want Britain to take full control of its borders and reduce the number of people entering for work. They also object to the idea of “ever closer union” and the ultimate goal to create a “United States of Europe.”

Who wants to stay?

David Cameron and sixteen of his cabinet back staying in. The Conservative Party has pledged to be neutral in the campaign, while the Labour Party, Scottish National Party (SNP), Plaid Cymru, and the Liberal Democrats are in favour of staying in.

Why do they want to stay?

Some believe that Britain gets a boost from E.U. membership . They claim it makes selling things to other E.U. countries easier and that the flow of immigrants fuels economic growth and helps pay for public services. The ‘ins’ also believe that Britain’s status in the world would be damaged by leaving and that the country is more secure as part of the bloc.

Who’s saying what?

A number of campaigners and union leaders wrote a letter to the Guardian calling the E.U. a “profoundly anti-democratic institution” and claiming that it is irreversibly committed to privatisation, welfare cuts, low wages, and the erosion of trade union rights. The letter stated: “We stand for a positive vision of a future Europe based on democracy, social justice and ecological sustainability, not the profit-making interests of a tiny elite. For these reasons we are committed to pressing for a vote to leave the E.U. in the forthcoming referendum on U.K. membership.”

Scotland’s First Minister, Nicola Sturgeon, has said that many Scots would object to being taken out of the E.U. against their will. She added that a second Scottish independence referendum would almost certainly be triggered if the U.K. votes to leave the E.U. but Scotland does not.

Caroline Lucas Green Party MP for Brighton Pavilion said the end of David Cameron’s marathon twenty-five hour negotiations last week must mark “an end of men in grey suits shouting at each other” and added “The distraction of the negotiations is now over and the real debate can begin. Every single vote is equal in this referendum – and it’s crucial that this conversation is taken out from behind closed doors and into our communities.”

In an opinion piece for the Guardian, Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn accused Cameron’s recent negotiations of“overblown tinkering.’’ Corbyn agrees that the E.U. needs reform but said Labour will be campaigning to stay in, as he said: “It’s because being part of Europe has brought Britain investment, jobs and protection for workers, consumers and the environment. We are convinced that the EU is a vital framework for European trade and international cooperation in the 21st century, and that a vote to remain in Europe is in the best interests of our people.”

London Mayor Boris Johnson released a statement on Sunday night siding with the exit campaign: “I will be advocating Vote Leave – or whatever the team is called, I understand there are a lot of them – because I want a better deal for the people of this country, to save them money and to take control. That is really what this is all about.” Despite the buffoon-like vagueness of his claims, the revelations caused shockwaves through currency markets on Monday with the pound hitting its lowest point against the U.S. dollar in seven years.

Stomach-churning photos of Nigel Farage and George Galloway at a rally for the Grassroots Out campaign last week no doubt boosted numbers for the Remain camp while prompting some hilarious tweets.

This article (Is Britain About To Declare Independence from the European Union?) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Michaela Whitton and theAntiMedia.org. Anti-Media Radio airs weeknights at 11pm Eastern/8pm Pacific. If you spot a typo, email edits@theantimedia.org.

From theantimedia.org Team