One Nation Tracked, Zero Privacy -New York Times
"Every minute of every day, everywhere on the planet, dozens of companies - largely unregulated, little scrutinized - are logging the movements of tens of millions of people with mobile phones and storing the information in gigantic data files. The Times Privacy Project obtained one such file, by far the largest and most sensitive ever to be reviewed by journalists. It holds more than 50 billion location pings from the phones of more than 12 million Americans as they moved through several major cities, including Washington, New York, San Francisco and Los Angeles....After spending months sifting through the data, tracking the movements of people across the country and speaking with dozens of data companies, technologists, lawyers and academics who study this field, we feel the same sense of alarm....It doesn't take much imagination to conjure the powers such always-on surveillance can provide an authoritarian regime like China's. Within America's own representative democracy, citizens would surely rise up in outrage if the government attempted to mandate that every person above the age of 12 carry a tracking device that revealed their location 24 hours a day. Yet, in the decade since Apple's App Store was created, Americans have, app by app, consented to just such a system run by private companies....Today, it's perfectly legal to collect and sell all this information. In the United States, as in most of the world, no federal law limits what has become a vast and lucrative trade in human tracking....The companies profiting from our every move can't be expected to voluntarily limit their practices. Congress has to step in to protect Americans' needs as consumers and rights as citizens. Until then, one thing is certain: We are living in the world's most advanced surveillance system. This system wasn't created deliberately...The greatest trick technology companies ever played was persuading society to surveil itself."
"Every minute of every day, everywhere on the planet, dozens of companies - largely unregulated, little scrutinized - are logging the movements of tens of millions of people with mobile phones and storing the information in gigantic data files. The Times Privacy Project obtained one such file, by far the largest and most sensitive ever to be reviewed by journalists. It holds more than 50 billion location pings from the phones of more than 12 million Americans as they moved through several major cities, including Washington, New York, San Francisco and Los Angeles....After spending months sifting through the data, tracking the movements of people across the country and speaking with dozens of data companies, technologists, lawyers and academics who study this field, we feel the same sense of alarm....It doesn't take much imagination to conjure the powers such always-on surveillance can provide an authoritarian regime like China's. Within America's own representative democracy, citizens would surely rise up in outrage if the government attempted to mandate that every person above the age of 12 carry a tracking device that revealed their location 24 hours a day. Yet, in the decade since Apple's App Store was created, Americans have, app by app, consented to just such a system run by private companies....Today, it's perfectly legal to collect and sell all this information. In the United States, as in most of the world, no federal law limits what has become a vast and lucrative trade in human tracking....The companies profiting from our every move can't be expected to voluntarily limit their practices. Congress has to step in to protect Americans' needs as consumers and rights as citizens. Until then, one thing is certain: We are living in the world's most advanced surveillance system. This system wasn't created deliberately...The greatest trick technology companies ever played was persuading society to surveil itself."
Crazy Won't Beat Trump -Noonan/Wall Street Journal
"The Democrats think they've just had a big triumph. The president's been impeached. But Republicans see themselves as gaining the upper hand. The House couldn't lift the event into an air of historical gravity. They dressed in dark clothes and never smiled, as at a wake, but the deceased was making kicking sounds from the casket and appeared to be tweeting, so it was incongruous. The revealing moment was when Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced the first article had passed and some Democrats apparently began to clap....What felt like news came the day after, when Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, who throughout the crisis had been relatively quiet and oblique, and who is never interesting by accident, suddenly became fiery. 'The Senate exists for moments like this,' he said, rather menacingly. 'Transient passion and violent factionalism' have swept the House....A Quinnipiac poll this week shows support for President Trump's impeachment and removal from office has gone down since October, to 45%....Here is how the Democratic party's lurch left has improved the president's position. It makes the 2020 race not 'Trump vs. the Democrat,' a race he can lose, but 'Trump vs. Lefty Madness,' which he can win. The left is turning Donald Trump into a savior. He was not a savior before AOC. He was not a savior before Elizabeth and Bernie said they'd ban your health insurance. But the past year has allowed the president's supporters, and independents, to see him that way....After so disastrously branding their party throughout 2019, is it possible for Democrats to turn it around in 2020?"
"The Democrats think they've just had a big triumph. The president's been impeached. But Republicans see themselves as gaining the upper hand. The House couldn't lift the event into an air of historical gravity. They dressed in dark clothes and never smiled, as at a wake, but the deceased was making kicking sounds from the casket and appeared to be tweeting, so it was incongruous. The revealing moment was when Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced the first article had passed and some Democrats apparently began to clap....What felt like news came the day after, when Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, who throughout the crisis had been relatively quiet and oblique, and who is never interesting by accident, suddenly became fiery. 'The Senate exists for moments like this,' he said, rather menacingly. 'Transient passion and violent factionalism' have swept the House....A Quinnipiac poll this week shows support for President Trump's impeachment and removal from office has gone down since October, to 45%....Here is how the Democratic party's lurch left has improved the president's position. It makes the 2020 race not 'Trump vs. the Democrat,' a race he can lose, but 'Trump vs. Lefty Madness,' which he can win. The left is turning Donald Trump into a savior. He was not a savior before AOC. He was not a savior before Elizabeth and Bernie said they'd ban your health insurance. But the past year has allowed the president's supporters, and independents, to see him that way....After so disastrously branding their party throughout 2019, is it possible for Democrats to turn it around in 2020?"
Liberalism Is A Mental Disorder -Reparations for Illegal Aliens May Cost Americans Up to $2.2 Trillion
Providing reparations to 11 to 22 million illegal aliens — as South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg has said he supports — could potentially cost American taxpayers up to $2.2 trillion. In a 2014 analysis by The Nation, Columbia University economist Suresh Naidu estimated that reparations could cost anywhere between $22,000 to $101,000 per illegal alien. Those costs are based on depressed and lost wages for illegal aliens taking American jobs in the workforce. The largest estimate, in which $101,000 is given to every illegal alien, would mean American taxpayers are forced to pay $2.2 trillion for illegal alien reparations. Should only reparations be given to the roughly eight million illegal aliens who are estimated to be in the U.S. workforce, American taxpayers would be billed about $808 billion. During the PBS/Politico Democrat debate on Thursday evening, Buttigieg vowed to provide reparations to millions of illegal aliens in the U.S. — a plan that has been floated by the open borders lobby
Chanukah — festival of lights and fabulous fried food from around the world
For Chanukah (also known as Hannukah) it’s traditional to use abundant quantities of oil to fry festive treats based on savoury fritters and doughnuts. Chanukah is the Jewish festival of lights, which this year starts on Sunday, the day after winter’s shortest day. The festival, one of considerable indulgence, commemorates the rededication of the Holy Temple in Jerusalem in around 160BC after a long fight for religious freedom.
The Jews led by Judah Maccabee were protesting against the Greek-Syrians trying to impose their religion. When the victorious Maccabees returned to Jerusalem and their desecrated holy temple, a single cruse of oil that appeared to be only enough to keep the temple’s eternal lamp alight for a single night lasted for eight days while more oil was sourced. To celebrate the miracle of the oil, the tradition is now to light candles on an eight-branched menorah over eight days.
What makes Chanukah so fascinating is the sheer diversity of how Jews around the world, who’ve been on the move for more than 3,500 years, interpret eating fried foods that reflect their locality and ingredients.Typically, us Ashkenazi Jews (with eastern European ancestry) went crazy for potato latkes, the dish most synonymous with Chanukah, while Sephardic (Mediterranean) communities came together over leek keftike and cinnamon fried chicken.
Chanukah’s theme of maintaining Jewish identity, religion and culture in the face of adversity also feels extremely relevant today, and reason enough to suggest Jews and non-Jews alike celebrate Chanukah’s vegan/flexitarian-friendly recipes over the eight days.
This year, I’m entertaining friends on Sunday, and there’s one thing that is guaranteed to be on the menu. Crisp, crunchy and golden yet fluffy within, classic potato latkes made with shredded potatoes, a little flour and egg are not only irresistible but synonymous with my childhood. My Hungarian great-grandmother would bustle around my grandma’s north London kitchen making latkes to serve with cinnamon-scented apple sauce and sour cream.
I believe that the best latke results are achieved by using an old-fashioned grater for the potatoes (rather than shredding in a food processor (the latter produces too much starchy water). The trick is to wrap the grated potato in a clean tea towel to really squeeze all the water out.
Add shallots and rosemary to the latke mix after draining but before frying for a bolder flavour. Spanish Sephardic Jews add leeks to the potato mix and some breadcrumbs to make keftikes. Latkes are best served immediately, piping hot, which is challenging when entertaining, especially as the traditional apple sauce and soured cream cools them down. Another dish to try is the Italian-Jewish tradition of subtly fragrant fried chicken with cinnamon, garlic and lemon.
To make the chicken irresistibly crisp and golden, dust it with fine matzo meal rather than flour before dipping in beaten egg and cook in sunflower oil with a couple of chunks of celery, which dissipates spitting.
Delicious doughnuts
When it comes to sweet, deep-fried dough, Maghreb Jewish communities favour sfinj, rings of light fluffy fried dough, generally served dusted with sugar or honey and usually bought from street vendors who still commonly sell them hung on palm fronds. Harry Handelsmann, owner of the new Stratford Hotel and Allegra restaurant in east London, who spent his youth in Israel remains a fan of classic sufganiyot jam doughnuts (based on eastern European doughnuts brought to Palestine during the 1920s), which he buys from Daniel’s in Golders Green.
When it comes to sweet, deep-fried dough, Maghreb Jewish communities favour sfinj, rings of light fluffy fried dough, generally served dusted with sugar or honey and usually bought from street vendors who still commonly sell them hung on palm fronds. Harry Handelsmann, owner of the new Stratford Hotel and Allegra restaurant in east London, who spent his youth in Israel remains a fan of classic sufganiyot jam doughnuts (based on eastern European doughnuts brought to Palestine during the 1920s), which he buys from Daniel’s in Golders Green.
Jewish bakeries have big queues at Chanukah, and this year they are joined by two interesting newcomers serving doughnuts. Michelle Eshkeri, in London’s East Finchley, makes them with a tangy nuance, filled with zesty lemon curd or chocolate custard, and shares the recipe in her Modern Sourdough book. Tami Isaacs-Pearce lights a menorah in the window of her south Hampstead Karma Bakery for each night of Chanukah. Her doughnuts (inset, left) brim with inventive fillings, such as tahini and honey, and stollen with dried fruit.
Dairy delicacies
Eating dairy dishes is also associated with Chanukah in deference to the feisty and resourceful Judith who seduced Assyrian enemy Holofernes, with salty cheese and wine long before the miracle of the oil. Other dairy foods, especially cheesecake, blintzes, rugelach and divine Syrian pancakes known as atayef/ataif, are popularly served.
Eating dairy dishes is also associated with Chanukah in deference to the feisty and resourceful Judith who seduced Assyrian enemy Holofernes, with salty cheese and wine long before the miracle of the oil. Other dairy foods, especially cheesecake, blintzes, rugelach and divine Syrian pancakes known as atayef/ataif, are popularly served.
These filigree-thin pancakes are made with semolina flour and a dash of orange blossom and have a velvety texture. They’re topped with thick cream and usually served with a sprinkling of pistachio. A delicacy that surely surpasses Christmas pudding and, happily, relies on a little of Chanukah’s magic ingredient – oil.
Latkes, just like great-grandmother used to make 4 large potatoes 1 onion 3 tbsp chopped parsley leaves 1 large egg, lightly beaten 2 tbsp plain flour ½ tsp baking powder Salt and freshly ground pepper Sunflower oil or rapeseed oil, for cooking Soured cream, to serve. Coarsely grate the potatoes and onion, alternating between onion and potato, as the acid in the onion helps to prevent the potato from discolouring. Transfer the potato mixture to a colander, and squeeze the mixture by hand to remove as much liquid as possible. Transfer the mixture to a large bowl, and stir in the egg, flour, parsley and baking powder, then season with salt and pepper.
Heat 2 tablespoons of oil in a large non-stick pan over a medium heat until it is shimmering. Spoon 2 tablespoons of the potato mixture into the pan for each latke. Flatten with the back of a spoon so that each is about 8–10cm in diameter. Fry for 4 minutes or until golden underneath and crisp. Turn the latkes carefully using two spatulas so that the oil doesn’t splatter, and cook for 4 minutes until golden and crisp.
Latkes can be kept warm in a 300C oven, and they freeze well, too - cook, allow to cool, place in a ziplock bag and put them in the freezer. When ready to serve, warm from frozen in an oven at 300C for 10 minutes or defrost in fridge for 24 hours then heat in a dry pan.
DISCLAIMER: All investments are subject to risk, which should be considered on an individual basis before making any investment decision. We are not responsible for errors or omissions. These publications are intended solely for information and educational purposes only and the content within is not to be construed, under any circumstances, as an offer to buy or to sell or a solicitation to buy or sell or trade in any commodities or securities named within.All commentary is provided for educational purposes only. Information contained in this service is NOT a solicitation to buy any security. This material is based upon information we consider reliable. However, accuracy is not guaranteed. Subscribers should always do their own investigation before investing in any security. Furthermore, you cannot be assured that your will profit or that any losses can or will be limited. It is important to know that no guarantee of any kind is implied nor possible where projections of future conditions in the markets are attempted. Hypothetical or simulated performance results have certain inherent limitations as to liquidity and execution among other variables.
REMEMBER, THERE IS NO FREEDOM WITHOUT THE LAW, REGARDLESS OF YOUR FAITH!
Why We Are a Republic, Not a Democracy
Hillary Clinton blamed the Electoral College for her stunning defeat in the 2016 presidential election in her latest memoirs, “What Happened.”
Some have claimed that the Electoral College is one of the most dangerous institutions in American politics.
Why? They say the Electoral College system, as opposed to a simple majority vote, distorts the one-person, one-vote principle of democracy because electoral votes are not distributed according to population.
To back up their claim, they point out that the Electoral College gives, for example, Wyoming citizens disproportionate weight in a presidential election.
Put another way, Wyoming, a state with a population of about 600,000, has one member in the House of Representatives and two members in the U.S. Senate, which gives the citizens of Wyoming three electoral votes, or one electoral vote per 200,000 people.
California, our most populous state, has more than 39 million people and 55 electoral votes, or approximately one vote per 715,000 people.
Comparatively, individuals in Wyoming have nearly four times the power in the Electoral College as Californians.
Many people whine that using the Electoral College instead of the popular vote and majority rule is undemocratic. I’d say that they are absolutely right. Not deciding who will be the president by majority rule is not democracy.
But the Founding Fathers went to great lengths to ensure that we were a republic and not a democracy. In fact, the word democracy does not appear in the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, or any other of our founding documents.
How about a few quotations expressed by the Founders about democracy?
In Federalist Paper No. 10, James Madison wanted to prevent rule by majority faction, saying, “Measures are too often decided, not according to the rules of justice and the rights of the minor party, but by the superior force of an interested and overbearing majority.”
John Adams warned in a letter, “Remember democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet, that did not commit suicide.”
Edmund Randolph said, “That in tracing these evils to their origin, every man had found it in the turbulence and follies of democracy.”
Then-Chief Justice John Marshall observed, “Between a balanced republic and a democracy, the difference is like that between order and chaos.”
The Founders expressed contempt for the tyranny of majority rule, and throughout our Constitution, they placed impediments to that tyranny. Two houses of Congress pose one obstacle to majority rule. That is, 51 senators can block the wishes of 435 representatives and 49 senators.
The president can veto the wishes of 535 members of Congress. It takes two-thirds of both houses of Congress to override a presidential veto.
To change the Constitution requires not a majority but a two-thirds vote of both houses, and if an amendment is approved, it requires ratification by three-fourths of state legislatures.
Finally, the Electoral College is yet another measure that thwarts majority rule. It makes sure that the highly populated states—today, mainly 12 on the east and west coasts, cannot run roughshod over the rest of the nation. That forces a presidential candidate to take into consideration the wishes of the other 38 states.
Those Americans obsessed with rule by popular majorities might want to get rid of the Senate, where states, regardless of population, have two senators.
Should we change representation in the House of Representatives to a system of proportional representation and eliminate the guarantee that each state gets at least one representative?
Currently, seven states with populations of 1 million or fewer have one representative, thus giving them disproportionate influence in Congress.
While we’re at it, should we make all congressional acts by majority rule? When we’re finished with establishing majority rule in Congress, should we then move to change our court system, which requires unanimity in jury decisions, to a simple majority rule?
My question is: Is it ignorance of or contempt for our Constitution that fuels the movement to abolish the Electoral College?
https://www.intellectualtakeou
Some have claimed that the Electoral College is one of the most dangerous institutions in American politics.
Why? They say the Electoral College system, as opposed to a simple majority vote, distorts the one-person, one-vote principle of democracy because electoral votes are not distributed according to population.
To back up their claim, they point out that the Electoral College gives, for example, Wyoming citizens disproportionate weight in a presidential election.
Put another way, Wyoming, a state with a population of about 600,000, has one member in the House of Representatives and two members in the U.S. Senate, which gives the citizens of Wyoming three electoral votes, or one electoral vote per 200,000 people.
California, our most populous state, has more than 39 million people and 55 electoral votes, or approximately one vote per 715,000 people.
Comparatively, individuals in Wyoming have nearly four times the power in the Electoral College as Californians.
Many people whine that using the Electoral College instead of the popular vote and majority rule is undemocratic. I’d say that they are absolutely right. Not deciding who will be the president by majority rule is not democracy.
But the Founding Fathers went to great lengths to ensure that we were a republic and not a democracy. In fact, the word democracy does not appear in the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, or any other of our founding documents.
How about a few quotations expressed by the Founders about democracy?
In Federalist Paper No. 10, James Madison wanted to prevent rule by majority faction, saying, “Measures are too often decided, not according to the rules of justice and the rights of the minor party, but by the superior force of an interested and overbearing majority.”
John Adams warned in a letter, “Remember democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet, that did not commit suicide.”
Edmund Randolph said, “That in tracing these evils to their origin, every man had found it in the turbulence and follies of democracy.”
Then-Chief Justice John Marshall observed, “Between a balanced republic and a democracy, the difference is like that between order and chaos.”
The Founders expressed contempt for the tyranny of majority rule, and throughout our Constitution, they placed impediments to that tyranny. Two houses of Congress pose one obstacle to majority rule. That is, 51 senators can block the wishes of 435 representatives and 49 senators.
The president can veto the wishes of 535 members of Congress. It takes two-thirds of both houses of Congress to override a presidential veto.
To change the Constitution requires not a majority but a two-thirds vote of both houses, and if an amendment is approved, it requires ratification by three-fourths of state legislatures.
Finally, the Electoral College is yet another measure that thwarts majority rule. It makes sure that the highly populated states—today, mainly 12 on the east and west coasts, cannot run roughshod over the rest of the nation. That forces a presidential candidate to take into consideration the wishes of the other 38 states.
Those Americans obsessed with rule by popular majorities might want to get rid of the Senate, where states, regardless of population, have two senators.
Should we change representation in the House of Representatives to a system of proportional representation and eliminate the guarantee that each state gets at least one representative?
Currently, seven states with populations of 1 million or fewer have one representative, thus giving them disproportionate influence in Congress.
While we’re at it, should we make all congressional acts by majority rule? When we’re finished with establishing majority rule in Congress, should we then move to change our court system, which requires unanimity in jury decisions, to a simple majority rule?
My question is: Is it ignorance of or contempt for our Constitution that fuels the movement to abolish the Electoral College?
https://www.intellectualtakeou
No comments:
Post a Comment