text:
STARS /
Athletes /
Thursday, 01 September 2011 00:00
Written by	Kristie Bertucci | Photos By MWRT/Scott Dukes – www.dukesphotography.com
Some guys have all the luck…DC Shoes founder/Rally Racer/Gymkhana king being one of them! Not only does he have the coolest job in the world, racing rally cars and busting moves in his Gymkhana videos, but he's now able to put gaming consultant on his already very impressive resume. Creating his Gymkhana videos for pure personal enjoyment has now propelled him and the driving style into the video game realm with DiRT 3.
Gearing up to release his fourth Gymkhana video and setting off the first ever Gymkhana World Tour, Block is pumped to see the highly popular new racing style featured in DiRT 3—something he was hands-on with since the series' second installment.
Block was asked to be one of the main testers and developers for the third game because of its addition of Gymkhana to its racing modes. "Basically, DiRT 3 takes all the best stuff from game two and makes it better and more fun," he describes. "It's incredible for me as a driver to see what I started to do just for fun become something bigger and make its way into a video game. It's done so well that playing DiRT 3 is just as fun as actually being in the driver's seat of my Gymkhana car."
"Man, the game incorporates things that I can only dream about doing in real life. But actually doing them would either be really expensive or very dangerous. I'm satisfied with being able to bust them in the game…for now!" Taking what Block has done in his videos and Gymkhana competitions, game developer Codemasters was able to integrate his Gymkhana expertise and take it even further by creating situations and racing abilities that Block can't even do now! "Man, the game incorporates things that I can only dream about doing in real life," he laughs. "But actually doing them would either be really expensive or very dangerous. I'm satisfied with being able to bust them in the game…for now!"
Still in awe that some random videos he posted online for fun grew so big that one of the biggest driving games in the world wanted to incorporate it into their virtual racing experience. "It's been an amazing time working with the guys at Codemasters!" he says. "It was a lot of fun and I couldn't have asked for a better time. I got to go out to England a few times and really learn about the gaming world. I'd love to continue the relationship and create more exciting and fun games."
Besides being able to have some fun with DiRT 3, Block is taking his rally racing skills to new heights with a bigger and broader schedule for World Rally Championship races and events in his all-new Monster Energy Ford Fiesta RS WRC. That's in addition to his involvement in the Summer X Games, Gymkhana GRID and select RallyCar and RallyCross events across the nation.
"This year, I'm doing nine of the 13 WRC events. I have yet to do a full season. But it's a huge learning experience going from a small national racing association like the Rally America Championship to a bigger worldwide one, so I've been really working hard to get better and keep improving," Block confesses. "But this year, I've only done three events and had a tough time at every single one."
So far, his worst one was in the WRC's Portugal Rally, where the car stepped out on loose marbles and he couldn't get it back in line, causing him to then roll over about five times during a practice run. "I was actually really mad in the middle of the crash," he says. "I was upside down and really pissed 'cause I knew this was going to make it where I didn't race the weekend…but that's racing and those things happen."
Other races included Mexico (one of his favorite rallies in the world) and Sweden, but he had mechanical problems at both, resulting in a less than expected WRC season for the moment. "I've got the skills, work ethic, but it's the technical stuff that's not working for me right now." Despite the roadblocks, he's optimistic that things will change during the rest of the season and is hitting the remaining races for the season with a plan of attack.
"You have to be smart about how you approach each event, if you don't have a game plan, there's really no way to improve. Rally racing is really serious business, and I work very hard at it. A plan in place helps a lot."
Rally may be serious business, but Gymkhana is nothing but serious fun for Block. He describes rally racing as being very intensive and requiring one to drive as quick as one can over a span of several days and a couple hundred miles. On the other side of the spectrum is Gymkhana's race events/stunts, which consists of a relatively easier course that can be conquered after one or two test runs.
"Rally and Gymkhana take totally different mindsets. I get to drive the car as aggressive as I want and really enjoy muscling the car around, whereas being in a rally car is more about competitiveness, and making every second and move count. You almost have to drive at a perfect speed and path to really rank high. One's totally carefree while the other really brings out my competitive side."
It may seem as if Block always lives life in the driver's seat between Rally Racing and Gymkhana, but in reality, airplanes are where he says he spends most of his time, traveling to various sites, promotional events and the like. But it's while he's in the driver's seat of either his murdered-out 2011 Ford SVT Raptor at his home in Utah or his European-spec Ford Focus RS is when Block turns off race mode and becomes a regular driver.
"I've had my eye on the Raptor for quite some time, but waited until Ford put a bigger motor in it than the original 5.4-liter one past versions had. You need a good 4x4 vehicle living in Utah, and Ford did a great job on the truck in terms of factory features." Living in Utah, the Raptor comes in handy when the weather gets nasty, something Block likes to take full advantage of. "I've had my eye on the Raptor for quite some time, but waited until Ford put a bigger motor in it than the original 5.4-liter one past versions had. You need a good 4x4 vehicle living in Utah, and Ford did a great job on the truck in terms of factory features."
Block especially likes the suspension and wider stance of the Raptor, which allows him to really go out and have some fun, either in the snow or sand. Happy with everything stock, Block only added some 20-inch KMC Addict wheels and went for a stealth black look with a matte black wrap.
Whenever in So. Cal, Block likes to take his green 2010 Ford Focus RS out for spins, since it's the one car he doesn't get much time in. When Block signed his deal with Ford, asking for a Euro-spec RS (which stands for "Rally Sport") was first on his list.
He does admit that despite its minute size, the Focus RS is actually a fun car to drive. "The green is Ford's standout color that they made especially for Europe when they first brought out the car," he explains. "Ever since I first saw that car in all the press and marketing materials, I wanted one. It also just so happens to match the Monster Energy green, which is perfect for me and my sponsors. It's one of the best performance cars in the world so I was really stoked that Ford was nice enough to bring one over from Europe for me. It's really the perfect fit all around!
Again, Block enjoys the original factory settings and praises Ford for making a great car right off the production line. All that was added were a set of KW Variant 3 coilovers, Pirelli P Zero Trofeo tires and 19-inch Volk Racing VR.G2 wheels.
"I'm not someone who likes to do a lot of things to their car unless it really needs it," he admits. "The stereo systems in both cars sound great. I love the nav and SYNC systems, too. Both cars work exceptionally well, and I'm happy with them straight from factory, with the exception of some minor changes to make them look the way I wanted. For right now, both are staying the way they are, with no plans on adding more mods anytime soon."
Between his two daily driver toys and his Rally and Gymkhana Ford Fiestas, Block is living the life any car enthusiast would love to have. "I'm a lucky bastard who gets paid to go out and drive cars this way, so I'm going to do it as long as I can."
http://www.dubmagazine.com/home/stars/225-athletes/8431-ken-block#sigProId79c549c57b
Published in Athletes
More in this category: « Shaquille O'Neal The Opposite Extremes of Ron Artest »


text:
Sun Flooring is proud to honor a history of flooring excellence.
In 1952, W.B. Humphreys purchased a branch of Stokes, renaming the business Carpet & Draperies. Mr. Humphreys, a WW2 veteran, was a hard worker who knew how to treat people!
By the 1970's, business was flourishing. Mr. Humphreys built a name for the business based on new products, exceptional customer service, and top class flooring installations.
In the 1990's, Mr. Humphrey's son in law, Mickey Goneke, purchased the business. The named was changed to Pay-Less Carpets, but the great service remained.
In 2018, Mickey's son, Drew, purchased the business, renaming Pay-Less Carpets to Sun Flooring.
Though the name has changed multiple times, each generation of this family business makes sure that customers are treated with respect, stores are filled with innovative products, and installations are best in class.
Meet the Sun Flooring team
Mobile (Call or Text us!)
2818 Government Blvd
Sun Flooring
Sun Flooring 2023

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
Iqbal Uddin | Published: 2020-07-07 12:23:51 BdST
About 50pc of coastal fishermen are in food crisis, 45pc borrowed at high-interest rates
Iqbal Uddin
Because of the ongoing 65-days ban on fishing in the Bay of Bengal, about 70% of fishermen have lost their employment, due to lack of income and failing to include names in the list of government aid list about 50% fishermen can't afford food for three times in a day.
A recent study by the non-governmental organization COAST Trust revealed this information.
COAST has prepared the research report based on information got from 264 fisher families in the coastal districts of Cox's Bazar, Laksmipur, Bhola, Patuakhali, Khulna, and Bagerhat.
According to the study, during using time 42.4% of the families of the fishers have an average monthly income of 6,000-10,000 taka, but 60.8% of the families have no income at all during the ban period. As a result, where 95.8% of the families used to eat three meals a day, 51% of the families can eat three meals during the ban.
The government is providing 43 kg of rice to help the families of the fishermen during the ban.
But even though 65.8% of the fishing families got rice, 34.2% of the families have not yet received this government assistance.
Half of those who got this rice received it about a month after the ban began.
40% of the fishers complained that despite fulfilling all the conditions, their names did not appear in the government list for support, so they got nothing.
67.5% of those receiving rice as government assistance said that the rice was not enough to support their families as there was no cash assistance to meet other household expenses and 96.1% of the fishermen did not receive any assistance under any other social safety net programs.
Thus, 79.9% of the fishermen have borrowed on interest to meet the expenses of the family, 42.1% have sold their labor in advance, and 45.7% have borrowed from the moneylenders at high interest.
The study also found that violence against women in fishers' families increased during the ban. 51.8% of households have experienced domestic violence.
The study also finds that 95.4% of the fishers have no alternative source of income except fishing at sea.
The study, therefore, recommends ensuring an alternative income for fishermen during the ban period.
Recognizing the effectiveness of the ban on fishing to increase the country's fisheries resources, the study makes several specific recommendations to address the various crises faced by fishing families during the ban.
Some notable recommendations are cash assistance instead of rice, easy access to loans or financial assistance, a compilation of an accurate list of fishermen, awareness and incentive activities to prevent child marriage and increase the rate of education, setting a "fishing ban period" in coordination with India and Myanmar.
Iqbal Uddin, a researcher at the COAST Trust, said the study was conducted to analyze the impact of the ban on fishermen's socio-economic life, to analyze the risk and gender fairness of women fishermen and to make recommendations to meet the needs of fishermen.
Rezaul Karim Chowdhury, Executive Director of COAST Trust, said the fisheries sector contributes 3.57 percent to the annual GDP. Hilsa alone as a single fish meets 12 percent of the country's fish demand. Fish production has increased by 58.35 percent in the last 10 years.
"Fishermen are always deprived even though they meet the fish demand of the people of the country. Most of them lead inhumane lives during the fishing ban. Rice assistance alone is not enough during the ban because cash assistance is needed for other household expenses," he added.


text:
Professor Noel Perkins Receives Amoco Award
Professor Noel Perkins ( https://me-web2.engin.umich.edu/zope/pubdir/bio?uniqname=ncp ) was one of two faculty from across the University of Michigan to receive the 2002 Amoco Undergraduate Teaching Award for "demonstrated excellence in instruction at the undergraduate level."
Nominations are reviewed by an interdisciplinary committee composed of distinguished faculty from a range of U-M schools and colleges. Awardees are selected by the Dean of the Graduate School, based upon the recommendations of this committee.
Perkins was nominated by ME Chair Dennis Assanis. This year, 15 faculty were nominated for the award.
The Amoco Awards are presented at a special ceremony in the fall, along with other major awards such as Distinguished University Professorships, Distinguished Faculty Achievement, Faculty Recognition and Regents' Distinguished Public Service Awards.


text:
Last name: Leggett
This unusual and interesting name is of early medieval English origin, and is an occupational surname for an ambassador or deputy. The derivation is from the Old French and Middle English word "legat", from the Latin "legatus", from "legare", to appoint, ordain, from "lex", "legis", law, command. In addition to being an official name for a "legate", an official elected to represent his village at the manor court, the surname may derive from a "pageant-name" similar to the medieval surnames of official position such as "Lord", "Knight", "King", and "Bishop", these being frequent characters on show in medieval pageants, and those that played them easily coming to be called by that name. The modern surname can be found as Leggatt, Legat(e), Leg(g)ett and Leggitt. The marriage of Richard Colfe and Elisabeth Leggett was recorded at St. Dionis Backchurch, London, in 1585. A Coat of Arms granted to the Legat or Leggett families of Essex, Kent and Norfolk, is an ermine shield with a red lion rampant. Two red lions' gambs erect, supporting a gold mitre, forms the Crest, and the Motto is "Jesus hominum Salvator". The first recorded spelling of the family name is shown to be that of Peter Legat, which was dated 1199, in the "Pipe Rolls of Cornwall", during the reign of King Richard 1, known as "The Lionheart", 1189 - 1199. Surnames became necessary when governments introduced personal taxation. In England this was known as Poll Tax. Throughout the centuries, surnames in every country have continued to "develop" often leading to astonishing variants of the original spelling.
Surname scroll for: Leggett


text:
The Idiot's Guide To Live Golf Sports Tournament Described
Wisconsin's males personal the Big Ten meet. This yr's title was their twelfth straight, tying the record for the 4th-longest championship streak in conference history among all sports. It was also the Wisconsin cross-county program's 44th crew title, including 29 of the last 34 championship races.
Your alarm goes off you stand up you bathe and dress you and perhaps the family have breakfast collectively you go to work the automobile begins or the bus/prepare is on time, even while you go through traffic lights and so they keep inexperienced and you do not have to gradual up or cease may be seen as successful!. You get to work on time and so forth!
He matches very well in Orlando's offense.
All of the F1 groups firstly of the season could not get to grips with the Pirelli tyres which subsequently lead to among the finest racing F1 fans have seen for years. The Chinese Grand Prix was the first actual instance of how not understanding the tyres and the new rules brought the field a lot closer collectively, and created edge of your. There was 12 automobiles separated by 8 seconds going into the closing levels of the race and misplaced out the most at the finish from being in second place going into the final few laps to ending outside of the points on account of his tyres falling "off the cliff." This was additionally the first sign we saw Mercedes trying like an actual menace with a one-two in qualifying and with taking his maiden victory in China. Nonetheless we soon found that Mercedes would go backwards somewhat than forwards in this season championship.
Analyzing the previous performances of some of the top golfers would enable you to get an idea of their capability to enter the final spherical. In 2009, the winner was Stewart Click on. He confirmed a highly spectacular efficiency. Tiger Woods is a golfer who options within the list of a number of winners of the British Open. Tiger woods received within the following years: 2006, 2005 and 2000. The 2008 competitions saw the emergence of Pardaig Harrington because the winner. Players like Todd Hamilton, Ben Curtis, Paul Lawrie, Nick Faldo, Greg Norman etc are additionally there on the listing of golfers with spectacular performances in the British Open Golf Championship.
Michigan's final two runners finished 43d and 59th.
Saugahatchee County Club this County membership is positioned at Bent Creek street between Auburn and Opelika. It presents outstanding golf, tennis, swimming, fitness and eating services. Amenities of this club embody 18-hole golf course, an lively tennis facility, a big outdoor pool and quite a lot of dining venues. Distinctive membership opportunities are supplied that appeal to particular person and family wants.
Having ranked within the prime thirty on the PGA Tour cash record the previous year The New York Yankees, except C.C. Sabathia, haven't any post season heroes. Derek Jeter is just too old, Curtis Granderson will in all probability collapse under that distinctive type of New York pressure and, nicely, Alex Rodriquez is Alex Rodriquez.
Held in version was won by Graeme McDowell of Northern Eire. In golf betting, people attempt to analyze the golfers by varied elements. Their efficiency in vital tournaments is one of the deciding elements. The FedEX match is considered as certainly one of them.
Unidentified Facts About Monthly Golf Sports Event Revealed By The Authorities
With six of the eight PKRA (Professional Kiteboard Riders Affiliation) freestyle occasions for the 2012 season behind us and solely China (Nov. 13th to 18th) and New Caledonia (Nov twenty first to Nov twenty fifth) nonetheless to come. We see two riders Youri Zoon and Alex Pastor, equal on points and sharing the Number one […]
What Everyone Does What You Ought To Do Different And As It Pertains To Biggest Golf Sponsor
There are a couple of causes but the primary was that Aprilia had been capable of offer a very competitive help package. Ducati was also an option however there are eight of their bikes on the grid which takes a variety of effort on Ducati's part. For that reason my group owner, Giuliano Rovelli, decided […]
The Trick of Strong Climbing Club That No-one is Talking About
Dirty Facts About Basketball New Rules Unveiled


text:
article, surveillance
July 26, 2013 Thomas Beagle 2 Comments
Text of Thomas Beagle's speech to the Urgent Public Meeting to Oppose the GCSB Bill held in Auckland, 25th July, 2013. (Or watch video of all of the speeches.)
I'm from Tech Liberty. We're a group dedicated to defending civil liberties in the digital age. I want to start by explaining what that means in the context of this bill.
I'm pretty sure you're all familiar with civil liberties – the right to freedom of expression and speech, the right to follow a religion, or associate with other people, the right to a fair trial.
But it's not just the individual rights that matter, what's important about them to me is that I see these civil liberties as being a vital part of a working democracy. And I like democracy. I believe it's a better way of organising ourselves.
This means that threats to our civil liberties are also threats to our democracy.
The other half of our name is Tech for technology, and that's the source of the latest threat to our civil liberties.
Communications have gone digital – voice, texts, emails, video chat, blogs. Behind the scenes everything is processed and stored as digital data.
Now what does this mean? The key point is that computers are very very good at handling digital data. We can store huge amounts of data very cheaply, we can send it anywhere in the world, we have sophisticated tools to process it.
These advances in technology provide the foundation of the mass surveillance state. And indeed, once this new technology got cheap enough, it was kind of inevitable that people would attempt to use it to create the surveillance state.
The GCSB Bill and the issues around it are not unique to New Zealand. I'm sure everyone here has some idea of what's being revealed overseas in the USA, the United Kingdom, Germany, France, Australia, and so on.
We wouldn't want New Zealand to be left behind, would we?
Well, in this case, in the case where "keeping up" means mass spying on our own people, I'd much rather be left behind.
And this is where we come back to my original point about valuing civil liberties because I value democracy. In a democracy we, the people, get to decide whether we want mass surveillance.
So in the aid of making that decision I'm going to spend the rest of my time talking about metadata, mass surveillance and the GCSB bill. In particular I want to talk about what we have to fear from mass surveillance, even if you personally don't feel threated by it.
My hope is that I can persuade you and that you can persuade your friends and together we can all persuade our politicians, democratically, that we don't want mass surveillance in New Zealand.
Metadata, mass surveillance and the GCSB Bill
Let's start with metadata 101 – it's often described by the wonderfully self-referential phrase "data about data".
In the case of an email, it's who sent it and when and who to, and how big it is and whether it's the first or the fifteenth email sent between those people. Everything except the actual text of the email.
For a phone call, it's who called who, how long they spoke for, where they were when they made the call, what devices were they using to do it.
In each of those examples I've only listed a very small amount of the types of metadata that can be collected and stored. What about the language used, who else have those people recently talked to, was the communication encrypted, it just goes on and on.
And that's one of the reasons why metadata is so useful – there's so much of it and in many ways it encompasses more information than the original text. Just think about all the metadata I listed for an email and how much information is there, when the text of the email could be just a single word such as "yes".
Think about what people could tell from looking at your metadata. They could work out who your friends are, what political party you belong to, which church you attend. But it goes further than that – metadata can also reveal who you're having an affair with, that you go to Alcoholics Anonymous, or that you're undergoing treatment for cancer. It would know, based on your cellphone, that you're at this meeting tonight.
And, super-conveniently, metadata is already in the right format for computers to process it easily.
If you're ever tried computer voice recognition or automatic translation services, you'll know that they're not very good at it. Computers find it hard to understand messy data like written text or the spoken voice.
Metadata is nice and regular. Dates. Names. Sizes. Yes/no flags. All very easy to collect, store and analyse using modern technology.
Mass surveillance
But while metadata is useful in a targeted investigation looking at a single person – just think of how the number and frequency of emails were used to force Peter Dunne to resign – it really becomes valuable when you're collecting it for everyone.
All that raw data can be sucked into a computer, processed, tabulated, cross-referenced and turned into usable information. You're not just making observations about one or two people, but you can now draw conclusions about anyone in the country. About everyone in the country.
And, of course, the information you collect builds on itself to enable better and more interesting observations to be mined from it. You can cross reference the activities of two or more people to get a better idea of what all of them are doing. You can look at long term trends and search for variations in behaviour.
This information is then available to anyone with access to it. The GCSB will have it. They'll be able to share it with other agencies within New Zealand. And of course, we still don't really know how much of that information they'll be sharing with their intelligence partners overseas.
Metadata and the GCSB Bill
There's no doubt that metadata is an important part of modern surveillance and spying and there is equally little doubt that the GCSB has been involved in its collection and analysis – but this bill doesn't mention it.
But when you look at the bill, you can't help but think that it looks as though it has been designed to allow it. In particular there is the potential for incredibly broad warrants and access authorisations in section 15A.
In 15A(1)(a) we see warrants that can be granted for "communications made or received by classes of persons", this is hardly a targeted warrant aimed at a single person based on reasonable suspicion.
Even more worrying is the access authorisations in 15A(1)(b) that allow the bureau to "access one or more specified information infrastructures".
I admit that my eyes glazed over when I first read that, but then I looked at the definition of what an information infrastructure is. I won't read it out to you as it's rather tedious but the summary would read as "includes every form of electronic communication and the associated metadata".
This means that a single access authorisation could be granted to give access deep into our telecommunications networks to enable the GCSB to collect whatever data they see fit. This access authorisation would be open ended, without limit and, as section 15A(5) makes clear, not to be limited by any other law, including the NZ Bill of Rights. The GCSB Act will reign supreme.
Now we've all heard that Peter Dunne has sold us out and will be voting for the bill after getting some minor changes made. However, even with these changes, the bill still doesn't mention anything about metadata or mass surveillance. There are no new controls, no new limits, nothing that says that this problem might be fixed.
The United Future press release does say that some definition of metadata might be inserted in the future depending on the findings of a review but to me that's basically worthless.
"I've got nothing to hide, why should I care?"
Now I hope that gives you all an understanding of what metadata is and how we think the GCSB intends to collect it and engage in mass surveillance.
But you might be sitting there and thinking "So what? Why should I care about this? I've got nothing to hide and it's only the intelligence agencies seeing it so what's the problem?"
It's a common question and it's one that I struggle to respond to in a soundbite friendly manner, but here I've chosen five answers for you.
1. Prove we need this law
Firstly, I'm going to start by explaining some of my own reflexive dislike of this idea.
I'm kind of old fashioned. I like the idea that democratic government exists to serve the people and that it should get out of the way as much as possible.
Our default position should be that any intrusion into our personal lives must be as minimal as possible – and even that must be justified as being necessary and reasonable in a democratic society.
In theory the Police operate in this way. They don't watch us all the time waiting for us to break a law, rather they wait until something happens that brings us under suspicion. Then they can go and show a judge that they have reasonable grounds for suspicion and apply for a search warrant or a surveillance warrant. Only then can they invade our privacy and our lives.
Mass surveillance is different. Mass surveillance works on the theory that you need to watch everyone at all times because you can't tell when you'll need it. Mass surveillance believes that anyone can be a threat at any time. Ultimately, mass surveillance is what happens when a government becomes scared of its people.
In other words, we're going from a society where you are presumed innocent and left to get on with your life to one where everyone is watched by "the authorities" – just in case.
I can't reconcile this with the ideals I just mentioned of a society where the state governs just enough and no more. We don't have the sort of threats that would justify this type of surveillance, this level of snooping into our lives.
So my first answer is "It's not my job to show why we don't need this, it's your job to prove that we do."
2. Mass surveillance is a threat to democracy
I think we can all agree that the sort of mass surveillance I'm talking about will give the government a lot of power to spy on people it sees as a threat.
But who are these threats? Who decides who is a threat and who isn't? When we look at stories about surveillance of political movements in New Zealand, it seems that it's always the more left-leaning movements that get infiltrated. Does anyone remember any cases where the police were caught spying on the National Front?
Now, this bill gives the GCSB a new purpose – "contributing to the economic wellbeing of New Zealand". What does this mean for environmental and conservation groups that might want to stop the spread of intensive dairying in New Zealand? Or poverty and beneficiary groups that might want to reallocate money from industry subsidies to welfare? It would be possible to define them as threats to the economic wellbeing of New Zealand. Will the GCSB be focusing on them?
Surveillance and spying on political groups in a democracy because of their views is a real problem. The story about the Police spy I quoted sent shockwaves through leftist political groups in New Zealand, sowing dissent, suspicion and confusion. By spying on these groups, the Police weren't just finding out what they were doing, they were undermining them and reducing their effectiveness.
As I see it, people in NZ are already frequently reluctant to put their hands up to be counted for a cause. How much more cautious will they be when they know that their involvement in a political group will immediately become known to the government? What if they are already feeling vulnerable to state power, because they work for a government department, or are on parole or a benefit? Maybe you'd be tough minded and exercise your democratic rights regardless but there's enough people who would be intimidated by this.
But democracy relies on dissent, on people saying "hey, that's not right". It relies on people forming groups and trying to recruit members to their cause, it relies on these groups working together and having the chance to put their views to the people of New Zealand so that our democracy can continue to move forward.
Therefore my second answer to the question of why we should care is that we all benefit from living in a democracy, and that democracy relies on freedom of expression and freedom of association, both of which are eroded by mass surveillance.
3. Privacy is important
It's always tempting to respond to the "I've got nothing to hide" people with the response "Well, you must be pretty boring then", but sadly it's not very helpful.
More seriously, when challenged, the people who say this never seem that keen on putting internet-connected cameras throughout their home and publishing their financial details and personal correspondence on the internet. Apparently even those with nothing to hide still have a sense of privacy.
Privacy appears to be a normal human need. We don't tell everything to anyone, we protect our inner thoughts, the intimate details of our lives. Not because we're ashamed, but because they're… private.
And, of course, some of us do have things that we wish to hide. Things that aren't illegal even if they may or may not be immoral. People have affairs. People tell polite lies. People struggle before coming out of the closet. People want to keep their political views secret from those they work with.
There should be a word for the discomfort you feel when someone knows something about you that you'd rather keep hidden. Just knowing that someone else knows, that they could tell, gives them power over you. But what if it's the government that knows? Do you feel just that bit less reluctant to rock the boat?
Now it's easy for someone like me who is white, male, middle class, sufficiently affluent and generally boring to talk about how I've got nothing to hide. But what about people who don't feel as safe and secure as I do? Don't they have rights too?
When you give up your privacy by supporting mass surveillance you're also giving up the privacy of everyone else in society.
My third answer, therefore, is that privacy appears to be a true human need and mass surveillance tries to remove it.
4. Mass surveillance is a tool for oppression
Mass surveillance is partly about power. I've already talked about how personal information can be used to threaten or intimidate individuals but there's more to it than that.
Mass surveillance also gives governments powerful new ways to react to events. Consider what has been happening in China, Turkey and Syria, where the government has been using these types of systems to hunt down dissidents.
My fourth answer is that we should be against mass surveillance because it gives the government a powerful tool that could be used to oppress us in the future.
5. No government is competent or incorruptible enough to have this power
My final answer is a very simple one. So far I've been assuming that mass surveillance will work roughly as planned – I've been arguing against the "best case".
But really, does anyone here have faith that a government program can be executed with 100% efficiency and no errors? Does anyone believe that the bureaucrats who run these programs operate with 100% integrity and can't be corrupted?
Of course no one believes that because it's obviously not true. Governments are made up of humans and humans are both fallible and corruptible. Just recently in New Zealand we have had medical staff snooping on the records of famous people, Police using their information systems to help them sell illegal drugs, government ministers leaking records to smear opponents, personal information being leaked by government departments.
My fifth answer is that mass surveillance gives a powerful tool that can be used to ruin people's lives to a group of bureaucrats who are only human, with human failings. I don't think we can trust the government to be competent or incorruptible enough to have this power.
Clarity in legislation
I hope that at least one of these reasons resonates for you as they do for me. I hope you can join me in opposing mass surveillance and demanding that it be explicitly excluded by the legislation controlling the GCSB, SIS and any other surveillance agencies.
But even if you still can't agree with me on this, and that you'd personally feel safer with the government watching your every move, I hope that you can agree with my last point which is that we need these bills to be a lot clearer about what they do and do not allow.
I assert that as citizens of a democratic society, we have the right to know the methods that government agencies use to watch us. Because without this knowledge we cannot assert our democratic rights to put appropriate limits on their use.
At the very minimum, we should expect clarity from the GCSB Bill. It should explicitly mention how metadata is to be treated, what access authorisations are to be used for, whether the GCSB is allowed to engage in mass surveillance. At the moment the bill is very quiet on these topics – and Peter Dunne's promised future reviews are cold comfort indeed.
In conclusion, I'm prepared to accept that some forms of state surveillance have their place in a modern democratic society. But we also need to recognise that state surveillance is a significant intrusion into people's lives.
Therefore it is important that its use is proportionate to the security problems that we face. That the powers available are the minimum required. That there's suitable oversight and as much transparency as possible.
The GCSB Bill fails on every one of these. It's a significant, unjustified and unreasonably hurried extension of state power over our lives.
I don't believe we need mass surveillance to keep us safe.
We need to reject this bill and assert democratic control over our surveillance agencies.
GCSBsurveillanceTICS
Previous PostOpposition to the GCSB BillNext PostApplication of Human Rights to Communication Surveillance
2 thoughts on "Speech to the Auckland public meeting against the GCSB Bill"
frank black says:
Could one not challenge the GCSB bill in court in terms of the Bill of Rights? Namely:
13. Freedom of thought, conscience, and religion
Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience, religion, and belief, including the right to adopt and to hold opinions without interference.
21. Unreasonable search and seizure
Everyone has the right to be secure against unreasonable search or seizure, whether of the person, property, or correspondence or otherwise.
Thomas Beagle says:
You could… but the NZ Bill of Rights is not supreme law. i.e. it can't be used to overturn other laws such as the GCSB Act.


text:
New Horizons Genealogy
"Specializing in New England and New York Colonial American Ancestry"
Home > Illinois Genealogy > Jefferson County, Illinois Genealogy > Revolutionary Soldiers Buried in Jefferson County Illinois
Military Records > Revolutionary Soldiers Buried in Illinois >
Barbour Collection
Mortality Schedules
Genealogy Blog
Revolutionary Soldiers Buried in Jefferson County, Illinois
Try our genealogy search engine page
Revolutionary Soldiers Buried in Illinois by Mrs. Harriet J. Walker, Reprinted for the web.
In the preparation of this work, every effort has been made to obtain the records of these soldiers, to verify them, and to ascertain their places of burial. This has been accomplished in various ways, by ascertaining the names of all who were pensioned and where the application was made. This does not always locate the burial place owing to the changing of the boundary lines of the counties of the state, making it necessary to obtain from the U. S. Treasury department the time and place of payment of the last pension.
Revolutionary War Graves of Soldiers Buried in Jefferson County Illinois:
DANIEL CHANDLER was from South Carolina, where he served in the Ninety-sixth District, February, 1776, under Capt. Jarret Smith, for four months. He again served in May, 1777, with Capt. James Lisle and Col. Jonas Beard, for two months, and one month with Capt. Frederick Lipham. In 1778 and 1779 he served with Capt. James Lisle and Col. John Lisle for over four months. He again served in June, 1780, with Capt. William Smith and Col. John Thomas; was in the battles of Cedar Springs, and Musgrove Mill, and in constant service until the close of the war. He was made Lieutenant under Capt. Jeremiah Williams and Col. John Hammond. He came to Jefferson county, Illinois, where he died. He was pensioned.
FRANCIS HANEY was born in Prince Edward county, Virginia, April 19, 1754. He enlisted in Boutetourt county, serving from June, 1776, to December, 1776, under Capt. Daniel Smith. He again served from September, 1778, for seven months with Capt. George Adams, again for three months with Col. Isaac Shelby, and once more for nine months with Capts. George Maxfield, Robert Caldwell, and John Martin. He came to Morgan county, Illinois, but died in Jefferson county. He was pensioned.
SAMUEL LITTLE was from South Carolina where he served in the war, being in the Cavalry. He was born in 1765. He came to Jefferson county, Illinois, and died there. He was pensioned.
WILLIAM LONG was born August 9, 1756, near Mt. Vernon, the house of Washington. He served in the Virginia troops and was in the battles of Brandywine and Germantown. He came to Illinois and lived in Mt. Vernon, Jefferson county. It is said that he was one of Washington's body guards. "Virginia Records" and "County History."
JOHN MURPHY served in the war from North Carolina. He came to Illinois in 1818. He died very aged, probably in Jefferson county. "North Carolina Records and County History."
JOEL PACE was born in Virginia, July 28, 1762. He served in the war from that state. He removed to Kentucky and later to Jefferson county, Illinois, settling in Mt. Vernon township where he died. "Virginia Records" and "County History."
THOMAS WILLIAMS was from North Carolina, where he served in the war, serving in both Infantry and Cavalry. He came to Illinois when it was a Territory, settling in Jefferson county, where he probably died. He was pensioned.
Related Revolutionary War Records;
1818 Pensioners of the United States: Illinois Territory
1820 Pension List: Illinois
1835 Illinois Pension Roll
1840 Illinois Census of Pensioners
Illinois Pensioners Of Revolutionary War Struck Off The Roll
Search Millions of Military Records
State AL AK AZ AR CA CO CT DE FL GA HI ID IL IN IA KS KY LA ME MD MA MI MN MS MO MT NC ND NE NV NH NJ NM NY OH OK OR PA RI SC SD TN TX UT VT VA WA WV WI WY
Privacy Policy | Disclaimer | Contact us


text:
Burnley boss Sean Dyche has his say on club's finances
Clarets posted record profits of £36m
Burnley boss Sean Dyche (Image: Burnley FC)
Burnley boss Sean Dyche believes the club can be proud of its finances in the wake of record profits.
The Clarets posted a profit of £36.6m for the year ending in June 2018, an increase of £16.4m on the previous 12 months.
And Dyche, whose side travel to Bournemouth on Saturday (April 6), believes Burnley's financial position is positive.
"The chairman and board were delighted," said the Burnley boss. "Within the detail of that when you look at the breakdown, we're still within that £58-59 million mark for wages and then big incentives on top.
"We like to think the incentives encourage the team.
"After finishing seventh last season and the incentives put on top of that and then to make £36million is a positive thing.
"It's difficult for me at times because I want some of that to keep building, but the club wants to be solid for years to come and it's showing that."
Why a Burnley return for Kieran Trippier could make perfect sense
Burnley and every other Premier League club's agents' fees in last year revealed
Dyche added: "I think we made £22m last season, before that £3m when we were getting back in the Premier League, and about £30m before that, so strong numbers.
"In the last four windows I think we're about plus £10m in transfer spend.
"Obviously I want to win games, but you kind of balance that out and it's a strong performance over those seasons.
"But, we still are where we are, and it's more important to focus on the football after those numbers.
"We have to take those numbers seriously, and work inside a certain framework, and it has its challenges, but it's still the focus on the three points and performance."


text:
Published on NewsBusters (https://www.newsbusters.org)
Home > CNN Media Panel: Our Fake News Stories Are Why You Should Trust Us
CNN Media Panel: Our Fake News Stories Are Why You Should Trust Us
By Nicholas Fondacaro | December 10, 2017 5:06 PM EST
In one of the most asinine discussions about the liberal media's credibility problem, CNN host Brian Stelter took to Reliable Sources on Sunday to defend his outlet and the rest of the media for the latest swarm of fake news stories plaguing the country. And offering no apology to the public for muddying the discourse, Stelter defended their precious anonymous sources while his guests claimed such reckless mistakes were why the public should trust what they say.
Stelter began the segment with a recap of what was fake about their story. "With ABC's suspension of Ross still in the headlines, I asked CNN if there would be disciplinary action against [Manu] Raju or his co-writer Jeremy Herb. A spokeswoman said no," he said. According to Stelter, it was because the journalists followed the networks so-called "standards process." But Stelter failed to mention that those writers issued the report without ever seeing the e-mail in question, just the description from those who saw it. What kind of ridiculous standard is that?
"Now, the sources have been reliable in the past. But they were not this time. The spokeswoman said CNN had no reason to believe this was malicious, meaning the sources weren't trying to trick the reporters, the sources were just mistaken," Stelter explained, defending the dead wrong source. And almost as though he was trying to get the attention off of CNN, he pointed to other news organizations that had pushed their own fake news.
Stelter didn't seem bothered by the fact that CNN's lack of transparency in sorting out the misinformation was further hurting their already tattered credibility.
The first guest to sing the praises of the media was veteran reporter Carl Bernstein. "We have to get back to the notion that – which is absolutely correct, that most of the media really tries, the mainstream media – the big news institutions from The Washington Post and The New York Times to The Wall Street Journal to CNN really go out of their way to be accurate, factual, contextual and we do and we have done a pretty good job of it," he rambled.
Stelter then asked former Republican David Frum about what advice he had for viewers during this trying time for the press. According to him, their factious reporting was just why they should be trusted:
I would say, the mistakes are precisely the reason the people should trust the media. Look, astronomers make mistakes all the time because science is a process of discovery of truth. Astrologers never make mistakes or at least they never own up to them, because what they are offering a closed system of ideology and propaganda.
Using Frum's warped logic, cheating on your spouse is precisely the reason they should trust you in the future. Use at your own risk.
Not long after that, Bernstein praised the media's ravenous reporting on the Russia investigation saying: "The general excellence of the media's coverage particularly of Donald Trump, his presidency, and this story." He then trashed Trump supporters for not being open-minded enough to see a possibility of collusion.
"The media, generally speaking, the mainstream media makes far fewer errors than most institutions in our culture, because we indeed are in the business of trying not to make errors," Bernstein opined, citing no evidence. "And we have all kinds of procedures in place to keep us from making those errors." But that apparently didn't stop any of these new outlets from pushing false stories. CBS had actually claimed to have confirmed CNN's false report.
For some reason, Frum was fuming and decided to smear Fox News as a news organization that didn't have an interest in finding the truth. And in a knock against the rest of the media, Frum declared that "the worst mistakes that press organizations have made in the coverage of Trump has precisely occurred in their effort – their overzealous effort to be fair to the President." He actually stopped himself mid-sentence to go back and add "overzealous" as a descriptor. What news was he watching?
<<< Please support MRC's NewsBusters team with a tax-deductible contribution today. >>>
Frum also claimed that CNN's biggest mistake so far was in hiring Trump supporters to be commentators. "The worst mistake CNN has made had been the result determination to bring in-house Trump associates in order to promote Trump falsehoods," he chided. But to Stelter's credit, he defended them, saying he thought it was important to hear their voices.
Despite the flood of fake news stories from the liberal media, Stelter had been on Twitter whining about how the President continued to call out CNN and others during rallies. You have no legs to stand on and complain about the President when you own news outlet was caught peddling false information as a bombshell report.
Transcript below:
11:14:20 AM Eastern
BRIAN STELTER: A week ago it was Brian Ross and ABC. Ross was suspended for a breaking news report about Michael Flynn that had not been fully vetted by the network ahead of time and since then several more mistakes by other media outlets have caused a lot of introspection in newsrooms. On Friday, CNN gave lots of airtime to an exclusive report that said: Then-candidate Donald Trump and Donald Trump Jr. had received an e-mail in September of 2016 providing a description key and web access allowing them to access hacked DNC documents before they were publicly available. Now, later that afternoon the story unraveled. CNN issued Manu Raju went on Brooke Baldwin's show to issue this correction.
STELTER: It changed the understanding quite a bit. With ABC's suspension of Ross still in the headlines, I asked CNN if there would be disciplinary action against Raju or his co-writer Jeremy Herb. A spokeswoman said no. Because the reporters followed CNN's standards process which means that the anonymous sources they were using for the story were vetted and okayed ahead of time.
Now the sources have been reliable in the past. But they were not this time. The spokeswoman said CNN had no reason to believe this was malicious, meaning the sources weren't trying to trick the reporters, the sources were just mistaken. But that mistake obviously caused a black eye for CNN. On Friday night President Trump seized on the recent corrections at a rally in Florida.
STELTER: Technically CNN did not apologize but did correct the reporting. CBS also issued a correction for the same story. And this was not the only error of the week. Did you hear about Robert Mueller's team subpoenaing Trump's bank records Deutsche Bank? Bloomberg and Reuters had to issues corrections, saying the documents that were subpoenaed pertained to people or entities affiliated with Trump, not the President individually. Now that is still a big development. But it's not what the news outlets originally said. The Wall Street Journal got it right in the text of their story but misconstrued it in the headline so they had to run a correction as well. These errors have piled up this week. There's a new one this weekend involving The Washington Post we'll get into.
CARL BERNSTEIN: We have to get back to the notion that -- which is absolutely correct, that most of the media really tries, the mainstream media – the big news institutions from The Washington Post and The New York Times to The Wall Street Journal to CNN really go out of their way to be accurate, factual, contextual and we do and we have done a pretty good job of it. I would say, by and large, an excellent job of it in terms of the facts of this hugely complicated story.
STELTER: David, what's your advice for journalists in this situation and for readers?
DAVID FRUM: I have more advice for readers. You asked the question, Brian, why should, given these mistakes, why should people trust the media? I would say, the mistakes are precisely the reason the people should trust the media. Look, astronomers make mistakes all the time because science is a process of discovery of truth. Astrologers never make mistakes or at least they never own up to them, because what they are offering a closed system of ideology and propaganda.
BERNSTEIN: Mike Allen is right about the general excellence of the media's coverage particularly of Donald Trump, his presidency, and this story. I think it's very important if open-minded people and that's what we seem to be lacking on both sides but especially Trump supporters here. And let's say that that is the fact especially among Trump supporters about open-mindedness. The media, generally speaking, the mainstream media makes far fewer errors than most institutions in our culture, because we indeed are in the business of trying not to make errors. And we have all kinds of procedures in place to keep us from making those errors. Compare us to Wall Street. Compare us to banking. Compare us to the Congress of the United States. Compare us to almost any institution and we make fewer errors.
FRUM: With the greatest respect to Carl and his incredible accomplishments, I really think framing this as a matter of two sides is fundamentally misleading. The press—the worst mistakes—again, when we talk about the press we exclude Fox and we talked about press organizations that have an interest in finding truth. Excluding Fox, the worst mistakes that press organizations have made in the coverage of Trump has precisely occurred in their effort -- their overzealous effort to be fair to the President. Because, the problem they cover is accurate coverage of this president and his campaign is very different than neutral coverage of this president and his campaign. I mean how do you fairly report the fact that the president lies tall time and that he recruits people to work for him that lie all the time?
FRUM: The worst mistake CNN has made had been the result determination to bring in-house Trump associates in order to promote Trump falsehoods. Not from Trump HQ or from the White House but with CNN's own brand on them.
STELTER: We will have to disagree on that one. I think we need to hear from Trump supporters.
NBDaily Media Bias Debate Cable Television CNN Reliable Sources Fake News Video Brian Stelter Carl Bernstein David Frum Donald Trump
Nicholas Fondacaro
Nicholas C. Fondacaro is a News Analyst for the Media Research Center
Source URL: https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/nicholas-fondacaro/2017/12/10/cnn-media-panel-our-fake-news-stories-are-why-you-should