What’s to be done about pesky grandparents and their bad influence?

How about nothing? You’re lucky to have them.

A new review from the University of Glasgow has found that grandparents have a negative impact on their grandchildren’s health. Did your eyebrows shoot skyward upon reading that statement, as mine did? Allow me to explain further what the researchers found.

Grandparents who provide part-time childcare tend to exhibit less-than-desirable behavior traits, such as smoking and physical inactivity, that rub off on the child and incline him or her to the same, thereby increasing their risk of getting cancer later in life.

Food is another sticky area. Grandparents have a tendency to ‘spoil’ grandchildren by over-feeding or providing sugary or fatty treats that parents would not normally condone. These actions, researchers say, contribute to the development of unhealthy eating habits that become harder to break as the child grows.

Since smoking, diet, and lack of exercise are all identified as risk factors for non-communicable diseases, including cancer, the authors suggest that, despite the risks being unintentional, grandparents could benefit from re-education. (I wrote about this very topic of training grandparents earlier this year: “Who cares if grandparents have an old-school approach?“) Lead author Dr. Stephanie Chambers told the University of Glasgow News:

“Currently grandparents are not the focus of public health messaging targeted at parents and in light of the evidence from this study, perhaps this is something that needs to change given the prominent role grandparents play in the lives of children.”

While I understand the need for children’s long-term health to be at the forefront of any discussion about child care, I do find the entire premise of ‘grandparents damaging grandchildren’ to be quite puzzling, especially within the context provided by the Financial Times, poetically titled “In defence of the killer grannies“:

“A report this year found that grandmothers and grandfathers save parents £16.1 billion (US $21.3 billion) each year in formal childcare costs, about £1,786 (US $2,362) per family.”

With that level of support being offered free of charge — I’m going to be blunt here — what on earth do parents have to complain about? That is huge! To save thousands of dollars annually, while furthering one’s career, all thanks to a kindly grandparent who is willing to put off retirement plans to chase around a toddler, is nothing to scoff at. It seems downright ungrateful to complain about a bit of junk food and too much TV.

If those ‘risk factors’ are such a concern to parents, then they should opt for another, considerably more expensive child-care route; nobody is making parents use free grandparent care. Now, one might argue, saying the alternatives are too expensive or impossible to access, but my point is that there are plenty of other people who are forced to make do without grandparents around. Somehow they scrape by. So, no, you don’t need grandparents, although they make life easier.

Obviously, parents are justified in feeling resentful when grandparents disregard requests for how a child should be cared for, but then that’s more of a communication problem than it is a lack of grandparental awareness.

How about talking to grandparents and getting their perspective? Presumably they haven’t forgotten how to raise kids. Unless their approach has changed considerably in a couple decades, who better than the parents themselves to know they turned out just fine in the end?

Crucially, “the studies did not take into account the positive emotional benefit of children spending time with their grandparents,” according to the University of Glasgow News. That strikes me as a significant oversight.

I’d like to tell those irritated parents, “Put this incredible gift into perspective. You are lucky to have help of any kind, let alone from a relative who loves that child almost as much as you do.” A bag of chips and a few too many SpongeBob episodes hardly matters in the big picture.

Source Article from https://www.treehugger.com/family/whats-be-done-about-pesky-grandparents-and-their-bad-influence.html

Bitter Hillary fantasizes about leaving Earth to be president on another planet (fingers crossed Hill!)


Hillary Clinton really wants to be president – even if that means blasting off from Earth to do so.

The failed Democratic candidate recently talked with Now This, a liberal online news outlet, where she pined for a presidency.

While discussing a variety of topics, Clinton envisioned leaving Earth and venturing Earth 2, where that planet apparently faces the same issues as the actual Earth.

“We went to another planet with Hillary,” the caption reads as Clinton and Now This’s Nico Pitney fired off a series of topics.

“People joke about Earth 2, where you are president,” he told a giggling Hillary.

Regarding Earth 2’s North Korea, Clinton said she would have “full on diplomatic pressure” to solve the crisis with the portly dictator Kim Jong-un.

Clinton said if she was in charge, she would be “putting as much money as it took into enforcing the laws we already have” on guns, and added she would want “universal background checks.”

After answering a question about the opioid crisis, a handler attempted to cut off the interview.

“I fear we have to end it here,” a voice off camera said.

“Okay,” Pitney responded.

“You want one more? I’ll be short – one more. Because I like being on Earth 2,” Hillary said.

Pitney then asked Clinton what she would do about Russia.

“If I had been president, or on Earth 2, where I am,” Hillary said she would have an “independent commission” look into the alleged Russian “hacking” of the presidential election.

“I worry about ’18. I worry about 2020 because this is the first time we’ve even been attacked and not imposed any real consequences on our adversary,” Clinton asserted, ignoring moves by Congressional Republicans and the Trump administration to impose new sanctions on Russia since the election.

The L.A. Times reported in late October:

The Russian government on Friday accused the United States of displaying “hostility” as the Trump administration belatedly took the first steps toward imposing new sanctions to punish Moscow for interfering in the 2016 presidential election.

In early August, after considerable delay and with minimal fanfare, President Trump signed into law a measure that required the new sanctions, which target individuals and firms with ties to Russian defense and intelligence agencies.

Under the law, companies that “knowingly engage in a significant transaction” with people or firms on the list could be subject to U.S. sanctions after Jan. 28.

Source Article from https://www.sott.net/article/368526-Bitter-Hillary-fantasizes-about-leaving-Earth-to-be-president-on-another-planet-fingers-crossed-Hill

America has no idea how many innocent people it’s killing in the Middle East – but it’s about 31 times more than it claims


Sixteen years after Bush Snr launched his so-called ‘war on terror’ an untold number of civilians have been killed by disease, illness and by the US and UK-led military campaign

In February 2003, Elliott Abrams, a US official convicted of lying to Congress over the Iran-Contra affair but cleared by President George HW Bush, spoke to the media about the impending invasion of Iraq, ordered by Bush’s son.

Abrams claimed in his remarks about “humanitarian reconstruction” – six priorities had driven the planning. “The first is to try to minimise the displacement and the damage to the infrastructure and the disruption of services,” he said. “And the military campaign planning has had – has been tailored to try to do that, to try to minimise the impact on civilian populations.”

It didn’t turn out that way. Sixteen years after Bush launched his so-called “war on terror”, millions of people’s lives have been turned upside down, Isis has been allowed to fester and spread, and Iraq is a nation at risk of fracturing apart. Moreover, an untold number of innocent civilians have been killed – by disease, illness, in gruesome tortures performed by local and foreign insurgents, and by the US and UK-led military campaign that Abrams and others vowed would be surgical.

In recent days, the US has been again forced to address the painful issue of civilian casualties following the publication of a investigation by the New York Times, which found that, contrary to the claims of the Pentagon, as many as one-in-five coalition air strikes on Isis targets in Iraq in 2014, resulted in civilians deaths. That figure was 31 times higher than what the US has acknowledged.

The Pentagon has hit back at the report; it insists it takes great care in preparing for and carrying out military strikes, and investigates all claims of civilian casualties. It says it believes 786 civilians have been unintentionally killed by coalition strikes since the operations against Isis started in June 2014.

“The unfortunate death of civilians is a fact of war that weighs heavy on our hearts,” said Pentagon spokesman Eric Pahon.

Asked about the total of civilians killed since the 2003 invasion of Iraq, Pahon told The Independent he doubted he could provide such a figure. He referred inquiries to the Combined Joint Task Force Operation Inherent Resolve, the name of the operation against Isis. There was no immediate response.

The truth is that nobody knows how many civilians have been killed in Iraq since George W Bush and Tony Blair launched an invasion that was sold to the world, not as a means to simply topple Saddam Hussein, but to seize the weapons of mass destruction they claimed he had. That is one of its many enduring tragedies.

Comment: Weapons which they claimed he had, but he didn’t, and they knew it. All those people died because of a lie.

The militaries of both the US and Britain kept painstaking records of its soldiers killed in both Afghanistan and Iraq – 2,280 and 4,491 for the US, and 455 and 179 for Britain. Yet, they have never tried to make an overall tally of Iraqi civilian deaths or those killed in other theatres.

Over the years, there have been various attempts to come up with a figure. One of the first was the Iraq Body Count (IBC), a British project that maintained a tally of casualties based on media reports. Yet as the IBC has admitted, its figures are based on reports in the media, which were themselves limited in scope and detail.

Two reports conducted by the Johns Hopkins University’s Bloomberg School of Public Health, used extrapolation based on epidemiology, and were published in The Lancet. The first, published in 2004, estimated that at least 100,000 Iraqis had been killed as a result of the war.

The second, published in 2006, suggested the figure had risen to near 650,000. The British and US governments criticised the findings but those involved defended the methodology. In 2015, a report by Physicians for Social Responsibility suggested the total may have passed one million.

The truth of the matter is that nobody knows. The figure could be one million, it could be two million.

And when you add the civilian casualties in Afghanistan and other places where the “war on terror” has played out – Yemen, Pakistan, Mali, Niger, Somalia and the Philippines – it becomes even more of a guessing game. In many of these places, there are not even the rudimentary efforts, such as that attempted by the IBC.

One thing that is so striking about what was said in 2003 and what is being said now, is the language employed by US officials. Pahon, the Pentagon spokesman, stressed how everything was done to “limit harm to non-combatants and civilian infrastructure”.

Back in 2003, Abrams had vowed: “We hope to discourage population displacement through – partly through an information campaign, and partly by efforts to provide aid rapidly and restore public services rapidly.”

War has always been a dirty, dangerous business. People should not pretend otherwise.

Source Article from https://www.sott.net/article/368523-America-has-no-idea-how-many-innocent-people-its-killing-in-the-Middle-East-but-its-about-31-times-more-than-it-claims

Doubts surface about key witness in Uranium One probe of Clinton

Federal officials have serious questions about the credibility of a key witness in congressional investigations of Hillary Clinton’s role in the sale of a uranium-mining company to Russian interests, two sources knowledgeable about the case tell Yahoo News.

The witness, a Florida businessman and former FBI informant named William Douglas Campbell, was considered so unreliable that prosecutors dropped him as a witness in an unrelated case involving Russian uranium sales, according to the sources.

The investigations by two House subcommittees, apparently spurred by a tweet from President Trump last month, focus on allegations about Clinton’s role in approving the controversial sale of Uranium One, a company that owned American uranium mines, to Rosatom, the Russian atomic energy company, in 2010. Campbell has suggested he can prove that approval of the sale was a quid pro quo for donations by Russian-connected parties to the Clinton Foundation.

But there are mounting questions about Campbell’s credibility in light of his track record as an informant in a separate FBI investigation into a Russian businessman named Vadim Mikerin, who was in charge of U.S. operations for Tenex — a separate unit of Rosatom that was not involved in the Uranium One purchase.

Court records and interviews with the sources who are familiar with the case indicate that Campbell provided key information to the FBI about a scheme orchestrated by Mikerin to collect kickbacks from American companies doing business with Tenex. The bureau enlisted Campbell as an undercover informant who wore a wire in his conversations with Russian officials.

But he proved a “disaster” as a potential witness in the case when doubts arose about his descriptions of some events that could not be documented, one of the sources said.  As a result, prosecutors dropped extortion charges against Mikerin that relied on Campbell’s testimony. “There was no question that [Campbell’s] credibility was such that [the prosecutors] had to  restructure the case,” the source said.  “He got cut out of the case entirely.”

Mikerin pleaded guilty to the remaining money laundering charges in August 2015 and was sentenced to four years in prison, which he is still serving.

“This is a smear job,” Victoria Toensing, Campbell’s lawyer, told Yahoo News when asked about the doubts law enforcement officials had about her client’s credibility. “That was not the reason” prosecutors removed him as a witness against Mikerin, she said. Instead, it was because “the Obama administration didn’t want to bring a big extortion case against Russia” and risk testimony from Campbell that would have undermined the Uranium One sale and undercut the president’s efforts to “reset” relations with Russia. So instead, “they covered it up,” she said.

The questions about Campbell and his purported knowledge about the Uranium One sale have become a political lightning rod in recent weeks, with Democrats charging they are only being raised now to distract attention from special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into the Trump campaign and its ties to the Kremlin.

Top Republicans initiated the Uranium One probes after President Trump tweeted on Oct. 19 that the sale to Russia “with Clinton help and Obama administration knowledge is the biggest story that Fake Media doesn’t want to follow!” Two House panels — subcommittees of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee and the House Intelligence Committee — have begun investigations. House Republican leaders are also calling for the appointment of a Justice Department special counsel to conduct a criminal probe of the Uranium One deal.

In announcing one of the congressional inquiries three days after Trump’s tweet, Rep. Ron DeSantis, chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform National Security Subcommittee, said he had “explosive” information from a  “confidential informant” who he said “would be able to link” the Obama administration’s approval of the sale of Uranium One to Russia to “millions of dollars” in donations to the Clinton Foundation. The sale of Uranium One was unanimously approved by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), an interagency panel of nine Cabinet members on which Clinton, who was then secretary of state, sat.

Campbell, who is expected to testify behind closed doors to DeSantis’s panel, repeated that claim in an interview with Reuters this week for a story that named him publicly for the first time. He told the news agency that he had worked for the Justice Department “undercover for several years,” and that he had “documentation” that could show a relationship between approval of the Uranium One sale by the Obama administration and “political influence.” (Toensing, Campbell’s lawyer, said her client was “dazed” at the time of the interview because the reporter caught up while he was recovering from chemotherapy treatment for cancer. She said “there are documents” in Campbell’s possession, but declined to specify what they were.)

But sources with detailed knowledge of his earlier role are skeptical. The sources confirm that Campbell approached the FBI with information about Mikerin’s role in a kickback scheme involving American companies doing business with the Tenex unit of Rosatom. Campbell was hired as a consultant to Tenex and was also paid by  Cassidy Associates, a major Washington lobbying firm, that had been hired by Tenex to promote its business in the U.S.

The investigation that followed was a significant one — far more so than was publicly revealed at the time. The FBI was able to trace $2.1 million in bribes paid to Mikerin and others and wired to offshore shell companies in Cyprus, Latvia and Switzerland. U.S. intelligence officials suspected — but were never able to conclusively prove — that these payments ultimately benefited entities connected to Vladimir Putin.

But Campbell’s importance to the Mikerin investigation faded after prosecutors discovered discrepancies in his account of his dealings with Mikerin and other Russian figures, sources said.  Investigators also were unable to verify some of his more explosive allegations, including claims that he was threatened with violence if he did not participate in the scheme by helping to arrange kickbacks in exchange for contracts with Tenex. The doubts were serious enough that the U.S. attorney’s office in Maryland — which was prosecuting Mikerin under the direction of then U.S. Attorney Rod Rosenstein, now the deputy attorney general — felt compelled to alert defense lawyers to them. There were also other questions  about his background, including two DUI convictions in 2009 and 2012.

Eventually, fearing Campbell would not withstand scrutiny in open trial, prosecutors dropped him as a potential witness and scrapped the charges against Mikerin that would have relied on his testimony.

Those problems arose again last year when Campbell filed a lawsuit against Mikerin in federal court in Baltimore, accusing him of racketeering and seeking damages. At the time, Mikerin was already serving his sentence at a federal prison in North Carolina.  Because legal proceedings were still pending against another defendant in the case, Justice Department prosecutors wrote to Campbell’s then lawyer, accusing him of violating the terms of his agreement with the government. Prosecutors threatened to reveal derogatory information to the judge about Campbell’s dealings with the government If he pursued the civil case,. Campbell later dropped the suit.

Toensing, Campbell’s lawyer, said that Campbell would be able to tell Congress that discussions about the Uranium One sale were raised by Russian officials during his dealings with them. But sources who spoke to Yahoo News said that during the course of hours of interrogations by the FBI and Justice Department lawyers, Campbell never mentioned any connection between Mikerin’s dealings and the sale of Uranium One. Nor did he ever volunteer that he had documents or information relating to the Uranium One sale. The issue, one of the sources said, never came up.

Read more from Yahoo News:

Source Article from https://www.yahoo.com/news/doubts-surface-key-witness-uranium-one-probe-clinton-203614558.html

VIDEO: Forget everything you thought you knew about Hezbollah


The regimes of Saudi Arabia, Israel and beyond this, successive US leaders have been engaged in a long-time disinformation campaign against the Lebanese political party and popular resistance movement, Hezbollah.

Hezbollah is today, one of the most dynamic political forces in Lebanon whose firm opposition to the Takfiri terrorism of groups like al-Qaeda and ISIS has been vindicated by the victory of the Syrian government over foreign funded jihadists.

Hezbollah traces its origins back to the second phase of the Lebanese civil war. After Israel invaded and occupied Lebanon in 1982 and began exploiting Lebanon’s sectarian tensions, Hezbollah officially formed in 1985 as an anti-occupation resistance movement whose primary goal was freeing Lebanon of foreign occupation.

The same year Israel invaded Lebanon, it orchestrated the Sabra and Shatila massacre in which 3,500 Palestinian and Lebanese civilians were brutally slaughtered. This event was pivotal in helping to galvanise the volunteers who would eventually form Hezbollah as a means of defending those who were erstwhile defenceless.

Since the official end of the Lebanese Civil War in 1990, Hezbollah has consolidated its experience and has become a highly influential political movement. Although centred around its Shi’a core in southern and eastern Lebanon, Hezbollah has come to win support from many diverse factions which comprise Lebanese society.

During his recent trip to Moscow, Lebanese Foreign Minister Geral Bassil of the primarily Maronite Christian Free Patriotic Movement, praised Hezbollah’s role in keeping Lebanon safe from jihadist terrorism. Hezbollah’s armed wing serves as a kind of national guard for Lebanon and in recent years, Hezbollah has volunteered to aid the Syrian Arab Army along with its Russian and Iranian allies in fighting terrorism. Hezbollah recently conducted joint operations with the Syrian Arab Army which resulted in the full defeat of al-Qaeda/al-Nusra and ISIS along the mountainous Syria-Lebanon border.

Today, Hezbollah has the third highest number of seats of any party in the majority March 8 Alliance in the Lebanese parliament. Hezbollah also has two cabinet ministers in the coalition government.

Hezbollah which styles itself as the Islamic Resistance of Lebanon is opposed to further Saudi influence in Lebanon while seeking to maintain partnerships with Iran and Syria. Hezbollah continues to win votes as its volunteers build many roads, schools and hospitals in Lebanon in areas that the central government has traditionally neglected.

Now watch this new video about the past, present and future of Hezbollah:

Source Article from https://www.sott.net/article/368299-VIDEO-Forget-everything-you-thought-you-knew-about-Hezbollah

Netanyahu– ‘Iranian regime cares more about hating Israel than about helping its own people’

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 5,825 other followers

Source Article from https://theuglytruth.wordpress.com/2017/11/16/netanyahu-iranian-regime-cares-more-about-hating-israel-than-about-helping-its-own-people/

What You Need To Know About The Crisis In Zimbabwe

Zimbabwe remained without a clear political leader on Thursday in the face of conflicting reports about the apparent military coup on the country’s long-ruling president, Robert Mugabe.

While some sources have portrayed the strongman leader’s departure as a “done deal,” other reports have suggested that he is refusing to cede power and resisting attempts to mediate a plan for a peaceful exit.

“It’s a sort of stand-off, a stalemate,” one source told Reuters. ”[Mugabe allies] are insisting the president must finish his term.”

Confusion also reigned over who would take control of Zimbabwe from Mugabe, if he were to end his 37-year authoritarian grip on the country. Former vice president Emmerson Mnangagwa, who was ousted earlier this month, said he planned to address the country as its head of state “when the time is right.” He had reportedly been working with the military and the opposition on a post-Mugabe vision for more than a year. Opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai returned to Zimbabwe on Wednesday, his spokesman said. 

Mugabe and his wife, Grace, reportedly remained under house arrest on Thursday.

Here’s what we know so far about this developing situation.

A man walks past a tank stationed at an intersection in Harare as Zimbabwean soldiers regulate traffic on Nov. 15, 2017. (- via Getty Images)A man walks past a tank stationed at an intersection in Harare as Zimbabwean soldiers regulate traffic on Nov. 15, 2017. (- via Getty Images)

Is there a coup happening in Zimbabwe?

Despite the army’s show of force and apparent takeover of state television, military officials have so far denied they are attempting to depose Mugabe. On state television, army spokesman Maj. Gen. SB Moyo said, “We wish to make this abundantly clear: This is not a military takeover of government.”

Instead, the army claimed that it has temporarily seized control in order to remove “criminals” surrounding Mugabe and “pacify a degenerating political, social and economic situation.”

But the situation in Zimbabwe certainly seems to have most of the elements of a coup. Military vehicles are occupying key parts of the capital; the state broadcaster appears under military control; and Mugabe has spent hours detained in his home with no direct word from him or his politically powerful wife.

South African President Jacob Zuma’s office said in a statement Wednesday that Zuma had talked to Mugabe, and the Zimbabwean ruler was “confined to his home but said that he was fine.”

Mugabe has been the leader of Zimbabwe since 1980, when he helped the country gain independence after a long struggle against colonial rule. Throughout his presidency, 93-year-old Mugabe has held on to power through crackdowns on opposition and dissent. Even as Zimbabwe’s economy collapsed in the past decade and Mugabe drew harsh international condemnation, he found ways to remain in control.

In recent years, Mugabe’s advanced age and mental lapses have grown increasingly apparent. He often sleeps through public events, has been oblivious while delivering the wrong speech to Parliament and seemed unfit for even basic ceremonial duties.

President Robert Mugabe and his wife, Grace Mugabe, attend a rally of his ruling ZANU-PF party in Harare on Nov. 8. (Philimon Bulawayo / Reuters)President Robert Mugabe and his wife, Grace Mugabe, attend a rally of his ruling ZANU-PF party in Harare on Nov. 8. (Philimon Bulawayo / Reuters)

How did this start?

The current crisis stems from a political shake-up earlier this month, but the roots of it go back much further. 

On Nov. 6, Mugabe decided to fire Vice President Emmerson Mnangagwa. The move caused unrest in the president’s ruling ZANU-PF party and the army. Mnangagwa has support among the military and was seen as a potential successor to Mugabe when the president likely dies in office.

As Mugabe’s health noticeably deteriorated in the past year, the question of who will succeed his rule has become more pressing. This has led to a heated standoff between Grace Mugabe and Mnangagwa, which even included the first lady having to publicly deny that she attempted to poison her rival after he became ill last month.

Mnangagwa’s ouster seems to have been a catalyst for these longstanding tensions to boil over, as it appeared that Grace Mugabe ― whose political capital has grown in the past few years ― had won out and positioned herself as a top contender for the presidency after her husband’s death.

But amid the ouster of Mnangagwa and the subsequent purge of his allies from government offices, the military decided this week that it would assert its power. On Monday, a military general issued a statement threatening to step in if the purges didn’t stop. The army then took action on Tuesday night, and now appears to be in control.

Military vehicles and soldiers patrol the streets in Harare on Nov. 15. (Philimon Bulawayo / Reuters)Military vehicles and soldiers patrol the streets in Harare on Nov. 15. (Philimon Bulawayo / Reuters)

What happens next? 

It’s unclear. There’s still a ton of uncertainty about the military’s intentions. Even the locations of key players in the crisis aren’t known for sure, as unconfirmed reports place Grace Mugabe in Namibia. 

There has been no sign of violence so far in the military action, and there have not been public demonstrations either in favor of it or against it. Foreign officials and regional leaders have called for calm and the country to avoid conflict, saying they are closely monitoring the situation.

Embassies in Zimbabwe, including the United Kingdom and United States, have issued statements instructing their citizens in the country to shelter in place and monitor the news for updates.

Although the situation is still unfolding, there is a strong possibility that this is the beginning of the end for Mugabe’s rule and his status as the world’s oldest serving president.

  • This article originally appeared on HuffPost.

Source Article from https://www.yahoo.com/news/know-crisis-zimbabwe-175520961.html

Three Riviera Beach Police Officers Speak Out About Corrupt Chief Clarence Williams

RIVIERA BEACH, Fla. – Three Riviera Beach police officers are breaking their silence and talking exclusively to WPTV’s Wanda Moore.

They say they are afraid of repercussions from speaking out. 

“I fear physical retaliation from the chief and his little minions,” an officer said. 

“I’m personally afraid for my safety and my family’s safety,” another officer said. “People are demoralized. The officers are scared.”

They say officers are scared of Riviera Beach Police Chief Clarence Williams and those who support him. 
“He’s by far the most powerful man in that city,” one officer said. 

“Who is holding him accountable? Absolutely nobody,” another officer said. 

The officers said that changed when council hired Jonathan Evans as their city manager in March. 

“Jonathan Evans was on the way to holding him accountable for what he was doing for several years,” one officer said. “And once he saw that he was going to be held accountable, they got rid of him. For no reason.” 
The officers believe the chief orchestrated Evans’ firing. 

“His fingerprints are all up on this entire corruption and this whole coup that’s going on,” one officer said. 
They point to a secret meeting at Hurst Chapel, eight days after council fired Evans, which was exposed by a WPTV investigation. 

After the meeting, he said he didn’t know anything about a meeting. 

Chief Clarence D. Williams: “I don’t know anything about the contents of the meeting. And why would walk up to the police chief and ask him…”

Bruce Guyton: “He just arrived.”

Chief Clarence D. Williams: “Yeah I just arrived.”

Reporter: “Oh, you just arrived? Because we saw you walk in earlier.”

Chief Clarence D. Williams: “I’ve come and gone. And you couldn’t have seen me.” 

Pages: 1 2

If you haven’t already, be sure to like our Filming Cops Page on Facebook and follow us on Twitter.

Please visit our sister site Smokers ONLY


(function(d) {
var params =
id: “3c7936d6-71e2-4cba-afb4-95ed4171941f”,
d: “ZmlsbWluZ2NvcHMuY29t”,
wid: “365543”,
cb: (new Date()).getTime()

var qs=[];
for(var key in params) qs.push(key+’=’+encodeURIComponent(params[key]));
var s = d.createElement(‘script’);s.type=’text/javascript’;s.async=true;
var p = ‘https:’ == document.location.protocol ? ‘https’ : ‘http’;
s.src = p + “://api.content-ad.net/Scripts/widget2.aspx?” + qs.join(‘&’);

Filming Cops

Source Article from http://filmingcops.com/three-riviera-beach-police-officers-speak-corrupt-chief-clarence-williams/

Underage sexting has doubled in two years: Authorities concerned about the mental and emotional impact on children

Image: Underage sexting has doubled in two years: Authorities concerned about the mental and emotional impact on children

(Natural News)
Children as young as 10 are revealed to be already “sexting” (sending text messages that are sexual in nature) as police forces in Wales and England have reported that sexting offenses have increased by around 33 percent to 6,238 in 2016-2017 – a rate of 17 every day – from 4,681 in 2015-2016. The latest statistics rose by around 131 percent from 2014-2015’s records, which were tallied at 2,700 cases.

Police reported that children as young as 10 are already involved in the sexting game – either by posting their pictures on malicious websites or sending them to strangers – with the age of the underage participants peaking at 14.

National Police Chief’s Council lead for child protection Chief Constable Simon Bailey reiterated concerns regarding the impact of pornography on the youth. “There is a worrying upward trend in children sharing sexual images, particularly regarding children who pass on indecent images of others.”

I am concerned about the impact that exposure to extreme pornography can have on children so we need to consider if a lack of universal relationship and sex education is compounding the problem. There is also undoubtedly more to be done to remove indecent imagery quickly and robustly from across social media platforms once it has been shared or posted without consent,” he added.

The number of children facing charges in sexting cases has more than halved, initial reports issued. Girls were more likely to be the victims, but perpetrators were evenly divided between boys and girls. Reports of sexting offenses dropped significantly in August, laying groundwork for the assumption that children were more at risk of abuse during the school term.

Sharing and possessing these images is against the law. Once an image is shared with others it can cause deep embarrassment and distress. Forces are risk assessing every case to ensure we are not unnecessarily stigmatizing children and saddling them with a criminal record. But there will always be a criminal investigation where we see that young people are being coerced, exploited, or blackmailed,” Bailey, who is also head of the Norfolk Constabulary, said.

The dangers of posting a nude photo on the Internet

You might think that a diamond is forever. This might be true, but do you know what lasts longer than a fine-cut diamond? A nude selfie.

In a seminar about pornography that the Natrona County Sheriff’s Office in Casper, Wyoming at Casper Classical Academy on Monday, November 6, police officers remarked that some teenagers don’t realize the dangers of sharing a naked photograph online.

The images are never gone,” Natrona County Sheriff’s Investigator Dave Hulshizer told 40 parents at the seminar. (Related: It’s Time for Parents to Stop Worrying About Sexting.)

Sharing a nude selfie can leave a girl – or anyone who shares a selfie – vulnerable to voyeurism, because the person who would be the recipient of the selfie can renege on the promise to keep the selfie for himself or herself, and share the selfie with other people.

What’s worse is that sending a nude selfie to a person via a social media platform, such as Snapchat, is equivalent to letting not only the recipient own a copy of your nude selfie, but also letting Snapchat store a file of your nude selfie, which can be made available to the Dark Net.

Hackers and unscrupulous people can access the Dark Net to download files, bundle the nude photos with other photos, and sell them to child pornographers, sex traffickers, and people who may want to blackmail the owner of the nude selfie.

About two, three years ago we began to see some patterns with the school district dealing with kids in high school, middle school. From there we just began to talk within specifically the investigations and Sheriff (Gus) Holbrook about what we can do to try to curb this. The best thing we came up with is education,” Hulshizer said.

Casper Classical Academy Principal Marie Puryear said the teachers were surprised by the extent of the sexting situation among teenagers. “Our teenagers were, quite honestly, pretty flabbergasted with the information. We generally consider ourselves savvy with technology and think that we’re generally pretty in the know, and found out there was a lot we didn’t know.”

Puryear acknowledged that some of their middle school students have gotten in trouble due to bullying and sending sexually explicit pictures. There are also apps that can be used for communication, such as OMEGLE, and apps that hide files, which look like mere calculators.

For more stories on gadgets and everything high-tech, visit VirtualReality.news.

Sources include:







Source Article from http://www.naturalnews.com/2017-11-13-underage-sexting-has-doubled-in-two-years-authorities-concerned-about-the-mental-and-emotional-impact-on-children.html

Uproxx Editor Corbin Reiff chats about his new concert book ‘Lighters In The Sky’

Music Editor Corbin Reiff knows a thing or two about music highlights, and his newest endeavor of writing a book about some of the best and most memorable concerts over the last 50 years is no exception. Reiff has chosen a variety of concerts amongst different genres, that span from 1960 to 2016. The artists include classic rock groups like The Beatles, The Who, late, exceptional guitar players and vocalists like Prince. More current artists include The Strokes, Jay-Z, Drake and numerous others. 

Not only is Reiff the music editor of Uproxx, he’s also a contributor to well-known and popular publications such as Consequence of Sound, Guitar World, Pitchfork, Rolling Stone, among others. As noted in a press bio, he’s a “live show enthusiast and resident of Chicago.” Praise has come in for the book from Will Toledo from Car Seat Headrest, who shared in a press release that “Reiff does a commendable job of translating a half-century of intangible musical energy into a compelling panorama of cultural evolution. You’ll come away with something new, whether you’re familiar with every artist on the list or you’ve never been to a show before.” 

Find out what Reiff had to say about his new book, why he chose to write, the cover art, and much more.

AXS: Why did you feel it was time to release “Lighters In The Sky,” and how many years in the making was it?

Corbin Reiff: From when I first hit upon the concept to the time I handed in the final work probably took about 18 months. Then of course came the editing process, which maybe took another six months or so. As to why “now,” felt like the right time. I think given the current climate, and the way so many artists really make their living nowadays, concerts themselves have never been more vital than they’ve ever been. The festival circuit, in particular, has become one of the industry’s main lifebloods. Given their larger role in the culture, I thought a book about iconic live gigs would really resonate with people.

AXS: How did you choose the concerts and artists you chose? 

CR: A lot of listening and a lot of watching. I didn’t want to just pick the same artists over and over again. I wanted to book to unfold in some ways as a musical history of popular music across the last six decades. You start with the blues and Muddy Waters, move on to rock and roll and soul with Elvis (Presley) and James Brown, hit The Rolling Stones, (Led) Zeppelin, Bruce Springsteen, then more pop-oriented acts like Madonna and Michael Jackson before hip-hop takes over with Kanye West and Drake. Above all, however, the concerts themselves had to mean something, and they had to be compelling. I really had to want to be there. 

AXS: Were there some concerts you wanted to include, but felt others took priority? Will you have a sequel to include those concerts?

CR: I’d love to write a sequel in some fashion! The great thing about a subject as broad as concerts is that it’s almost impossible to include everything. As a result, you inspire some really great and fun debates about who should have gotten in and who maybe should have been left out. The exclusion I’ve heard about the most has been The Grateful Dead. Their live reputation obviously precedes them, but frankly, I just couldn’t fit them in over say, The Ramones when punk was breaking in 1977, or over the Stones on their S.T.P. tour in 1972. Don’t hate me Deadheads!

AXS: We love the cover photo and its colors. Did you work with someone to collaborate on design?  

CR: I did actually. That was done by a close friend and family member Annie VanEngelen. I basically laid out the concept, and she just did a fantastic job of bringing it to life. An incredible artist!

AXS: You’ve already received positive feedback from musicians and live enthusiast fans alike…which concerts from this year (2017) do you think have been the greatest?

CR: I actually wrote a sort of bonus chapter for my 2017 pick, which you can check out over on the Lesser Gods website. Maybe at some point, we can include it in the official book?  For me, it’s got to be Kendrick Lamar. I personally caught his DAMN tour twice and was just blown away by the spectacle, the intensity, and the theatricality of his performance. Other than that, the One Love Manchester show with Ariana Grande was pretty special. I also really enjoyed Brand New’s latest live show as well. Incredible catharsis there.

Source Article from https://m.axs.com/uproxx-editor-corbin-reiff-chats-about-his-new-concert-book-lighters-i-125331