RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://www.forbes.com/sites/adamandrzejewski/2020/09/30/mapping-los-angeles-homeless-encampment-challenge–nearly-100000-cases-reported-since-2019/#6d635e794dee

Los Angeles represents the glitz and glamour of the California lifestyle. It’s a tourist mecca that boasted 50 million visitors in 2019 – an all-time high.

The greater Los Angeles area can also claim Muscle Beach in Venice; the Hollywood movie studios; the rich and famous in Beverly Hills; and a previously booming economy that trailed only New York City and Tokyo.

But the city itself is in trouble, and tourists should be advised to avoid some neighborhoods and streets entirely.

Today, Los Angeles hosts an estimated homeless population of nearly 40,000 people (the entire states of Texas and Florida have between 25,000 and 28,000 respectively). Affluent sections of the city have become dangerous with open-air drug use, human feces, medieval diseases, and, sadly, homeless encampments.

Since 2019, there have been at least 94,430 reported complaints of homeless encampments in public spaces –an average of 4,500 per month.

First elected in 2013, Mayor Eric Garcetti promised to clean things up. However, conditions are the same or worse. Last year, the number of encampment complaints spiked to 55,569. The same pace has continued in 2020 with 35,241 instances already reported through August.

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/16561/leila-khaled-terrorists-internet

An interesting legal question or two popped-up… right at the intersection of free speech and technology. Corporate standards for content and how Internet platforms engage in editorial decisions over content material (they supposedly are not responsible for) is increasingly becoming a point of contention.

Policing content and platform liability get more complicated with every passing day. The social media tech giants pretend they are not really responsible, unless they want to be — or they do not like your politics — or they are frightened of being prosecuted and fined for supporting terrorism.

Corporate America, and especially the Internet tech giants, do not see it that way. Consider the multi-billion-dollar Internet pornography industry that exploits and denigrates human beings through exploitation, child abuse and trafficking.

What happens when the giants decide that an election outcome must be decided in one way, and that anyone reporting or asking questions about a different outcome, a different way, must be banned and suppressed?

We have good news: Terrorists were stopped from exploiting the Internet and a state university event to propound their violence-inspiring, hate-filled rhetoric. Ten days ago, several online news and social media fora sounded the alarm over San Francisco State University (SFSU) hosting the terrorist Leila Khaled on September 23, 2020 via an Internet-based open classroom event. The occasion was described as “a historic roundtable conversation with Palestinian feminist, militant, and leader Leila Khaled, followed by Q&A discussion with students, activists, and scholars.”

Billed as “Whose Narratives? Gender, Justice, & Resistance: A conversation with Leila Khaled,” the event featured at least three other terrorists from the Weather Underground, Black Panthers and an advisor to Hamas. Today, the good news with which we are following up is that Khaled and the other terrorists did not win.

While Khaled is not a specially designated terrorist, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) is a designated organization — and Khaled is a member of the terrorist organization’s politburo. Because the online event was an Internet open classroom, there were no specific issues related to her physical admissibility to the U.S. Khaled has spoken in Europe several times (including at an EU conference in Brussels in 2017) but the same year, was denied entry to Italy.

https://amgreatness.com/2020/09/30/secret-report-how-cias-brennan-overruled-dissenting-analysts-who-concluded-russia-favored-hillary/

Former CIA Director John Brennan personally edited the report that was used to help justify continuing the Trump-Russia “collusion” investigation, which had been launched by the FBI in 2016.

Former CIA Director John Brennan personally edited a crucial section of the intelligence report on Russian interference in the 2016 election and assigned a political ally to take a lead role in writing it after career analysts disputed Brennan’s take that Russian leader Vladimir Putin intervened in the 2016 election to help Donald Trump clinch the White House, according to two senior U.S. intelligence officials who have seen classified materials detailing Brennan’s role in drafting the document.

The explosive conclusion Brennan inserted into the report was used to help justify continuing the Trump-Russia “collusion” investigation, which had been launched by the FBI in 2016. It was picked up after the election by Special Counsel Robert Mueller, who in the end found no proof that Trump or his campaign conspired with Moscow.

The Obama administration publicly released a declassified version of the report — known as the “Intelligence Community Assessment on Russian Activities and Intentions in Recent Elections (ICA)” — just two weeks before Trump took office, casting a cloud of suspicion over his presidency. Democrats and national media have cited the report to suggest Russia influenced the 2016 outcome and warn that Putin is likely meddling again to reelect Trump.