WASHINGTON — 

The conviction of a Dallas police officer this week on charges of killing an unarmed teenager has stood out for its rarity.

Roy Oliver, who was sentenced to 15 years in prison on Wednesday for the killing of 15-year-old high school freshman Jordan Edwards in 2017, became only the sixth police officer convicted in an on-duty fatal shooting incident since 2005, a period that has seen thousands of fatal police shootings.

While most of those shootings were found to be justified, civil rights advocates say they hope this week’s conviction will lead to policies that put an end to a wave of questionable police shootings that have exacerbated tensions in some American communities in recent years.

“It can serve as an example of what can and should be done,” said Hillary Shelton, senior vice president for advocacy and policy at the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, the nation’s oldest civil rights organization. “Hopefully, we’ll be able to utilize it as something to get more local police departments, state police organizations, and even those at the federal level to change how they do business.”

Randy Sutton, a retired Las Vegas Police Department officer and author of A Cop’s Life, praised Oliver’s conviction but said the Dallas incident was an aberration in police shootings.

“This was not a justified shooting by the police,” Sutton said. “To try and lump this shooting [with other high profile shootings of blacks by white police officers] and then characterize these shootings as excessive and using it in anti-police rhetoric, I find it offensive.”

On-duty police officers kill between 900 and 1,000 suspects each year, a figure that has remained consistent in recent years, according to data tracked by criminologist Phil Stinson at Bowling Green State University.

Yet only 93 police officers have been charged with murder or manslaughter resulting from an on-duty fatal shooting since 2005, and only 33 have been convicted of a crime related to the shootings, according to Stinson.

Of those, only six were convicted of murder or manslaughter, and four of those convictions were overturned on appeal. In all four cases, the officers were later tried and convicted on separate federal charges related to the incidents and received lengthy prison sentences.

“In most of these cases the officers were found to have been justified,” Stinson said.

The legal standard determining when an officer can use deadly force was established in two Supreme Court cases from the 1980s, and most police department guidelines on the use of firearms against suspects are based on these rulings.

In Tennessee v. Garner, the court ruled in 1985 that a police officer may use deadly force against a fleeing suspect only when he has a reasonable belief that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or bodily injury to the officer or to others.

In Graham v. Connor, the court established in 1989 an “objective reasonable standard” for determining whether an officer had used excessive force.

According to these rulings, “a police officer is justified in using deadly force if the officer has a reasonable apprehension of an imminent threat of serious bodily injury or deadly force being used against the officer or somebody else,” Stinson said.

On the other hand, “if an officer subjectively believes that there was an imminent threat but their belief was not objectively reasonable, then the officer is not legally justified and cannot assert that as an affirmative defense to defeat a conviction,” Stinson said.

That is how Oliver ended up getting convicted. On the stand, Oliver asserted that he fired on a car in which Edwards and his friends were riding because he wanted to protect his partner who, Oliver believed, would be run over by the vehicle. But the partner, Tyler Gross, had already testified that he did not fear for his life and saw no need to shoot at the car.

Yet critics say police department policies on the use of deadly force are unclear and inconsistent, sometimes leading to excessive use of force.

“We’re looking at these problems and we want them fixed,” Shelton of the NAACP said. “And we want to make sure those policies are put in place so we understand when you can and when you cannot use deadly force.”

Sutton said police department procedures vary from agency to agency, but when it comes to the use of deadly force all agencies abide by the Graham v. Connor ruling.

In police misconduct cases, officers are almost always charged with state crimes and tried in state courts. The Justice Department rarely prosecutes police officers and does so only when local prosecutors fail to obtain a conviction in a clearly egregious case or the defendant receives a light prison sentence.

Often, the officers are charged under a statute making it a crime to deprive an individual of his civil rights.

Amid a spate of high-profile shootings of unarmed black people by white police officers in recent years, the Justice Department under the Obama administration prioritized cracking down on police abuse.

Police departments involved in racially charged shootings were investigated, a handful of officers were charged with civil rights violations, and court-supervised consent decrees to reform the departments were entered into.

The Justice Department under the Trump administration continues to investigate police misconduct. According to press announcements by the department, the department has brought 11 indictments and received four convictions and nine guilty pleas in police misconduct cases since January 2017. Nearly all the cases involved assault or use of excessive force. None involved a fatal shooting.

Attorney General Jeff Sessions has said that while the Justice Department is committed to addressing police misconduct, “the vast majority of men and women in law enforcement are good people, who have chosen to do tremendously hard and dangerous jobs because they want to protect us all.”

One of his first acts in office was to order the Justice Department to review all existing consent decrees with police departments, saying they “can reduce the morale of police officers.”

Stinson said that while the number of police misconduct cases prosecuted by the current Justice Department is “surprisingly low” compared to historical norms, the figures do not necessarily suggest the “feds aren’t doing their jobs.”

“If local prosecutors are prosecuting these cases when they believe that an officer has committed a crime, there is no need for the Justice Department to invoke the federal criminal deprivation of civil rights statute. It’s just unnecessary,” Stinson said.

Apple seems to have blocked its new pride Apple Watch face in Russia, according to a bit of digging by an iOS developer.

The Apple Watch pride face, which was unveiled in June at WWDC ’18, was meant to celebrate Pride Month and to stand against LGBTQ+ discrimination — and cement Apple’s “unwavering commitment to equality and diversity.”

But the pride face simply won’t show up as an option for Russian users.

iOS developer Guilherme Rambo did a bit of code digging and discovered something interesting.

In a tweet on Thursday, Rambo wrote that “the Apple Watch pride face is hardcoded to not show up if the paired iPhone is using the Russian locale.”

Basically, if you set your location to Russia, then the pride face simply disappears as an option. We can’t independently verify the authenticity of the code, but Rambo has a solid track record of accurate information.

The Apple Watch pride face is hardcoded to not show up if the paired iPhone is using the Russian locale pic.twitter.com/vEP8XquYsP

— Guilherme Rambo (@_inside) August 31, 2018

Various Apple Watch users across Reddit and the Apple Support communities have questioned the absence of the price face in Russia over the past few months.

It’s worth noting that the lack of a pride face in Russia is likely meant to help keep Apple from running afoul of local regulations.

In 2013, Russia implemented what’s been called a “gay propaganda” law that carries the risk of jail time or fines for promoting “non-traditional sexual relationships” in front of minors.

That law, which has been slammed by the European Court of Human Rights and Amnesty International, essentially makes LGBTQ+ activism illegal. That includes speaking positively about LGBTQ+ rights, holding pride events, or promoting LGBTQ+ relationships in the presence of minors, Gizmodo reported.

Apple also doesn’t sell its special edition pride watch band on its online Russia storefront.

Debuted earlier this year, a portion of the proceeds from the band sales goes toward supporting various LGBTQ+ advocacy groups.

This isn’t the first time that Apple has seemingly bent its principles due to regional law.

Some groups have claimed that Apple “betrayed” its users in China. While a vanguard for privacy rights across most of the world, Apple okayed the move of Chinese iCloud user data to state-run servers to comply with newly implemented regulations.

After SB 822 passed California’s state Assembly yesterday, it just needed (re)approval from the Senate before going in front of the governor to be signed into law. The net neutrality bill that its sponsor Scott Weiner calls “the strongest in the nation” got the necessary votes this evening despite opposition from groups representing ISPs like Comcast, AT&T and Verizon.

Stanford Center for Internet and Society director Barbara van Schewick said in a statement that “SB 822 sets the standard for other states to follow. SB 822 is the only state-level bill that truly restores all the 2015 net neutrality protections. That’s what makes it so special. Most state-level bills have just copied the text of the FCC’s 2015 net neutrality rules, leaving out critical protections. By contrast, SB 822 includes the important protections and clarifications in the full Order which explained the rules and closed known loopholes.”

According to Weiner, “when Donald Trump’s FCC decided to take a wrecking ball to net neutrality protections, we knew that California had to step in to ensure our residents have access to a free and open internet.” The EFF noted Verizon’s recent throttling of internet to firefighters battling a blaze in Mendocino, saying that because the Open Internet order was repealed earlier this year, it could escape “meaningful” punishment for that.

In India, a game of Cricket was considered to be most loved sport to an extent that people didn’t even know the name of athletes in other sports. But with constant wins of sportsperson like Hima Das, PV Sindhu and Neeraj Chopra, sports like Racing, Badminton and Jwelin Throw at the Olympics has made people aware about other sports very well.

Indian athletes are making India proud as they continue to win medals at the Asian Games 2018.

Image Source

Roller Skater 

India’s Harshveer Singh finishes eighth while Amitesh Mishra fails to finish the race in the Men’s Road 20 Km Final.

Diving

After the fifth dive, India’s Ramananda Sharma jumps to the 10th spot in the Men’s 1m Springboard Preliminary and qualified for finals in the Men’s 1m Springboard.

Image Source

Sailing

India’s Nethra Kumanan finishes fifth in the Women’s Laser Radial Race 12.

India’s Varsha Gautham and Sweta Shervegar bag silver after they finish second in the Women’s 49er FX Race 15.

India’s Varun Thakkar Ashok and Chengappa Ganapathy Kelapanda win bronze in the Men’s 49er Race 15.

India’s Harshita Tomar bags a bronze medal in the Open Laser 4.7 event. 16-year-old Harshita totalled 62 after race 12 to finish third. “It is a great feeling to win a medal for the country. I can’t explain it. It has been a great learning experience for me,” said Harshita.

Image Source

India’s latest medal tally at the Asian Games 2018: (as of 3:50 pm On August 31)

Gold — 13
Silver — 22
Bronze — 27
Total: 62

Indians are really proud of the athletes for making the country proud by winning medals. Stay tuned to Laughing Colours for the latest sports news and updates.

Published by Bhaumik Raja on 31 Aug 2018

Want more posts like this delivered to your inbox? Enter your email to be subscribed to our newsletter.

Google News does not deliver different news to users based on their position on the political spectrum, despite accusations from conservative commentators and even President Donald Trump. Rather than contributing to the sort of “echo chamber” problem that critics fear have plagued Facebook and other social media networks, our research has found that Google News algorithms recommended virtually identical news sources to both liberals and conservatives. That’s an important point to keep in mind when evaluating accusations that Google News is biased.

Our findings are part of an ample and growing body of research on this question. Online services – including Google’s regular search function – may provide intensely personalized information. But media scholars like us have found that when it comes to news, search engines and social media tend to lead people not to a more narrow set of sources, but rather to a broader range of information. In fact, we found, Google News is designed to avoid personalized search results, intentionally constructing a shared public conversation based on traditional criteria of journalistic values.

There is, however, one aspect of this lack of personalization that may strike conservatives the wrong way: Established mainstream news outlets strongly dominate the results, regardless of what a user is searching for. Of all the Google News recommendations we collected, a full 49 percent – nearly half – were to just five national news organizations: The New York Times, CNN, Politico, The Washington Post and HuffPost. And those five, much like other mainstream news organizations, tend to be seen as center-left.

In addition, Google News favors sites with original reporting – as well as ones that produce large numbers of articles, respond reasonably quickly to events and have larger staffs. Those criteria, which don’t directly have anything to do with a news organization’s political bent, do appear to disadvantage explicitly partisan right-wing commentary sites, which tend to be small, low-volume and do little of their own on-the-ground reporting. And it’s definitely true that users don’t know how Google News works. The company, like many of its ilk, is tight-lipped about how its news and other algorithms function – at least in part to prevent media companies from gaming the system to favor their own material.

How we tested for echo chambers

Shortly before the 2016 election, we studied what would happen when people searched for news about Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton on Google News. Specifically, we used Amazon Mechanical Turk to recruit a diverse set of 168 people in California, Florida, New York, North Carolina, Ohio and Texas. Participants were of different ages, education levels and political views: 41 percent identified as liberals and 26 percent identified as conservatives. The remaining 33 percent did not declare a political affiliation.

We asked them to search Google News for news about Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump while logged in to their personal Google accounts, and report the first five stories they were recommended on each candidate. We repeated this on two separate occasions, once after a presidential debate and later during a slow news period. Then we compared the stories that people were recommended.

The fact that they were logged in to their Google accounts was important: Google, of course, collects huge amounts of data about each of its users, and could leverage that information when returning search results. Therefore, we expected to find people getting different article recommendations based on their prior search history and online activity, as recorded by Google and applied to the results they got from Google News.

That’s not what we found at all. Instead, liberals and conservatives were recommended virtually identical news sources.

No collusion against conservatives

We found, as have others, no evidence that major technology companies collude against conservatives or tweak their algorithms to return politically slanted search results.

In fact, some have suggested that the opposite may be true. In the run-up to the 2016 election, Facebook was accused of yielding to charges of bias, moving to favor right-wing views by letting leading conservatives investigate its internal biases. Twitter has been similarly accused for protecting InfoWars in 2018.

Further, as tech journalist Kara Swisher has argued, “Mr. Trump himself is the most voluble politician ever to use digital media, and his entire existence has been amplified, echoed and re-echoed over and over again by the tools that Silicon Valley has let loose on the world over the past two decades.”

Who determines what gets prioritized online?

However, there is reason to understand – even if not to agree with – claims of bias. First, Google News search results do favor legacy news organizations, ones with a long history. In our study, of the 14 news sites that ranked highly on at least one search, only three were newer “digital-first” news organizations. The rest were legacy newspapers, national TV stations and magazines.

Whether this is a problem – and if so, how much of one – is largely up to individual interpretation. For people who care that public discourse is based on a shared set of facts, it’s good news to learn that most people get the same results when they search Google News. And for people who believe that long-standing news producers with proven track records are best equipped to report on current events, our research is reassuring.

Yet across the political spectrum, Americans have far more trust in their local media than in the national media organizations that dominate online – including the results of Google News. It’s especially difficult to trust search engines and social media sites whose algorithms are secret, complex and constantly changing.

Ultimately, the concerns about algorithms and technology boil down to the principles that guide recommendation engines in shaping what reports get the most attention. Should Google News prioritize stories that adhere to traditional journalistic norms? Or should it reflect some other, yet undetermined standard? Trump’s rhetoric resonates with his supporters because, to them and others, the answer is not so clear-cut.

People have different visions of how societies should narrate their shared life. That’s perhaps why concepts of news judgment and balanced coverage largely assume that human editors will be involved. Algorithms can’t solve these quandaries – but they can help bring sharper focus to the public debate of the role news should play in a democratic society. Trump’s latest attacks may forestall that debate, though, by doing to technology companies what he did to the press: convincing many people they are “fake” and thus not to be trusted at all.

Rejhane Lazoja landed in Newark on her way home to Staten Island, New York, and found herself pulled into a secondary screening room by two CPB agents. They asked for her electronic devices, told her she didn’t need a lawyer, and proceeded to demand she unlock her phone.

According to the motion filed by her attorneys in a New Jersey federal court on Wednesday, the male agent asked her to unlock her iPhone but would not provide a reason. She declined, telling them there were communications with her attorney on her phone, as well as photos of her without a headscarf. The latter part of which makes their continued demands even more creepy and violating for a Muslim woman.

The female CBP officer took her out of the windowless interrogation room and a second male officer asked Lazoja to unlock the phone. Lazoja said no again, and the female officer pressed, saying she understood the sensitivity of the personal photos — that without her hijab, Lazoja is undressed — but the female officer then also asked her to unlock the phone anyway. Despite their B-list “good cop, bad cop” act, Lazoja still said no.

So they searched all her physical belongings, questioned her some more, then took her phone and SIM card, “indicating the iPhone and SIM Card were ‘Sent to DHS Lab'” said the filing. What happened afterward, according to the federal lawsuit, was DHS cracking and copying her iPhone’s contents at a separate location, keeping it for four months, and not saying a damn thing about what they’ve done with her photos, data, and all the other information they got from her phone.

“The agents never returned the iPhone 6S Plus, which was running iOS 9.2.1 (13d15),” reported Ars Technica, “and gave her a receipt instead. After they kept the phone for 90 days, she contacted attorneys at CAIR [the Council on American-Islamic Relations].”

One of Lazoja’s attorneys, Albert Fox Cahn, of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), told Ars, “They provided no justification for why they took the phone.” He added, “They’ve never accused her of a crime.” This is especially important because in January, CBP announced its updated policy on electronic device search at borders. It states officers must have “reasonable suspicion” of illegal activity, or show a national security concern (and have supervisory approval), to conduct an advanced search of a device, defined as when they “review, copy, and/or analyze its contents.” Which is what they did to Ms. Lazoja.

Lazoja’s attorneys have filed what’s known as a “Motion to Return Property,” normally used for physical property. “The seizure, retention, and any sharing of her property without reasonable suspicion, probable cause, or a warrant have violated Ms Lazoja’s rights under the Fourth Amendment of the US Constitution, and are at odds with recent Supreme Court holdings as well as District Court and Court of Appeals decisions scrutinizing CBP’s practices of seizing digital storage devices without a warrant,” the filing [PDF] reads.

Lazoja and her attorneys want to “order Defendants to return her Data, to expunge any copies made of the Data, to disclose all third parties who received and/or retain copies, partial or complete, of the Data, and to provide information about the basis for the seizure and retention of the Property.” The filing’s conclusion details:

Further, Ms. Lazoja respectfully asks that this Court declare that Defendants, their agents and employees violated the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution through their policy of searching, seizing, detaining, copying, and sharing with third parties digital storage devices without a warrant.

Finally, Ms. Lazoja respectfully asks that this Court enjoin Defendants from its practice of searching and seizing electronic storage devices without a warrant supported by probable cause.

Well, that would be great. It’s hard not to be cynical considering how much light this suit just shined on what’s happening right now with the search and seizure of Americans’ electronics at airports.

Under the Trump Administration, we learned in March 2017 that phone and digital device searches by Customs and Border Protection agents at airport checkpoints had more than doubled. Those searches had expanded to include password demands. When the new Trump policies began, 5000 devices were searched in February alone — that’s around 180 people a day. Now we see that everything we worried about, and that people thought was too Orwellian to become true, is happening.

Basically, now if you’re traveling internationally and won’t give up your password to CPB brownshirts, they will actually take your phone away from you and break into it.

As an aside, I really, really want to know whose phone cracking tools they’re using. Is it crappy old Hacking Team tools, or fancy-expensive Cellebrite wares? I just want to know. They’re hackers, like the ones who go to Black Hat and DEF CON. Like people I know who get excited about the latest, previously-impossible attacks. Do they think of moms like Rejhane Lazoja, and her daughter, as an abstract concept? Or do they think what happened to her is funny, because they’re smarter at security than she is, like guys I see talking about “dumb users” in infosec Twitter circles? Perhaps they’re uncomfortable, like the workers at Microsoft who were sickened by the company’s role in providing tech solutions for ICE.

I mean, this is the same CBP that Salesforce continues providing services to despite the urgings of 23 organizations including Fight for the Future, Greenpeace International, Free Press, and The Icarus Project. “Salesforce CEO Marc Benioff,” wrote Fight for the Future, “has claimed since the company’s contract with CBP does not deal directly with activities at the US-Mexico border, Salesforce will not drop their contract.”

One thing’s for sure: Rejhane Lazoja’s lawsuit is going to show us just how far Trump’s CBP thinks it can take this current free-for-all raid of Americans’ rights.

Disturbingly, we’ll also find out how much CBP plans on following its own rules — or our country’s own laws.

Image: Joe Raedle/Getty Images (CBP at airport)

Over the past few years, I’ve had the pleasure of spending significant time on the ground in China for ReadWrite and ReadWrite Labs. While here in China, I’m continuously discovering new opportunities that exist and even more reasons for foreign startups and corporations to consider getting started in China.

However entering a new market can be overwhelming without the right information or guiding trip. So here’s a quick start guide for anyone currently thinking about expanding into China.

1. Largest consumer market globally

It’s no secret that China has the largest consumer market in the world with almost 1.4 billion people and rising. What some may not be aware of is that China will present what will be the greatest middle-class growth bump of any country since the United States beginning in the early 1950s. In fact, by 2022 over 76 percent of China’s urban population will be considered middle class according to a McKinsey & Company study. That’s roughly (in today’s numbers) over 550 million people who are ready to be your customers.

As that population continues to grow so will the country’s internet users, specifically mobile. Today China alone has over 700 million (with 30% growth in 2016) active mobile internet users. Which equates to the largest sandbox for applications, gaming, the Internet of Things (IoT) and more.

2. The Greater Bay Area

For those unfamiliar with the term, it is not an extension of the San Francisco Bay Area, in fact, it’s more than three times larger. The Greater Bay Area is part of China’s initiatives to drive innovation throughout the country. To put it in perspective here’s just a few stats about this newly defined region,

• 11 cities make up the region (Hong Kong, Macau, Guangzhou (third largest city in China), Shenzhen, Zhuhai, Foshan, Zhongshan, Dongguan, Huizhou, Jiangmen, and Zhaoqing)
• 67+ million people now within less than a one hour drive
• 16 and growing Fortune 500 companies have a headquarters within the region – more following
• $1.36 trillion dollars in combined GDP for the area in 2016 (compared to the San Francisco’s Bay Area of $431.7 billion GDP in 2015)
• Each city will have a dedicated focus on an industry (Manufacturing, Finance, Travel, Artificial Intelligence, etc.) with local benefits provided for those doing business locally

3. Innovation at scale

The days of copycats are fading away throughout China in favor of innovative ideas that push industries forward rather than oversaturate. These changes are gaining momentum at astounding rates thanks to ambitious entrepreneurs and corporations, along with enormous governmental support. All three are hungry to lead with entrepreneurs craving advice and education on Silicon Valley success.

Local businesses are opening their doors welcoming global partners and providing support or insights on the local markets. Governments throughout all cities within China are offering to make it easier for foreign companies to soft-land and establish while providing necessary benefits for those that decide to expand to China.

Don’t believe that innovation is growing at scale in China? Here are some stats that might help,

• China is now the No. 1 interactive game market globally beating the US
• China accounts for 67% of ALL global on demand transportation
• Bike sharing users now make up more than 20 million people with 100%+ monthly growth rate
• China mobile payment volume in 2016 reached over $5 trillion dollars (2x compared to last year)
• E-commerce in China is now taking place 71% on mobile devices
• China online advertising revenue is now a $40 billion dollar market
• Tencent, the largest gaming company in the world now has over 1.5 billion active users worldwide
• Huawei is the No.1 telecommunication equipment company in the world
• Huawei is also leading the development of our future 5G wireless infrastructure
• DJI currently represents almost 90% of global Drone market

The takeaway for this article is that there’s no better time to get started in China than now. While also understanding that China isn’t shying away from its goal to be the leader in innovation, nor to become the global business hub. In their efforts, they are welcoming all those interested in joining the ride.

But if you’re still not convinced why you need to be in China or if it’s right for you, join me on a trip around the country. We’ll spend 5-days in China meeting with the local government and community leaders, as well as corporations that can serve as strategic partners, and to talk with the founders and executives of the largest and most successful companies in China.

To learn more and get started, click here.

ROME — 

Pope Francis was described Thursday by a top aide as ‘serene’ in the face of the unprecedented public skirmishing breaking out among Catholic prelates over an explosive charge that the pontiff knew about sexual misconduct allegations against a U.S. cardinal but chose to ignore them.

The Vatican’s secretary of state said Francis is maintaining his grace despite “bitterness and concern” in the Vatican over the accusation leveled against him by a onetime top Catholic envoy, who has demanded the Pope resign.

The Pope’s accuser, Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano, a former Vatican ambassador and a doctrinal opponent of Francis, has gone into hiding after making his claim last Sunday in a scathing 11-page document that was crafted with the assistance of a well-known Italian journalist and a stalwart critic of the Pope. According to Vigano, Francis ignored misconduct allegations against Cardinal Theodore McCarrick.

The incendiary document, which also warned of a homosexual culture in the church, was leaked to several conservative Catholic newspapers and blogs, all determined foes of Francis. They agreed to publish it on the second and final day of Francis’s trip to Ireland, in a coordinated effort, say Francis loyalists, to cause him maximum damage.

The publication of the letter upended the visit to Ireland, where Pope Francis had hoped to stanch the damage being done to the Holy See by the clerical sex abuse crisis that has roiled the Roman Catholic Church worldwide for decades. Just two weeks before the Ireland trip, the Church was rocked by further clerical abuse allegations with the release of a grand jury report in the U.S. which detailed the abuse of children in six Pennsylvania dioceses over the past seven decades by hundreds of “predator priests.”

In Ireland, Pope Francis met Irish abuse victims and asked for the faithful to forgive the church for its failings. “We ask forgiveness for the times that we did not show [abuse] survivors compassion or the justice they deserve in the search for truth,” he said. And he then added: “We ask forgiveness for members of the Church hierarchy who did not take care of these situations and kept quiet.”

But Vigano says Francis is one of the church leaders who’s colluded in covering up abuse or has been too ready to overlook abuse allegations when leveled against friends and progressive allies. He has also claimed that a tolerant attitude towards homosexuality in the Vatican — even alleging a progressive gay cabal in the upper echelons of the Church — is the root cause of clerical sex abuse. Francis supporters scoff at that charge, noting that clerical sex abuse has been going on for decades and for most of that time traditionalists were in control of the Vatican.

‘Conspiracy of silence’

Midweek Vigano reemerged to give an interview to La Verità newspaper, saying he spoke up out of a sense of duty to the Catholic Church and not because the Pope had passed him over for promotion. “I have never had feelings of vendetta or rancor,” he said, adding that there is a “conspiracy of silence” in the Church “not so dissimilar from the one that prevails in the mafia.”

Vigano says Francis was aware of the grave allegations of sexual misconduct against Cardinal Theodore McCarrick, who’s been accused of abusing young priests and molesting seminarians for decades. Unlike his predecessor Pope Benedict XVI, who imposed sanctions on McCarrick, Francis and his circle of advisers chose to rehabilitate the U.S. cardinal, argues Vigano.

The claims are shaking Francis’s five-year papacy.

Amid the swirl of charge and counter-charge between church liberals and conservatives locked in a power struggle, there’s mounting anxiety in the Vatican that traditionalists, opposed to the Pope’s efforts to make the Church more inclusive and less rigid doctrinally, are determined to use the clerical sex abuse scandal to gain politically.

The pope’s supporters say Francis’ doctrinal opponents won’t be satisfied until they have either forced him to resign, or so damaged him that he’s stripped of the authority needed to drive the reforms they’re determined to halt. They say traditionalists have been emboldened by the resignation of Benedict, whose stepping down as leader of the Catholic Church in 2013 made him the first pope to relinquish the office since 1415, setting a modern-day precedent for pontiffs not having to stay in office until they die.

Abuse survivors are also suspicious of the motives of Vigano and the circle of traditionalists supporting him. Despite their own frustrations with Francis at what they see as a failure by his Vatican to take concrete steps to root out corrupt clergy, they worry traditionalists are enlisting homophobia in their campaign against Francis and are not truly focused on the well-being of abuse survivors.

Not a word

Cardinal Oscar Maradiaga, one of the Pope’s closest advisers, dismissed Vigano’s attacks, telling La Repubblica newspaper Thursday, “Transforming information of a private nature into a bombshell headline that explodes around the world damaging the faith of many people doesn’t seem to me to be a correct action.” But Maradiaga did not engage with the details of Vigano’s central charge — that the pope ignored misconduct allegations against McCarrick, who last month resigned, becoming the first cardinal to do so since 1927.

Francis, too, has continued to remain silent about McCarrick.

The 81-year-old pope told journalists who accompanied him on his two-day visit to Ireland that he wouldn’t comment. Asked in an impromptu press conference on board his plane on the return to Rome about Vigano’s accusation, the Pope said he left it up to the journalists to judge for themselves. “I won’t say a word about it,” he said.

Vatican analysts say the Holy See appears to be hoping that by ignoring the substance of the claim against Francis, the storm can be ridden out. But they warn that appears to be a forlorn hope — by shunning the charge, Francis is fueling it and prompting the question, ‘why won’t the pope answer?’ If the claim is inaccurate, “why wouldn’t the pope correct it, just as he has spoken so openly about so many other things?” queried commentator Tim Stanley in a commentary for the London Sunday Telegraph.

Francis’ conservative critics are gearing up to press formally for an answer. In an open letter to his diocese in Tyler, Texas, Bishop Joseph Strickland midweek said: “Let us be clear that they are still allegations, but as your shepherd I find them to be credible.” He says he will agitate for an investigation.

Other prelates are plotting to do so as well, next month in Rome at a synod of bishops to discuss young people and faith.

The Diocese of Dallas in Texas has petitioned the Pope to hold a special synod, or summit, of bishops on the clerical sex abuse scandal.

Progressives started to rally Friday around Francis with prelates from Latin America, the pope’s home continent, as well as Portugal leading the charge.

Of the accusations, Cardinal António dos Santos Marto, of Fatima, Portugal, told the Observador newspaper, “It’s a campaign organized by ultra-conservatives to mortally wound the pope.”

Marto predicted Francis will be strengthened by the controversy, adding, however, that “in this moment it’s necessary for the entire Church to manifest her support for the pope.” He said Francis may soon switch tactics and address head-on the accusations against him.

Francis also received backing from a top aide to his predecessor, Benedict XVI. Archbishop Georg Ganswein dismissed Vigano’s claim that Benedict had informed Francis of the misconduct allegations against McCarrick. He told Italian newspapers Friday: “It’s all rubbish.”

Earlier this year, Amazon rolled out a new feature that allowed Alexa device owners to create their own custom skills using preconfigured templates. Today, Amazon is expanding Alexa Blueprints, as the service is called, to include a handful of new templates designed for families and roommates.

These include a chore chart template, a house rules template for roommates, and others.

The Chore Chart template allows families to schedule and track children’s weekly chores, and even lets multiple kids (or anyone, really) compete to see who has done the most. Parents first configure the skill with a list of weekly chores and who those chores are assigned to.

Throughout the week, the kids can log their completed chores by asking Alexa. (“Alexa, ask Chore Chart to log a chore.”). Anyone can then check the progress by asking for the “Chore Score.”

Another blueprint is a variation on the existing “houseguest” and “babysitter” templates, which let you fill in useful information about the home, like where to find the TV remote or what the Wi-Fi password is, for example. The new “Roommate” blueprint, available now, lets you program in other information about the house, like the “house rules.”

You can have Alexa nag users to turn off the lights or run the dishwasher when they ask for the “house rules” for a given room. This passive aggressive roommate shaming system may not be the most useful – unless maybe used to poke fun – however, the template also lets you program in other important contacts, like the landlord or building manager.

The two other new blueprints are more lighthearted in nature.

One, “Whose Turn,” will have Alexa either randomly pick whose turn it is to take on a particular task – like walking the dog – or she can pick from the next name in the list, depending on how it’s configured.

Similarly, the “What To Do” skill will let Alexa make the decision when you’re stumped about what activity to do next. Alexa can pick what movie or TV show to watch from a list you configure, and can even suggest what’s for dinner, if you program in a list of favorite meals. This is also clearly intended more for parents with kids, who like to incorporate Alexa into family discussions and activities, as a third-party arbitrator of disputes, so to speak.

Many of the existing blueprints are already family-friends, like the family jokes, trivia, and stories. Amazon said in June that Alexa Skill Blueprints’ adoption has been higher than expected, when it introduced a way for people to share their custom blueprints with others.

The new blueprints are live now, bringing the total number of customizable skills to 41.

Asian Games 2018 marked many woman achievers. It not only made us proud but they have really inspired us and made us believe that anything is possible despite all odds.

Here is a list of woman winners who won at Asian Games 2018. Have a look:

1. Swapna Barman

She won a gold in Heptathlon.

image source

2. Manika Batra

Bronze in Mixed Doubles Table Tennis.

image source

3. Dutee Chand

Silver in 100/200 meters.

image source

4. Hima Das

Silver in 400 meters.

image source

5. PV Sindhu

Silver in Badminton Singles.

image source

6. Saina Nehwal

Bronze in Badminton Singles.

image source

7. Pincky Balhara

Silver in 52 kg category Kurash.

image source

8. Malaprabha Yallappa Jadhav

Bronze in 52 kg category Kurash.

image source

9. Vinesh Phogat

Gold in 52 kg Wrestling.

image source

10. Sudha Singh

Bronze in 3000 meter Steeplechase.

image source

11. Ankita Raina

Bronze in Tennis singles.

image source

12. Naorem Roshibina Devi

Bronze in Wushu.

image source

13. Dipika Palikal

Bronze in Squash Singles.

image source

14. Joshna Chinappa

Bronze in Squash Singles.

image source

15. Neena Varakil

Silver in Long Jump.

image source

16. Muskan Kiran

Silver in Compound Archery.

image source

17. Madhumita Kumari

Silver in Compound Archery.

image source

18. Jyothi Vennam

Silver in Compound Archery.

image source

Do you also believe that women can do anything?

They have managed to be good in every area of life wherever they have stepped on.

We Congratulate all the women achievers and wish them Good Luck for their future endeavours!

Published by Minal Gupta on 31 Aug 2018