Tuesday, June 21, 2016

SINCE WHEN IS APPLE ABOUT TIM COOKS SEXUAL PREFERENCES AND PROGRESSIVE POLITICS? ATTORNEY GENERAL LYNCH: LYING TO AMERICA BY CENSORING THE NEWS? MARTIN LUTHER KING WOULD BE SO ASHAMED OF OPRAH ...

One Citizen Speaking...


SINCE WHEN IS APPLE ABOUT TIM COOKS SEXUAL PREFERENCES AND PROGRESSIVE POLITICS?

Posted: 20 Jun 2016 01:46 AM PDT

If Tim Cook hasn’t noticed, Apple is a corporation that owes a fiduciary duty to its shareholders and anything which can prejudice any government against Apple’s business policies and practices may not be a good thing. So instead of being the iconic gay business leader, perhaps he should be the business leader who happens to be gay. So why is Tim Cook and his cohorts deliberately giving the finger to the Republicans – with a more than likely chance that they may become the next Administration and take a closer look at Apple’s business practices?

It is enough that Apple’s cache and sales – based on design rather than innovation – may become a thing of the past as computing becomes commoditized in a cloud that only requires a minimal footprint and browser to take advantage of powerful systems. 

Apple won't aid GOP convention over Trump

Apple has told Republican leaders it will not provide funding or other support for the party’s 2016 presidential convention, as it's done in the past, citing Donald Trump’s controversial comments about women, immigrants and minorities.

Unlike Facebook, Google and Microsoft, which have all said they will provide some support to the GOP event in Cleveland next month, Apple decided against donating technology or cash to the effort, according to two sources familiar with the iPhone maker’s plans. 

Apple’s political stand against Trump, communicated privately to Republicans, is a sign of the widening schism between Silicon Valley and the GOP’s bombastic presumptive nominee. Trump has trained his rhetorical fire on the entire tech industry, but he's singled out Apple for particular criticism -- calling for a boycott of the company's products, and slamming CEO Tim Cook, over Apple's stance on encryption.

Source: Apple won't aid GOP convention over Trump - POLITICO

About the encryption issue …

I firmly believe that Tim Cook was absolutely correct in withholding Apple’s engineering resources to create a tool to allow the FBI to crack the Riverside Terrorist’s iPhone. First, because it was the bumbling FBI that made the phone inaccessible in the first place by fiddling with passwords. Second, because the FBI was disingenuous about attempting to set a legal precedent that could be used to force any company to build tools to assist the FBI in cracking any and all electronic devices. Three, because the FBI found an alternative source to provide the technical support they originally sought from Apple – and appear to be sharing it with numerous other law enforcement agencies with similar device encryption issues. But, most of all, there was little to learn from the device itself, and there was a well-founded suspicion that the FBI was orbiting the area using a sniffer to hoover-up all manner of electronic communications.

Trump on the other had is a bloviating billionaire bully boy who appears to be a progressive socialist democrat masquerading as a republican. His ego-centric worldview and bizarre pronouncements make him unfit for the Office of the President and the role of Commander-in-Chief. Trump is no techie and his command of technical issues is probably limited to Tweeting.

Bottom line …

I hope that Tim Cook will concentrate on the massive job of making Apple relevant in these fast-paced technological times and leave the social engineering and so-called “justice”  politics to the lobbyists who work both sides of the aisle. 

-- steve  

ATTORNEY GENERAL LYNCH: LYING TO AMERICA BY CENSORING THE NEWS?

Posted: 19 Jun 2016 04:35 PM PDT

Once again a high-ranking member of the Obama Administration follows in the footsteps of President Obama, Secretaries of State Hillary Clinton and John Kerry, and United Nations Ambassador Susan Rice in believing the end justifies the means – including lying to the American public in such a manner as to prevent well-reasoned decision-making.  doij

Also known as a continuing misrepresentation, a lie by omission occurs when an important fact is left out in order to foster a misconception. 

Attorney General Loretta Lynch has announced that the government will release only a partial transcript of the Orlando shooter’s 911 calls. What will be removed are the references to Islamic terrorism and the shooter’s motivation in his own words … 

Meet the Press - June 19, 2016

 

LORETTA LYNCH: What we're announcing tomorrow is that the FBI is releasing a partial transcript of the killer's calls with law enforcement, from inside the club. These are the calls with the Orlando PD negotiating team, who he was, where he was... that will be coming out tomorrow and I'll be headed to Orlando on Tuesday.

CHUCK TODD: Including the hostage negotiation part of this?

LORETTA LYNCH: Yes, it will be primarily a partial transcript of his calls with the hostage negotiators.

CHUCK TODD: You say partial, what's being left out?

LORETTA LYNCH: What we're not going to do is further proclaim this man's pledges of allegiance to terrorist groups, and further his propaganda. 

CHUCK TODD: We're not going to hear him talk about those things? 

LORETTA LYNCH: We will hear him talk about some of those things, but we are not going to hear him make his assertions of allegiance and that. It will not be audio, it will be a printed transcript. But it will begin to capture the back and forth between him and the negotiators, we're trying to get as much information about this investigation out as possible. As you know, because the killer is dead, we have a bit more leeway there and we will be producing that information tomorrow. <Source>

Bottom line …

It is time that the progressive socialist democrats stop treating America citizens like children and pre-digesting the news in such a manner as befits the pursuit of their own agenda. Why does it matter that the Orlando shooter was a gay Muslim or a registered democrat who voted for Barack Obama twice or declared his allegiance to a foreign terrorist organization?  Pretty much because it indicates that this “mass shooting” is an aberrational event and does not support the Administration’s attempt to capitalize on this crisis to pursue gun control.

If the truth be known, looking at FBI statistics, would make a case for disarming only minority gang members in the inner cities and leaving the great majority of law-abiding citizens alone. But, it appears that the Obama Administration cannot tell the truth to the American public for fear of looking predatory and foolish.

It is about time that the Obama Department of Justice be held accountable for the ongoing attempts to criminally obstruct justice by slow-walking investigations such as “Fast and Furious,” the “IRS scandal,” “Benghazi,” and the attempt to stack the department with anti-America ideologues who appear to be bending over backwards to provide aid and comfort to our enemies when it comes to Gitmo and other investigations involving terrorists.

We are so screwed when our government believes that telling us that they are lying or have lied bring no accountability to the perpetrators of those acts. It appears that Congress is afraid of acting lest the members be held accountable in their districts by the activists who will target them as being racist.

When will “We the People” demand accountability from our politicians or will we continue accepting corruption and continue sliding towards a French-style revolution in 2050 when all semblance of law and order is merely a cover for political tyranny?

-- steve

MARTIN LUTHER KING WOULD BE SO ASHAMED OF OPRAH 

Posted: 16 Jun 2016 11:49 PM PDT

For the majority of Black progressive socialist democrats, there are few things as revered as Martin Luther King’s “I Have A Dream”  speech and the power of King’s own words …

“I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.”

But here comes Oprah Winfrey who overlooked Obama’s inexperience, ties to radical ministers, ties to domestic terrorists, and ties to communists to vote for Obama because he was black.

Now it appears that Oprah Winfrey will do the same thing by ignoring Hillary Clinton’s flawed character and voting for her because she is a female.

Martin Luther King would be so ashamed that one of the most prominent and accomplished women in America would ignore character for color and ignore substance for sex.    

owhc

Oprah Endorsed Obama Because He's Black, Now She's Endorsing Hillary Because She's Female -- Those are very thoughtful reasons. 

For some people, particularly those in positions of power, politics is skin deep. Literally. 

During his 2008 bid for the presidency, media mogul Oprah Winfrey endorsed a then-relatively unknown Barack Obama. Using her financial network, name recognition and credibility, and above all her far-reaching media platform, it's been said that Oprah may have indeed won Obama the election. 

It seemed odd that a woman who was able to catapult herself from more than meager beginnings to the greatest personal and professional heights because of capitalism, chose to endorse a socialist. But to Oprah, the color of Obama's skin trumped everything. 

Sure, she billed his candidacy as a redemption song for the long-suffering African-American community. And of course, she wanted to help "make history."

Well, she did. And nearly eight years later, the country is less prosperous, less safe, and less free because we elected someone based on the color of his skin, not the content of his character. Clearly, Oprah didn't get the memo (perhaps that's understandable given the bubble her wealth allows her to live in), so now she's endorsing Hillary Clinton. 

Because...she's a woman.

<Source>

Bottom line …

Perhaps Oprah can be forgiven her vote for Barack Obama because he put forth a message of change and hope. But, how can she be forgiven for endorsing and promoting a candidate that is mired in scandal, under investigation by the FBI, and has a pattern and practice of obstruction of justice?

If anything, Oprah sold out her people, her entire audience as well as her community, by endorsing the man who has disadvantaged blacks in every way possible. And now she seeks to repeat history with the endorsement and promotion of Hillary Clinton. Of course, Oprah is so wealthy and insulated from the real world that she is immune from the he effects of any corrupt politician. So as my mother used to say, if she is doing wrong, the sin is on her.

-- steve