Sponsored

Sunday 2 June 2019

Facebook is taking action against every individual account | Your Account can be next Target.

The term “fake news” has been tossed around by so many different sources that it’s almost become laughable, if not a downright badge of honor. It’s basically become the go-to insult for any news you don’t like, or simply refuse to agree with.
Facebook has had more than its fair share of issues with malicious, harmful content, as well as allegations that it knowingly let foreign accounts manipulate its visibility algorithms in order to influence the last presidential election. Now, news has come out that Facebook has been deleting accounts that contain pro-Palestine, anti-Israel posts.
Facebook Complies With Orders To Shut Anti-Israel Accounts. Facebook’s actions believed to be the result of demands from Israeli government.
Government demands
According to Al-Jazeera, Facebook has conceded to demands from Israel’s government to shut down accounts that “incite” unrest in the region. Many of the accounts that have been closed belong to Palestinian news sources.
“Last week, four editors from the Shehab News Agency, which has more than 6.3 million likes on Facebook, and three executives from the Quds News Network, with about 5.1 million likes, reported they could not access their personal accounts.  Both agencies cover daily news in the occupied Palestinian territories. Editors at the Gaza-based Shehab News agency say that the move was hardly surprising. This is the fourth time in a year that they have been censored by the social network, says Rimah Mubarak, director of Shehab news agency.”
Accounts suspended
The Intercept links the account closures to a meeting last year between Facebook’s top executives and a minister of the Israeli government. Allegedly, the social media platform was told either close the accounts or Israel will pass laws that penalize platforms with heavy fines for allowing disparaging posts to stay up. So far, the New York Times has reported that as many as 96% of the accounts flagged by the government have been suspended.
For its part, Facebook has stated that it has zero tolerance for terrorist activity, including posts that threaten or incite violence.

If You Sleep Naked Tonight, Here’s The Surprising Effect It’ll Have on Your Body


Sleeping is one of the most important activities for our health. Lack of sleep can be detrimental to the health. However, did you know that sleeping naked provides even more benefits than sleeping with clothes? Less than 10% of Americans sleep naked. Sleeping naked has some amazing health benefits, physically and psychologically.
Benefits of Sleeping Naked
Improves Sleep
People who sleep naked have better sleep than the ones who sleep with clothes. The body temperature naturally declines and if your ear clothes, it disrupts that cycle. As a result, you toss and turn, and have irregular sleeping patterns. On the other hand, sleeping naked will promote the sleep quality and you will sleep like a baby.
Prevents Bacteria
Sleeping naked will prevent the growth of yeast and bacteria. Moreover, it will dry out the spots of perspiration and keep the body comfortable.
Promotes Weight Loss
If you sleep naked, your cortisol levels decrease, you sleep better, and that promotes the weight loss process. If you want to shed some pounds, you have the solution.
Feeling More Frisky
The skin to skin contact will increase the bonding hormones such as oxytocin and make you more sensitized to your partner’s touch. Moreover, it will strengthen the feelings of trust, connectivity, and lower your heart rate.
Boosts the Energy
Having a good night’s sleep will increase your energy levels, which will last throughout the whole day.
Reduces Pain
Sleeping naked will stimulate circulation and reduce the pain, especially in the abdominal area. You will feel comfortable and without pain, so you can sleep tighter.
Improves the Skin’s Repair Processes

If you sleep naked, the skin will repair itself more easily, the sebaceous glands will work at full capacity, and your skin will absorb nutrients more quickly. As a result, your body’s metabolic rate will improve.

Monday 26 February 2018

The extraordinary weakness of President Trump | Worst president in History |

President Trump got away with an awful lot when he was only a businessman, and I've long contended that it was possible because people had limited knowledge about him. Let's say you were a small business owner making something like curtains, and Trump came to you with a huge order for a new hotel or casino he was building. What great news! You've seen him on TV, and you knew what a big shot he was. What you probably didn't know was that he had a history of stiffing small business owners, taking their goods and services and then refusing to pay them. By the time you filled his order and couldn't get paid, it was too late.
When Trump ran for and then became president, he didn't change his approach to pretty much anything. But there's a big difference between now and his former life: When you're president, everyone sees what you do. All of it. And because of that knowledge, something important is happening: Fewer and fewer people are afraid of him.
Consider this comical development in Trump's ongoing war with the people who work for him, or used to. Earlier this week, excerpts from a new book by Michael Wolff were released in the media, in which we learned that former White House chief strategist Stephen Bannon had lots of unflattering things to say about people in Trump's orbit, including members of the president's family. Other people Wolff interviewed paint a picture that we've heard many times before, of a staff struggling and failing to manage an impulsive, infantile president (dealing with Trump, Wolff quotes former deputy chief of staff Katie Walsh saying, was "like trying to figure out what a child wants").
And how did Trump respond, apart from releasing an angry statement about what a jerk Bannon is? He had his lawyer send a letter to Wolff's publisher demanding that it "immediately cease and desist from any further publication, release, or dissemination of the book," among other things. "Legal action is imminent," the lawyer warned, perhaps using a scary voice.
But here's the thing: Nobody believes him. Put aside how horrifying it is that the president of the United States wants to stop publication of a book because it makes him look bad. We all know that Trump isn't suing anybody, not only because of how damaging such a lawsuit would be for him (ask a lawyer friend what "discovery" is about), but more importantly because we've seen him make these empty threats before. In October 2016, after The New York Times published an article in which multiple women alleged that Trump had committed various forms of sexual assault against them, Trump had his lawyer threaten to sue the newspaper if it didn't immediately issue a retraction and apology. The Times invited him to go right ahead and sue, but the lawsuit never materialized.
Trump also threatened to sue all the women making the accusations: "All of these liars will be sued after the election is over," he said. He never sued them either. So now, when he says he's going to sue someone, everyone knows it's just bluster.
If you had a run-in with Trump 10 years ago and he said he was going to sue you, you might have been frightened by what you perceived as his strength. But today, what stands out is Trump's weakness. He doesn't have the power to determine who wins elections; just look at what happened in Alabama, where his endorsed candidate lost the primary in a special Senate election, then his second endorsed candidate lost the general election. He can (and does) call people out on Twitter, but that's more likely to help your career than hurt it. Like most everyone in the media, I myself am desperately hoping to be included in "THE MOST DISHONEST & CORRUPT MEDIA AWARDS OF THE YEAR," which Trump says he'll be handing out next Monday (and yes, that's what the most powerful man on Earth spends his time thinking about).
And while there are certainly people in the government whose jobs depend on staying in his good graces, before long many Republicans are going to realize that in the long run it may be much better to be seen as an enemy of Trump than his friend.
That will be particularly true when it comes to politicians. With his approval rating currently in the 30s, saying "I'm a loyal soldier for Trump" may not be to your political advantage, even in some conservative districts. And in competitive districts — of which there will be many more in this year's midterm elections than there usually are — Republican candidates will be eager to distance themselves from him.
That of course will infuriate Trump, and you can bet more than a few vulnerable Republican candidates will be hoping for an angry tweet sent their way that they can use to call attention to their independence. There's never been a president who had a more burning need for ceaseless lickspittlery from anyone and everyone, and when Trump doesn't get it, he just gets more upset.
Here he is, having achieved the grandest ambition anyone could hope for, in the most important job in the world, and he only seems to be getting smaller. It's going to be an awfully long year for him.

UN outrage at Syrian suffering: ‘We can no longer stay silent’

UN’s Panos Moumtzis calls for ceasefire to ease ‘dramatic deterioration’
The scale of suffering across Syria has reached unprecedented levels, with access to aid blocked in three major population centres, growing displacement and more than 13 million people in need across the country, the UN has said.
The organisation called on Tuesday for a one-month ceasefire to ease what it described as an “extreme situation” that “we haven’t seen before” at any point during the war, which is soon to enter its eighth year. The conflict has been marked by a mass exodus of Syrian citizens, sieges, starvation and a death toll that surpassed 500,000 people in 2016.
The UN’s assistant secretary general and regional humanitarian coordinator for Syria, Panos Moumtzis, said the organisation had been almost powerless to respond to a “dramatic deterioration in the humanitarian situation” over the past two months in particular, when access to people in opposition areas had been blocked by Syrian government officials.
The siege had been most acute in East Ghouta on the outskirts of Damascus, where 400,000 people – 94% of all those under regime blockade – have not received deliveries of food, water or medicine since late November. Ghouta, an opposition stronghold throughout the conflict, has been heavily bombed by Russian and Syrian jets for the past month, as both allies attempt to press home their recent gains elsewhere.
Up to 88 civilians were killed by airstrikes on Monday and Tuesday alone, local medics and activists said, as a campaign to break resolve in remaining opposition areas continued unabated.
Activists and doctors said those figures had risen as rescue workers uncovered more civilians buried under the rubble. In eastern Ghouta alone, activists said the death toll had risen to 78 people on Tuesday.
“Half of yesterday’s dead were women and children,” said one doctor in eastern Ghouta.
Elsewhere, airstrikes continued to hammer Idlib province in northern Syria, where more than 2 million people, at least half of them displaced from other parts of the country, are hemmed in near the Turkish border. Russian jets are attacking them from above while Iranian-led ground forces squeeze them from the south.
The city of Afrin in northern Idlib was attacked last month by the Turkish military and an Arab proxy force, adding a new layer of complexity to a war in which alliances have shifted and internal dynamics have splintered attempts to provide a united opposition front against the Assad regime. All the while, international powers have increasingly tried to shape the outcome of the war in their own interests, while mounting humanitarian needs across the province have routinely gone unmet.
At least 300,000 people have been displaced in Idlib since mid-December, when the most recent regime push on the area began. Almost half the area’s current population have been displaced from elsewhere in Syria; some were relocated as part of what Syrian officials call locally negotiated ceasefires, but which have nearly always followed long, crippling blockades.
Idlib also contains large numbers of jihadist fighters who control much of the province. Jihadist and conservative Islamist groups have besieged two Shia towns near Aleppo for much of the past three years. Their presence has been used by Syrian and Russian officials to claim that any genuine anti-Assad opposition was fleeting and has long been subsumed by a global jihadist agenda.
“They have stuck to this line for the past five years,” said Manaf Khaled, a businessman from the town of Zabadani, near Damascus, who was relocated to Idlib last September. “When we came here, it was the first time we saw them. Now they want to tell the world that we are all like them. It is a dangerous trap and people must know this.”
The UN said that in 2017 only 27% of its requests for access to opposition areas were granted by the Syrian government. As the military offensives have continued in Ghouta and Idlib, not a single request has been granted so far this year. Idlib was supposed to be a de-escalation zone, where hostilities were slowed or stopped to pave the way for negotiations.
“There is a misperception that the de-escalation areas have resulted in peace and stability. If anything, these have been serious escalation areas,” said Moumtzis, who renewed a call for a political response to the crisis. “We feel really outraged. Dramatic developments have been building up and it has reached a point where we can no longer stay silent. These are multiple fires we have to respond to, with a dramatic deterioration in many places.”
Moumtzis said a perception that the Syrian war was winding down had probably reduced impetus towards a political solution to the crisis, which had remained elusive despite three separate peace processes, in Geneva, Astana and most recently the Russian town of Sochi. The UN-backed Geneva process is largely moribund, having achieved little in more than a dozen meetings. Russia’s attempts to take the lead by holding the Sochi summit also ended in failure, with an ascendant Syrian regime, heavily backed by Iran and Russia, not willing to make concessions while conditions on the battlefield remain in its favour.
Alaa al-Ahmad, 27, from East Ghouta, said: “Even throughout Sochi the regime committed massacres; even as we speak they’re committing massive crimes. We are surprised that another conference is being set for next month. Can’t they see it is being built upon ours and our children’s blood?”

The World’s Silence on Syria Is a Silence of Hypocrites

There is an old Syrian proverb: “A little spark can kindle a great fire.”
On Jan. 26, 2011, that is exactly what happened in Damascus when Hasan Ali Akleh set himself on fire in an act of self-immolation similar to what Mohamed Bouazizi did in Tunis on Dec. 17, 2010. In both cases, the result was the same: revolution.
Kindled by the hopes and dreams of an entire region, a spark caught fire in Syria that day — and it spread like wildfire. It was fueled by the past transgressions of that country’s brutal leadership and now, despite nearly three years of murder, Bashar al-Assad has yet to contain that flame. For he has failed to understand that every Syrian father, mother and child he kills is fuel for the revolution’s persistence. After nearly five decades of Ba’ath Party rule, the idea that the country is not his — that the government exists to serve the people, rather than the other way around — means nothing to Assad. And so the revolution rages on.
Yet even the most stubborn protestors must succumb to force eventually. Even the loudest rally is no match for bullets. Two years ago, when I watched the videos of peaceful crowds being mowed down by Syrian soldiers and government thugs, my heart sank. Without help, I knew, these people were destined to fail; the flawed doctrine of “might makes right” would prevail. And though much of the world claimed to champion freedom and therefore to empathize with these activists at a time when their sole demand was democracy, the international community then as now met the protestors’ demands with little more than empty actions and silence.
It was a silence of hypocrites.
This shameful dithering has had two horrible consequences: First, Assad now believes — rightly so — that he can commit atrocities without facing consequences. Lacking a moral compass, he has little reason to stay his hand; we witnessed this when he used chemical weapons of the worst kind against his own people. Second, an opposition that began as a peaceful movement has become radicalized and infiltrated by elements that are nearly as loathsome as the Assad regime, if not more loathsome. If the West had spoken in a meaningful way sooner, if it had taken strong action from the beginning, this development could have been averted. Yet because we dithered and succumbed to the selfish demands of China and Russia, the rebels of today are almost as scary as the regime. A fight one used to be able to characterize with a straight-face as something approximating good versus evil has transformed into a situation where the moral lines are thoroughly blurred.
Take a moment to consider the situation’s gravity. When all this started three years ago, people were dying for the simple reason that they yearned for democracy, yet the West — despite intervening in Libya on behalf of armed rebels at a time when fewer had died — did little but watch as Assad murdered unarmed protestors. How can we call ourselves champions of democracy when we did nothing?
Despite the increased radicalization of the rebels, some type of meaningful action could save lives, and as such I still believe that strong action on the side of the rebels is warranted. The Syrian uprising is now a fire, a flame, but unless the rebels receive a boost from the world now it could inevitably dwindle to just a flicker. This dwindling, when and if it happens, will entail massive amounts of bloodshed. We need only remember the tragedy that occurred during the Hama protests in 1982, when Bashar’s father Hafez used tanks and aircraft to slaughter 20,000 of his own people. If the West remains silent, who knows how high the death toll — which has surpassed 100,000 — could climb? If Assad believes he faces no consequences for his actions, nothing will stop him. The world must act soon if it is to stave off another Hama.
Yes, we have interests in Syria; yes, those interests could be helped or harmed by intervening. But simple humanity calls on us to do something. We don’t even need to send in missiles; no, sending words would do. But the words we send must be much more potent than what has already been said; we — as humans — must demand rights for the Syrian people, must demand that Iran cease its intervention, and must demand that Assad step down. We must set firm limits on the types of conduct either side can engage in, and when one side breaches that conduct—for instance, when one side murders hundreds of civilians with chemical weapons — there must be concrete consequences. Only then can we bolster a people who have been treaded on for so long. Only then can we bring our actions in line with our rhetoric.
The Syrian rebels are a ragtag group demanding freedom from oppression. Their situation is not unlike that of the American rebels of the eighteenth century — poorly equipped citizens fighting for freedom from a vastly more powerful force that refuses to represent them. Yet even our ancestors had help in attaining liberty.
All that Syrians are asking of us now is to know we care — to know that the world cares. Even if democracy wins out in Syria, I fear that later our inaction will bear heavily on the minds of those who have shed blood to attain liberty. As Dr. King said, “In the end, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends.” True, not all Syrians consider us friends, but Assad has never been our friend. And now we have this one chance to show the people who could replace him that our defining ideology — freedom — is not only an ideal but a reality, too — and a reality that extends to all people, regardless of race or religion.
Eventually, Assad or his sons must renounce power; history teaches that no repressive regime lasts forever. But how long until this family falls? How long until “might makes right” is replaced by morality, until the pen and law and human decency really do triumph over the sword? How much longer can the world stand by and do nothing while young, decent people are tortured, their bodies mangled beyond recognition?
Silence is murder. As of today, the entire world is silent. By sheer complacency alone, the world has allied with a murderer, and in doing so it has transformed what started out as a group of peaceful protesters into something that is much more troublesome. It is the Syrian rebels versus the world.
They don’t stand a chance.
This post was modified from an older column, found here .

Why World is Silent on Syrian War?

The word tragic has often been used to describe the civil war in Syria, but it is a pale description of the raging madness on the ground. The bloodletting and massive destruction that has swept the nation is not a mere tragic event; the magnitude of the destruction and loss of lives is catastrophic by any measure unseen since the horror of World War II. The world is largely watching with apathy, and those with unique interests in the conflict play politics with the lives of hundreds of thousands of Syrians who died in vain as there is no salvation in death while unspeakable anguish and pain still awaits the living.
Just imagine the scope of the catastrophe that has been inflicted on a country and people by a vicious dictator who is determined to stay in power even at the expense of subjecting his country to wholesale destruction:
When 250,000 men, women and children are slaughtered and four million people become refugees languishing in camps, this is a catastrophe;
When more than seven million are internally displaced, 14 million are in need of humanitarian assistance, tens of thousands of people are prevented from fleeing and unable to receive international aid, and half the country is in ruin, this is a catastrophe;
And the most catastrophic of all is when a whole generation of young Syrians is lost as it bears long-term disastrous consequences from which the Syrian people will suffer for decades to come.
Sadly, the Obama administration’s assistance to spare the lives of tens of thousands of innocent civilians has been lukewarm at best. The Arab states, though providing some assistance to the Syrian rebels, remain unwilling to place ground troops which has and continues to be essential to defeating ISIS.
Russia and Iran stood by their ruthless ally, Assad, and spared no effort to provide him with the military, financial, and logistic guidance he needs to continue to mow down his people with his killing machine. Their political and strategic interests in Syria trump the welfare of the country, and they will do anything to protect their national interests and shape the country’s future to fit their needs.
While the US and some of its allies are busy fighting ISIS from the air, they left Assad free to drop barrel bombs, killing indiscriminately thousands of people each month and obliterating whole neighborhoods with near impunity.
Now, however, that Assad has admitted he is losing ground and lacks sufficient number of troops to fight the rebels on all fronts, and Iran and Russia fear that the rise of ISIS could divest them of their influence in Syria, they have all begun to search for a political solution:
Out of desperation, Assad dispatched his foreign minister Walid Moallem to explore a new opening for peace talks with the Syrian rebels to be arranged by Oman;
Iran has presented a peace plan personally conveyed by Iran’s Foreign Minister Mohammad Zarif to Assad that includes a ceasefire and a power-sharing government with Assad remaining in power, at least for now;
And Russia has invited representatives of the Syrian rebels and the Assad government to visit Moscow for peace talks.
While these initiatives look compelling on the surface, none will lead to a solution unless Washington, Tehran, and Moscow coordinate a joint effort to end the war in Syria, which is now made more likely in the wake of the Iran nuclear deal.
This does not suggest that major difficulties no longer exist. The Arab Sunni states have no serious dialogue with Assad’s main patrons, Iran and Russia, and any deal that would be acceptable to these two countries is not likely to be satisfactory to the Sunni states, especially Saudi Arabia and Egypt.
While the US conducted its first drone strike into northern Syria from bases in Turkey by targeting ISIS alone, the US has become a de facto ally of Assad, giving him no reason to stop ravaging the country.
Though Turkey has agreed with the Obama administration to permit US strikes on ISIS targets from Turkish air bases, Ankara is exploiting the new arrangement to strike the Kurds in Syria. Turkey’s objective is not only to weaken the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) but also to impede the Syrian Kurds from consolidating their plans to establish an autonomous entity, which could encourage the Turkish Kurds to follow.
Ironically, notwithstanding the stark differences between the main players and their long and short-term objectives in Syria, their common interest to defeat ISIS provides an opportunity for all the countries involved to collectively work for a political solution to Syria’s civil war.
Moreover, being that violent extremism and political upheaval is sweeping the Middle East and large swathes of Syrian and Iraqi territory remains under ISIS’ control, this provides further impetus to try to end the conflict in Syria before the country disintegrates all together.
In addition, given that conditions on the ground have changed and Assad is becoming increasingly dispensable, Iran and Russia might well be more in tune, at this juncture, to find a political solution that would exclude Assad.
That said, any political solution must be anchored on the establishment of a new transitional government led by representatives of the Sunni majority with proportional representation of all other ethnic and religious factions, including the Alawites.
The US and all other parties concerned about the future stability of Syria should not make the same mistakes they made in Egypt and Libya by prematurely pushing for early elections and writing a new constitution. The transitional government in Syria should remain in place for at least five years while focusing on rebuilding the country and maintaining internal security.
In the interim, political parties will have the time to organize and develop a political agenda with which the public can become familiar before elections are held and the public has had the time to heal and return to some normalcy.
To demonstrate their good intentions, Russia and Iran ought to warn Assad that he must immediately cease and desist from dropping barrel bombs. If he refuses, the US should be prepared to strike Syrian military installations to stop Assad from raining barrel bombs, with or without the consent of Iran and Russia.
None of the interested parties can have it all. The question is, will they muster the moral courage and find a solution to spare what is left of Syria from a catastrophe the world has been watching for nearly five years with deafening silence?

Sridevi: India mourns Bollywood superstar dead at 54 | Some Memories |

Media captionSridevi "paved way for other women in Bollywood"
Tributes have been pouring in for superstar Bollywood actress Sridevi Kapoor, who has died aged 54.
The actress, known simply as Sridevi, died of a heart attack on Saturday while at a family wedding in Dubai.
Over five decades, she featured in almost 300 films, including classics Mr India, Chandni, ChaalBaaz and Sadma.
She was considered one of the very few Indian female superstars capable of huge box office success without the support of a male hero.
Top Bollywood figures, sporting giants and leading politicians reacted with shock, and Prime Minister Narendra Modi said he was "saddened" by her death.
Crowds gathered outside Sridevi's home in Mumbai as news emerged.
A spokesperson for Sridevi's husband, who is the producer Boney Kapoor, told the Indian news agency Asian News International that her body would be flown from Dubai to Mumbai on Monday.
Obituary: From Bollywood actress to Indian icon
What has the reaction been to Sridevi's death?
Actress Priyanka Chopra tweeted: "I have no words. Condolences to everyone who loved #Sridevi. A dark day. RIP"
"The world has lost a very talented person who left behind a huge legacy in film," said another big Bollywood name, Madhuri Dixit
Leading actor Akshay Kumar tweeted: "A dream for many, had the good fortune of sharing screen space with her long ago and witnessed her continued grace over the years"
Cricket great Sachin Tendulkar said: "We all grew up watching her and suddenly to hear that she is no longer with us is hard to digest"
Indian President Ram Nath Kovind said her death had left millions of fans heartbroken
Media caption"We miss you, Sridevi": Fans pay tribute to the Bollywood superstar
Why was she such a huge box office draw?
Sridevi worked in films in the Tamil, Telugu, Malayalam, Kannada and Hindi languages.
Her acting career began at the age of four and by 13 she was cast in the adult role of a complicated woman avenging her lover's death.
Sridevi debuted as a lead actress in a Bollywood film in 1978, soon becoming one of India's biggest film stars.
The actress decided to take a break from the film industry after the release of Judaai in 1997.
She made a comeback in 2012, starring in English Vinglish.
In 2013, the Indian government awarded her the Padma Shri - the fourth highest civilian honour.
How did she die?
The actress was in the United Arab Emirates to attend the wedding of her nephew, Mohit Marwah.
Her husband and daughter, Khushi, were with her when she passed away on Saturday, reports say.
Her brother-in-law, Sanjay Kapoor, said it had happened at about 23:00 local time (19:00 GMT), according to news site The Indian Express.
He did not provide any further details.