SoylentNews

Dear wife brought this to my attention. "You know how they took Kyle's gofundme down? They've got a gofundme for BROOKS! Can you IMAGINE?!?!?" I hemmed and hawed a little bit, and agreed that would be outrageous. Then I did a search . . .

Very first hit, a site I've never heard of before, https://meaww.com/go-fund-me-allows-fundraiser-for-darrell-brooks-days-after-banning-kyle-rittenhouse-campaign

GoFundMe reportedly banned fundraisers for Kyle Rittenhouse from their platform, saying its “terms of service prohibit raising money for the legal defense of an alleged violent crime” before allowing it back recently. But Law Enforcement Today claimed that the crowdfunding platform reportedly briefly allowed the fundraiser for Darrell Brooks Jr, the suspect in the Waukesha Christmas Parade tragedy. The report also stated that the campaign was up till November 23.

However, it seems the crowdfunding platform has now removed the fundraiser because when MEAWW checked the GoFundMe site, we did not find any page urging money for Brooks Jr. Also, MEAWW has reached out to GoFundMe for a comment.

According to the Law Enforcement Today report, the apparent campaign page for Brooks was started by James Norton, who wrote while urging $5 million as a donation, “On November 21st, 2021 our dear friend Darrell Brooks was arrested for allegedly driving his car into a parade, as someone who knows Darrell personally I can tell you that he would NEVER do such a thing and I know he is innocent of what he was charged with.”

So, going on this one news source, I'm going to say that a friend of Brooks started the gofundme, that it stayed up for some hours, maybe even a day, then when people noticed it, it was taken down.

More searches are in order, but first:

I said opportunity is knocking. Here, BLM, Antifa, and privileged progressive white America has the opportunity to disassociate itself, and disavow, an individual who is obviously guilty of truly heinous crimes. Yeah, the justice system has to consider Brooks innocent until he is proven guilty. I'm not the justice system, neither are you, or BLM, or any other concerned or unconcerned entities. I've watched the vidyas, and Brooks proved himself an inhuman monster. Any individual in the world can look at the videos, and watch bodies flying through the air, just because Brooks felt like watching bodies fly.

Opportunity. Is the progressively crazy community capable of distinguishing between black men who are oppressed, and black men who are capable of committing monstrous crimes? I mean, Tamir Rice is so very obviously in the first group. Various individuals in the years since have been equally innocent, while other individuals have been shady characters, whom I just couldn't get behind. In fact, we can probably define a spectrum, ranging from truly innocent, to out of control criminals who must be dealt with harshly. Can we separate the more heinous crimes against black men, from more honest law enforcement actions with unfortunate results?

Here, I would expect a person, such as aristarchus, who claims to be a philosopher, to help us wade through the maze of legitimate and illegitimate actions by law enforcment. Seriously, ari, feel free to jump in and help us distinguish between young black males who would be a threat to any society from young black males who are persecuted and prosecuted unjustly.

And, this is just the sort of thing we need to see from BLM, Antifa, the Democrats, progressives, as well as liberals. Darrell Brooks is most certainly not equal to Ahmaud Arbery, or John Crawford III, or Breonna Taylor, or any number of innocents killed by racially motivated white people and/or law enforcement.

Come on, ari. I challenge. Help me to rank people on this spectrum. Tell us who we should really be demonstrating for, and who we should be demonstrating against. I'm never going to buy that a black man is innocent just because he is black, any more than I'll buy into the white supremacists presumption that a white man is always innocent, always right, in any confrontation with a non-white.

Pentagon announces plans to streamline UFO reports and analysis

The new unified group, called the Airborne Object Identification and Management Synchronization Group (AOIMSG), will standardize the process for reporting UAP incidents, as well as "identifying and reducing gaps in operational and intelligence detection capabilities; collecting and analyzing operation, intelligence, and counterintelligence data; recommending policy, regulatory or statutory changes as appropriate; identifying approaches to prevent or mitigate any risks posed by airborne objects of interest; and other activities as deemed necessary by the Director," Deputy Defense Secretary Kathleen Hicks wrote in a memo.

The newly created AOIMSG, led by a director, will now take over the work of the Navy's UAP Task Force as the Defense Department works to get a better grasp on what's behind the UFO sightings and how much of a threat they could pose to national security. The work of the AOIMSG will be overseen by an executive council.

There is no indication yet what flavor of batshit crazy is responsible here. The city staged their Christmas parade, and a red SUV came flying up behind the parade, intentionally running people over. No casualty count yet, but one witness claims ~30 bodies in one intersection. The SUV continued along the parade route after going through that particular intersection, so 30 may be a conservative number.

Police say they have a "person of interest" in custody, which I presume to mean the driver of the SUV.

There is little in the way of video, and even less in terms of meaningful statements.

https://twitter.com/bill_haus/status/1462575969043206144

https://www.savevideo.xyz/downloads/NorrinR06303580

https://twitter.com/SamKraemerTV/status/1462560504208146438

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EIfJ8TU84bw

https://edition.cnn.com/us/live-news/wisconsin-waukesha-christmas-parade-car-plow/index.html

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EIfJ8TU84bw

Here, we see the SUV running into the marching band mentioned in other places.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4qqEEQNjo00

MediaTek's Pentonic 2000 chipset is here to help deliver the 8K 120Hz TVs of the future

A device based on the 2000 could also add MEMC for 8K to its spec list, as well as Dolby Atmos and Dolby Vision. Finally, it may be able to handle any codec required, as it is the first SoC of its kind to support content in Versatile Video Coding (VVC) H.266. Otherwise, AV1 is also an option.

MEMC is Motion estimation/motion compensation, referring to an upscaling method.

Versatile Video Coding (H.266)
AOMedia Video 1 (AV1)

AV2 Video Codec - Early Performance Evaluation of the Research - OTTVerse

Unrequited rage: The demand for mob justice in the Rittenhouse trial
Jonathan Turley, opinion contributor - 20m ago

The aftermath of the Kyle Rittenhouse verdict is a lesson in unrequited rage. After a jury of 12 citizens in Kenosha, Wis., acquitted Rittenhouse on all charges, politicians and media figures lashed out at the judge, the jury, and the entire legal system.

Like our politics and our media, the legal system has become a vehicle for collective rage; there is no room for doubt or deviation from our predispositions. Yet, in denouncing "vigilante justice," pundits and politicians seem to be advocating for a form of mob justice.

The difference between vigilante and mob justice? Perspective and numbers.

For some, Rittenhouse running down Sheridan Road in Kenosha with his AR-15 is a vigilante. For Rittenhouse, people chasing him with guns and chains is a mob. Neither involves actual justice, which is what juries mete out through the dispassionate application of law and facts.

Most of us - including his defense counsel, following the verdict - were critical of Rittenhouse and his decision to take his AR-15 to a riot. However, the trial revealed key facts that sharply diverged from past media reports. For the first time, the public was not reading facts filtered and framed by the media. In a great demonstration of the value of cameras in courtrooms, the public could reach its own conclusions.

It turned out that Rittenhouse was not an "outsider" but someone with long, close ties to Kenosha. He spent much of that fateful day in Kenosha cleaning graffiti from the walls of the high school and was asked by a business owner to protect his property that night. He did not chase down his victims and shoot one, Joseph Rosenbaum, 36, in the back as Rosenbaum attempted to flee. Instead, he was attacked by all three men he shot, including one who pointed a gun at his head. Rosenbaum, a convicted child molester with a history of mental illness, threatened to kill him and others earlier.

Yet, the "white supremacist" narrative was a "fact too good to check" by the media, which almost uniformly failed to report on facts supporting the claim of self-defense.

Within days of the shootings, then-presidential candidate Joe Biden referenced Rittenhouse as a "white supremacist" despite no evidence supporting that widely repeated claim.

Likewise, when the judge ruled on motions for Rittenhouse, he was declared a racist. When the jurors ruled for Rittenhouse, they - including a black juror - were declared to be racists, too. When Rittenhouse was allowed to go free, the entire legal system was denounced as racist.

Even after grudgingly stating that we "must abide" by the verdict, President Biden added that the verdict left "many Americans feeling angry and concerned, myself included."

Other leaders went further. New York Major Bill de Blasio called the verdict "disgusting" and a victory for "violent extremism from within our own nation." Former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo denounced the verdict as "a stain on the soul of America" and an example of "supremacist vigilantism." (Cuomo, soon to be a criminal defendant in his own trial, may want to consider how mob justice could play out in his case.) Declared Rep. Cori Bush (D-Mo.): "The judge. The jury. The defendant. It's white supremacy in action. This system isn't built to hold white supremacists accountable. It's why Black and brown folks are brutalized and put in cages while white supremacist murderers walk free."

For Bush and others, it is just that simple: Jurors selected at random were racists because they failed to convict a white defendant who shot three white men.

MSNBC legal analyst and Georgetown law professor Paul Butler - who previously described the trial as "white supremacy on steroids" - said the verdict is a message that "vigilante justice prevailed." MSNBC posted an opinion blog headlined: "Kyle Rittenhouse Trial Was Designed To Protect White Conservatives Who Kill."

Some were not satisfied to simply denounce the jury or judge as racists. Former NFL quarterback Colin Kaepernick declared that this was the final proof of a "system built on white supremacy" that "further validates the need to abolish our current system." What appeared infuriating to Kaepernick about Kenosha was the absence of mob justice, not a victory of vigilante justice: Rittenhouse personified all of our social ills and had to be punished, sentenced to life in prison on the basis of popular opinion.

That, of course, would transcend evidence or law. It would be a system based on demand, not deliberation - the very definition of mob justice.

What is most concerning is the involvement of many in the media in this movement. We live in the age of "advocacy journalism," in which figures like former New York Times reporter Nikole Hannah-Jones are lionized for declaring that "all journalism is advocacy." Stanford journalism professor Ted Glasser has insisted that journalism must "free itself from this notion of objectivity to develop a sense of social justice."

For legal analysts, this often means "freeing" ourselves not just from objectivity but from the criminal code. Indeed, after the jury failed to convict as demanded, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler called for the Justice Department to investigate the "miscarriage of justice."

In this case, the legal question under Wisconsin law was neither complex nor confusing: "a person is privileged to threaten or intentionally use force against another for the purpose of preventing or terminating what the person reasonably believes to be an unlawful interference with his or her person by such other person." Lethal force is allowed if "the actor reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself."

Each use of force by Rittenhouse was preceded by attacks by at least four men. The jury simply had a reasonable doubt that Rittenhouse acted without a reasonable belief that he faced great bodily harm.

Not surprisingly, those facts often were not given as the context for legal analysis. Instead, more amenable hypotheticals were trotted out. After the verdict, MSNBC legal analyst Joyce Vance explained that the verdict was "something akin" to "saying if you go into a bank and rob it and people are trying to apprehend you, you can then shoot your way out and claim self-defense." Except that Rittenhouse was not robbing a bank when he was attacked; he was not doing anything illegal in guarding a business at the owner's request, or walking down the street. The jury decided that the men he shot were not "apprehending" him but, instead, were attacking him without provocation.

The facts of the case are now as irrelevant as the verdict, however, because we are a nation addicted to rage - and rage does not allow for doubt. In the minds of some, Rittenhouse was a vigilante, so his acquittal was vigilante justice. However, swapping mob justice for vigilante justice lacks the same critical element: justice.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/unrequited-rage-the-demand-for-mob-justice-in-the-rittenhouse-trial/ar-AAQWiPY

I'm watching live video at the moment. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F3EyP19E4DY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XzfzOKTcqAU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MdETmfiV74w https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JMagJfsfwVY

I'll have more to say as more news is released.

Let's be clear. All charges, not guilty. When you're attacked by criminals, you are permitted to defend yourself, using deadly force if necessary.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=edjqHkW-rYk

The reporter described an apparent brawl in the courthouse yard. The camera wasn't in position to see anything, but several people on the ground, grappling, and cops responding - oops, lost the feed!

Joe Biden has found a way to guarantee positive news stories from legacy media reporters. He wants to help pay their salaries, despite the ethical questions this would raise.

Didn't GWB do almost the same thing, when he paid some individual journalists hundreds of thousands to write favorably? But, here, we have a president who is buying off entire companies, if not the entire industry!

You would assume Gannett’s highly touted code of ethics would prohibit their taking handouts from the government. Specifically, their promises to:

        Be vigilant watchdogs of government and institutions that affect the public.
        Remain free of outside interests, investments or business relationships that may
        compromise the credibility of our news report.
        Avoid potential conflicts of interest and eliminate inappropriate influence on content.
        Remain free of improper obligations to news sources, newsmakers and advertisers.

While these are lofty goals, having met the folks who run the company, I know full well they would sell their own children to receive $127.5 million in savings over the next five years.

http://www.thegunmag.com/biden-wants-to-bribe-legacy-media-in-exchange-for-positive-news-coverage/
https://americangunalliance.com/2021/11/17/collusion-biden-wants-to-ensure-positive-coverage-by-paying-mainstream-media-journalists/
https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/collusion-biden-wants-to-ensure-positive-coverage-by-paying-mainstream-media-journalists/

I guess when your approval ratings are around 40% and falling, you've got to do something, right? Gotta head off the recall election, right? Oh, wait - no recall for presidents, it's the 25th Amendment he's really worried about!

Maybe the journalism industry needs yet another CoC - pronounced just like it looks, LOL!

https://nypost.com/2021/11/14/bidens-approval-rating-hits-new-low-poll/

Not even Democrats like Olde Sleepy - WTF did you vote for him?

Raspberry Pi 400 Now Available With Japanese Keyboard

To coincide with its first anniversary, the Raspberry Pi 400 is now available with a Japanese keyboard layout.

[...] The Japanese layout is a big deal for what’s essentially a computer inside a keyboard, and the new Japanese keycaps join ten others, from US and UK to Portuguese and Danish,

The JIS keyboard layout keeps the roman letters alongside the hiragana. Special language input keys switch between input methods - note the extra keys alongside the space bar and below Esc on the new Pi 400 keyboard - and to fit Roman characters into the squares used by typical Japanese characters in order to preserve the grid-like look of a block of text.

Maybe it would be better if RPT manufactured the base and keyboard separately and sold them to distributors? Or allowed third-parties to make the keyboard.

Bullseye – the new version of Raspberry Pi OS

One of the changes which was prompted by the move to GTK+3 is that we are using a new window manager, called mutter, instead of the openbox window manager used in previous releases.

[...] One drawback of mutter is that, due to needing to draw the entire screen to memory before it can display it, it is quite demanding in terms of RAM, and can only run properly on a Raspberry Pi with 2GB or more. As a result, on Raspberry Pis with less than 2GB, the older openbox window manager is still used instead. (This does mean, unfortunately, that on those systems, tooltips will now have square corners. Which is another answer to the question, “so why didn’t you move to GTK+3 years ago…?”)

[...] With a major upgrade, we recommend downloading a new image, reinstalling any applications, and moving your data across from your current image.

Raspberry Pi OS Updated For Debian 11 Bullseye, Desktop Transitions To GTK3+Mutter

Bullseye bonus: 1.8GHz Raspberry Pi 4

Users with recent Raspberry Pi 4 devices will find that their default turbo-mode clock has increased from 1.5GHz to the 1.8GHz used on Raspberry Pi 400. “Recent” in this case means any 8GB Raspberry Pi 4, or a 2GB or 4GB board with the extra components circled in the image below. This is the dedicated switch-mode power supply (“switcher”) for the SoC core voltage rail, and was introduced when we shuffled the allocation of switchers to rails to support 8GB.

New Raspberry Pi OS Includes Hidden Speed Boost and 64-Bit Option

The new Raspberry Pi OS is still based upon a 32-bit release, but it appears that there is also a 64-bit release, lurking in the shadows and spotted by Geerling. Whether this is still a beta or ready for release remains uncertain.

https://apnews.com/hub/kyle-rittenhouse

For those who want to follow the Rittenhouse trial, the AP link is about as good as any. Better to go to Youtube, and search for "LIVE: Rittenhouse Trial". This link worked on Fri, Nov. 5, now it's just a loop of 3 hours and 42 minutes, hitting most of the high points. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rNEzfHf7T5A

So far, the prosecution has had it's turn. I can almost believe that the prosecution is working to ensure that Kyle is found not guilty. They introduced, or attempted to introduce, "evidence" that Rosenbaum and Huber were "heroes". In fact, the lead prosecutor made a blunt statement that 'The State' considers them to be heroes.

Turns out, Rosenbaum is a mental patient, who had been released from a mental hospital the day before the riot, having been treated after a suicide attempt. Rosenbaum was on probation, and under orders to have no contact with his former girl friend, or to be anywhere near her apartment. Both of which the lawless lawbreaker chose to ignore. Evidence has been presented that Rosenbaum told Rittenhouse and company, "If I catch one of you alone, I'm going to kill you!" That along with the oft repeated "Shoot me nigga! Shoot me nigga!" The prosecution has established that Rosebaum was a hyper violent mental case who was suicidal, and promised to attack Rittenhouse if caught alone.

Then, there's Huber, who, among other things, was arrested after his family called him. Testimony shows that Huber held a knife to his brother's belly, and promised that he would "gut you like a pig". Also stuck a knife into his brother's ear, and threatened to kill the brother if brother didn't clean his room to Anthony Huber's satisfaction. Another threat to burn down the family home was taken seriously by his family, as well as law enforcement. Official charges against Anthony Huber include strangulation and false imprisonment, both of which he was convicted of.

The prosecution's case is, quite simply, falling apart.

The prosecution has rested it's case, and the defense gets it's turn now. Unlike The Trial, the hero actually gets to present evidence on his behalf, presented by competent legal advisers. The Defense's opening statement frames all evidence to date from a rational point of view.

A bunch of criminals went to Kenosha, intent on destruction and mayhem. These lawless individuals created the circumstances in which a nutcase would attack an innocent young man, attempting to kill him. When the suicidal fool grabbed hold of Rittenhouse' rifle, he sealed his fate, an obvious suicide by attack on an armed man.

I need to make a run to the grocery store, for more popcorn. These next couple of days should be really entertaining. It's possible that we'll learn more about that third criminal, Grosskreutz, who has been handled with kid's gloves by law enforcement. This link, http://www.kenoshacountyeye.com/gaige.pdf represents just one city's record of Grosskreutz offenses. Slapping Granny around? FFS, that's low. Bad enough to slap back at your own mother, beating up Granny ain't cool even among the criminal element! That doesn't include any expunged complaints like this (and possibly more) http://www.kenoshacountyeye.com/gaigeburgcomp.pdf

The cops didn't even charge Grosskreutz with felon in possession of a deadly weapon, despite all the video evidence of him assaulting Rissenhouse with a firearm!

To summarize, either The State is incompetent, or The State has misrepresented it's intent in this trial.

Congress pressures Biden to defend Taiwan

China’s military provocations toward Taiwan and President Joe Biden’s mixed messages are igniting a debate on Capitol Hill over whether to adopt a more aggressive official posture — including the possibility of preemptively authorizing Biden to use military force if Beijing invades the island nation.

The conversations, coupled with the White House’s efforts to walk back some of Biden’s apparent slips of the tongue, are fueling bipartisan efforts to ditch “strategic ambiguity,” the policy that has governed the U.S. posture toward the conflict for more than four decades. The strategic ambiguity doctrine, enshrined in the 1979 Taiwan Relations Act, stipulates that the U.S. remains purposely noncommittal about whether it would defend Taiwan from an attack or invasion by China.

But a push to proactively send Biden a war authorization could subvert ongoing efforts by Congress and the Biden administration to restrict presidential war powers. And undermining the status quo on Taiwan, both parties worry, could be seen by Beijing as a provocation, rather than a deterrent.

How War With China Begins

President Xi Jinping declared in July that those who get in the way of China’s ascent will have their “heads bashed bloody against a Great Wall of steel.” The People’s Liberation Army Navy is churning out ships at a rate not seen since World War II, as Beijing issues threats against Taiwan and other neighbors. Top Pentagon officials have warned that China could start a military conflict in the Taiwan Strait or other geopolitical hot spots sometime this decade.

Analysts and officials in Washington are fretting over worsening tensions between the United States and China and the risks to the world of two superpowers once again clashing rather than cooperating. President Joe Biden has said that America “is not seeking a new cold war.” But that is the wrong way to look at U.S.-China relations. A cold war with Beijing is already under way. The right question, instead, is whether America can deter China from initiating a hot one.