It’s happened before when Canadian government overturned the CRTC’s decision and allowed Globalive to enter the Canadian cellphone market, and it looks like Ottawa is about to again weigh in and reverse an even more controversial ruling by the regulatory agency. As confirmed by Industry Minister Tony Clement on Twitter, the government plans to reverse the recent CRTC decision that effectively imposed usage-based internet billing if the agency doesn’t back down and “go back to the drawing board.” Citing a senior government official, The Toronto Star further reports that the reversal could come as early as next week. As any Canadians reading this may well be aware, the issue of usage-based internet billing has been simmering for some time, but it reached a tipping point with the CRTC’s decision last week that affected smaller internet service providers who rely on the major telecom companies’ networks. Under the new ruling, those companies would be have been faced with increased costs that would drastically limit the amount of bandwidth they’re able to offer to customers — one such ISP, Teksavvy, had in fact already sent out notices to customers informing them that their current 200GB bandwidth cap would be dropping to just 25GB on March 1st, with any additional data use to be charged by the gigabyte. [Thanks to everyone who sent this in] Canadian goverment vows to reverse CRTC decision on usage-based internet billing originally appeared on Engadget on Thu, 03 Feb 2011 13:26:00 EDT. Please see our terms for use of feeds . Permalink
Continue reading …Israeli archaeologists have hit on a stunning site in the Judean hills: a 1,500 year-old Byzantine basilica, which sits on top of an even older structure, which sits on top of a series of tunnels, which lead to a small cave that they believe might be the legendary burial…
Continue reading …An umbrella cockatoo from Antigo, Wisconsin is quite the Green Bay Packers fan. He even sings of his love for the Superbowl-bound team. (Feb. 3)
Continue reading …Egyptian authorities launched a systematic crackdown on the press today, rounding up journalists and sending armed gangs through the streets to attack anyone with camera equipment. Two New York Times journalists were detained overnight, and then released this morning, the paper reports . In addition to the gangs, the government has…
Continue reading …Click here to view this media In news that will surprise no one, Senate Dems voted unanimously to defeat the GOP attempt to repeal the health care bill. This one will be decided in the courts: Senate Democrats remained united on Wednesday in killing a Republican effort to repeal the health care bill signed into law last March. As expected, no Democrats voted against a procedural motion that effectively defeated a GOP amendment — sponsored by Republican Leader Mitch McConnell and tacked on to an unrelated aviation bill — to repeal the health legislation. All Republicans voted together in favor of the McConnell-sponsored amendment. The vote was 47-51. The House passed the repeal measure last month. But the defeat of the equivalent legislation in the Senate means that the ultimate fate of the health care bill will likely not be settled until the Supreme Court hears an expected constitutional challenge to the law — particularly its mandate that most Americans buy insurance. The high court would likely hear the case in its next term, which begins in October of 2011, although some would like to see the matter addressed sooner. Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Fla., urged the court today to expedite the ruling. As John Thune and Orrin Hatch told Greta Van Susteren last night, Republicans aren’t giving up or going away on this. Indeed, they intend to try a piecemeal approach of a death by a thousand cuts. They also clearly are pinning most of their hopes on a Supreme Court decision.
Continue reading …ABC and reporter John Quinones on Thursday stretched the bounds of journalism, hiring an actor to play a racist security guard as a way of testing how the people of Arizona would react to the state's “anti-immigration law.” Previewing the network's ” What Would You Do? ” segment for Friday's 20/20, Quinones explained the undercover concept: “So, I go undercover, pretending to be someone who is about to be arrested and deported, simply by the way I look.” The piece featured a cartoonish “security guard” harassing Mexican actors in Tucson, Arizona. Presumably, ABC chose a security guard because impersonating a police officer is illegal. The actor walked into a restaurant and spewed, ” I'm just looking to make sure these guys are legal citizens. And if they're not legal citizens, they shouldn't be here. They should be deported. They look Mexican .” Of course, having this man pretend to be a security guard really makes no sense. (A security guard is going to deport people?) Secondly, for journalists that often attack conservative sting operations, it's rather odd to see ABC manipulate such a scenario. The Radio, Television and Digital News Association ethics guide states: “Use surreptitious newsgathering techniques, including hidden cameras or microphones, only if there is no other way to obtain stories of significant public importance and only if the technique is explained to the audience.” Was this the only way ABC could do such a story? Previewing the segment, Quinones misstated what Arizona's law actually is. He asserted, “So, we took our cameras down to Arizona, where a controversial, new law would give police the authority to question and perhaps deport anyone who, in their eyes, appears to be in the U.S. illegally .” This is false. Byron York of the Washington Examiner explained in an April 26, 2010 column: Critics have focused on the term “reasonable suspicion” to suggest that the law would give police the power to pick anyone out of a crowd for any reason and force them to prove they are in the U.S. legally. Some foresee mass civil rights violations targeting Hispanics. What fewer people have noticed is the phrase “lawful contact,” which defines what must be going on before police even think about checking immigration status. “That means the officer is already engaged in some detention of an individual because he's violated some other law,” says Kris Kobach, a University of Missouri Kansas City Law School professor who helped draft the measure. “The most likely context where this law would come into play is a traffic stop.” After playing clips of the “security guard” arguing with patrons as he harassed Mexicans, Quinones lectured, “And what we kept hearing over and over from folks was that they all knew about the anti-immigration law. What they didn't realize until we staged our scenario was how it might affect innocent people, Latinos, George who are in this country legally.” Notice the use of “anti-immigration” rather than anti-illegal immigration. A previous “What Would You Do?” segment featured “ugly Americans” in Paris. In January of 2009 , overweight and wearing George W. Bush t-shirts, these actors showcased obnoxious behavior in Europe. Quinones smeared, “They're the ugly Americans. And for more than a century, they've been fixtures in American literature and film.” A transcript of the February 3 segment, which aired at 7:44am EST, follows: 7:30am tease ROBIN ROBERTS: Also this morning, imagine being threatened with deportation, even though you haven't committed a crime and it's all because of how you look. John Quinones goes undercover to Arizona's controversial immigration law. GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: His ultimate, “What would you do?” 7:44 GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: We're going to turn now to our undercover report from the front lines of the border wars. Arizona's immigration law passed last year. It stirred up a lot of controversy. So, John Quinones went to Tucson to put people's attitudes to an unusual test. And as I said earlier, this is sort of an ultimate, “What would you do?” JOHN QUINONES: Yes. We took it all the way to Arizona. You know, what does, George, an illegal immigrant look like? What does he sound like? So, we took our cameras down to Arizona, where a controversial, new law would give police the authority to question and perhaps deport anyone who, in their eyes, appears to be in the U.S. illegally. So, I go undercover, pretending to be someone who is about to be arrested and deported, simply by the way I look. [Video of protests.] These people are protesting for and against Arizona's new immigration law. We travel 70 miles north, to Tucson, Arizona and install our hidden cameras at this popular restaurant. BK. Carne Asada and Hot Dogs. This security guard is an actor hired by What Would You Do? And so are the people he's harassing. WHITE “SECURITY GUARD”: Excuse me. Sorry to interrupt. If I could see some identification. You don't belong here. QUINONES: How will patrons react to the guard asking for identification from a Latino man, a Latino family or even me? WHITE “SECURITY GUARD”: I just want to see some ID and make sure everything's okay. Everybody's like, “Oooh!” It's no big deal. I'm just looking to make sure these guys are legal citizens. And if they're not legal citizens, they shouldn't be here. They should be deported. They look Mexican. QUINONES: The wheels in this woman's head are turning. But, wait until you hear her plan. WHITE WOMAN: He just called for a ride. He's going to try and get him deported because he doesn't have any papers. You gotta get those two guys out of here. WHITE “SECURITY GUARD”: All I'm doing is I'm just looking out for everyone's safety. WHITE WOMAN: You're racial profiling. You totally racial profiled! WHITE “SECURITY GUARD”: Looks like a duck, smells like a duck. WHITE WOMAN: Looks like [bleeped] is [bleeped]. QUINONES: She then unveils her incredible plot to help me escape. WHITE WOMAN: You guys have to get out of here. Do they need to go out the back door, do you think? Where's your car? Where's your car? Where's your car? I can drive over there and meet you right there. QUINONES: Did she really say what we think she said? WHITE WOMAN: You run out that door. And I'll bring your car right over there. QUINONES: I'm a reporter. I'm with ABC News. I'm John Quinones. WHITE WOMAN: Oh. I know who you are. QUINONES: You jumped right in. You were going to take us in your car. WHITE WOMAN: I was actually going to get your car and bring it around and meet you over there. QUINONES: Why get involved? WHITE WOMAN: Maybe you have family, mothers, children. And I would feel bad if you got separated from them and shipped across the other direction. QUINONES: It's amazing how people responded. And what we kept hearing over and over from folks was that they all knew about the anti-immigration law. What they didn't realize until we staged our scenario was how it might affect innocent people, Latinos, George who are in this country legally. STEPHANOPOULOS: Boy, it looks like a fascinating report. Okay, thanks, John. You can see it tomorrow night on Primetime. What Would You Do?”at 9/8 central. — Scott Whitlock is a news analyst for the Media Research Center. Click here to follow him on Twitter .
Continue reading …Barack Obama said his faith has deepened during his two years in the White House, and directly addressed questions about his religion, saying his Christianity has been a “sustaining force” during times when he and his family’s faith has been questioned. More highlights from today’s National Prayer Breakfast in Washington:…
Continue reading …Image Credit Dan Reed As Kaid Benfield notes, it is getting harder to tell reality from The Onion. Here is the bucolic New Urbanist community of Kings Farm, outside of Washington DC. It won all kinds of design awards for being “designed around a light rail line linking the town center to the subway station. Similar to Commonwealth Avenue in Boston, the light rail will be built along the principal boulevard. The town square, town center neighborhood and the office neighborhood are located along this street and mark the proposed stops on the rail… Read the full story on TreeHugger
Continue reading …Charlie Sheen is finally speaking up, and he tells E! —via text message—that the rumors swirling about him ( cocaine chunks the size of tennis balls , his family seeking a conservatorship …) are “all crap.” He continues, “Believe nothing. I will never speak about any of this as long…
Continue reading …