Eni Aluko, a former England striker, has withdrawn from the Women’s Football Awards presentation role following her criticism of fellow pundit Ian Wright.
The 38-year-old criticised Wright last week, saying that he should be aware that there were only “fifteen opportunities” for female football journalists.
Aluko, a former Chelsea striker, has since offered an apology for her remarks, but Wright claimed he was “very disappointed” and “cannot accept” the apology.
The former England international and Arsenal icon has long been a proponent of the women’s game, appearing on television shows with an emphasis on Lionesses games, and received a lot of support after being criticized.
She said, “I’ve decided to step down from the hosting lineup this year.”
I don’t want to distract myself from the celebrations, recognition, and celebrations that surround this occasion. The players, coaches, fans, and everyone who has worked tirelessly to advance the women’s game deserve this occasion.
More than 137, 000 people have liked Wright’s Instagram post in response to Aluko’s comments, including England women’s players Mary Earps, Alessia Russo, and Alex Greenwood.
After a 15-year professional career that began at Crystal Palace in 1985, the 61-year-old said he will “always” try to return to the game of football.
The game has serious systemic challenges, according to Wright, who has worked alongside Aluko, because in the past, where men had been preventing women’s play for 50 years, they have been preventing it.
We have a responsibility to set the standard for women’s football because we are the nation that created modern football.
Dearborn, Michigan – Traveling is a regular occurrence for Michigan attorney Amir Makled. As recently as December, he went overseas and returned home to the United States without any issues.
“I’ve left the country at least 20 times. I’ve visited every continent. I go to Lebanon every year”, he said.
However, the Detroit Metro Airport’s return this month was completely different.
When they reached a customs checkpoint, he and his family had just returned from a spring break trip to the Dominican Republic.
“The agent looked over at me and then looked to another agent and asked him if the TTRT agents are here. I had no idea what this meant.
He looked up the acronym on Google. It stands for Tactical Terrorist Response Teams.
When I travel, even if I’m driving in from Canada, I feel some sort of anxiety that I’ll be randomly selected to be stopped or profiled, he explained.
I sat there and said, “OK, I’m going to be profiled here.”
Sure enough, Makled and his family were asked to go to another room.
Makled was aware that he couldn’t be denied entry because he was a citizen of the US and was born in Detroit, Michigan. He urged his wife and children to pass the checkpoint without him.
“I knew my rights at the border in that regard. And I was also aware of how frequently border searches are conducted, he said. For the first time in my life, I was stopped.
But what happened next would put the lawyer in a precarious position.
Border control officers have a lot of legal authority to search a person’s belongings. The goal is to stop people from entering the country with security threats, contraband, or environmental threats.
Those searches, however, extend to the contents of electronic devices. And that raises questions about what should be protected from the government’s prying eyes and what needs to be regulated.
A threat to the attorney-client privilege
Makled knew the border agents could take his phone. He was faced with a complex ethical dilemma, though, as an attorney. His phone contained privileged client information.
In the US, a basic tenet of the legal system is that a client can have frank discussions with their lawyer, with the safety of knowing anything they say will be kept confidential.
Makled’s phone contained a sizable portion of his writing. He claimed he couldn’t give the device to the border officers when asked to do so.
“All my emails, my text messages, my files, the cloud-based software I use for my office”, he said, “it’s all through my phone”.
Makled, a lawyer for people he described as particularly vulnerable, represents those who are in need of civil rights and criminal defense.
A protester was detained last year at a University of Michigan pro-Palestine encampment, according to one of his clients. She was later charged with resisting and obstructing police, a felony that carries up to a two-year prison sentence.
Makled thinks that because the border patrol officers had this information in mind, he was targeted. He claimed that one of the agents even called him a “famous lawyer,” which he thought was a statement made in response to the protester’s case.
In the end, he gave the agents written permission to see his contacts but no other permissions. He was permitted to leave with his phone after about 90 minutes at the airport.
Rasha Alawieh, a deported Brown University kidney specialist, is the subject of a protest march 17 outside the Rhode Island State House. [Charles Krupa/AP Photo]
A growing trend
Border control officers have the authority to search any person entering the country, their luggage, or other items in their possession at the time of the inspection since Title 19 of the US code began almost a century ago.
However, today’s digital devices contain far more information than is necessary for a trip.
The most recent fiscal year saw 47, 047 electronic devices searched by border control officers, the vast majority of which belonged to non-US citizens.
That is an almost 13% increase over the previous fiscal year, which US Customs and Border Protection recorded with 41, 767 electronic searches.
The process has long been hampered by the uncertainty of whether these searches can be used for political gain or to retaliate.
In November 2018, for instance, an employee of the tech company Apple, Andreas Gal, said he was detained while returning to San Francisco from an international trip.
Gal was flagged for the TTRT, just like Makled. Customs officers pushed to search his electronic devices, just like the lawyer. He refused. Gal later stated that he thought his online political views had caused him to be targeted.
However, experts have increased their concern about such searches in recent weeks.
Since taking office for a second term in January, President Donald Trump has sought to deport noncitizens he sees as critical of the US or its ally Israel. Among the allegedly used evidence to expel people from the country was material from electronic devices.
Rasha Alawieh, a kidney transplant specialist, was denied re-entry after returning from Lebanon to the US. She held a valid H-1B visa that allowed her to work in the US.
According to reports, the Trump administration cited photos recovered from her phone, including those of Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah, as justification for her expulsion.
Following Alawieh’s expulsion, the Department of Homeland Security stated in a statement that “supporting terrorists who kill Americans is grounds for visa issuance to be denied.”
Also in March, the French government said one of its citizens, a scientist, was prevented from entering the US on account of the political messages on his phone.
However, that accusation has been refuted by the Trump administration.
Homeland Security spokeswoman Tricia McLaughlin wrote on social media that the French researcher in question had access to sensitive information from Los Alamos National Laboratory, in violation of a non-disclosure agreement.
“Any claim that his removal was based on political beliefs is blatantly false”.
[Damian Dovarganes/AP Photo] Agents at airport border checkpoints and border crossings have broad authority to search travelers’ luggage.
a lack of legal consensus
There are two types of screenings a device may undergo while in border control custody.
When an officer uses a hand-held electronic device to conduct a “light” search, it occurs. The device is connected to external equipment during an advanced search, which legally calls for “reasonable suspicion” of a crime. The device may not be returned to its owner for weeks or months.
Although US citizens are not required to unlock their electronics in order to re-enter their country, border agents do not require a warrant to search an electronic device.
However, refusing to provide these details may result in a ban on entry for travelers who are not US citizens or permanent residents.
But experts say these practices raise serious concerns about the Fourth Amendment of the US Constitution, which grants protection from unreasonable searches and seizures by the government.
The American Civil Liberties Union’s Speech, Privacy and Technology Project’s deputy director, Esha Bhandari, shared examples of the government bridging Fourth Amendment protections with these border checks.
According to Bhandari, “the government is increasingly viewed this as a constitutional flaw.”
“They have someone under investigation, and rather than waiting on whether they can establish probable cause, which requires a judge to give a warrant, they wait until someone crosses the international border and treat that as a convenient opportunity to search their devices”.
However, it is up for debate how far that loophole can extend.
The US courts have yet to come to an agreement regarding the extent and limits of searches of digital devices, according to Saira Hussain, a senior staff attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation.
“At this moment, whether you fly into San Francisco vs Boston vs Atlanta, there are three different rulings on exactly which part of your phone can be searched, for what purposes]or] what level of suspicion is needed”, Hussain said. There hasn’t been uniformity, according to the statement from several lower courts regarding the issue.
Makled, for his part, claimed that he has never been turned down for traveling or supporting controversial causes.
“I feel that this is an intimidation tactic. He defended the protester who was detained at the University of Michigan, saying that it’s an attempt to dissuade me from taking on these kinds of cases.
Sheffield’s Crucible Theatre is where BBC Sport journalists are based.
31 Comments
Mark Williams, a three-time champion, fought back to earn a 13-12 victory over John Higgins in the World Championship’s semi-finals.
As winner Williams rallied from each of the first four frames with three half-centuries before the game resumed at 8-8 on Wednesday, Higgins was initially left to rue costly misses in each of the subsequent frames.
Williams, 50, who was 5-1 up at the 20th frame as Higgins, a four-time champion, delivered a stirring response from 12-8 down, was largely confined to his chair after that.
The 49-year-old, who appeared to be struggling, found his rhythm and recorded breaks of 94, 114, and 67 to prepare for a dramatic conclusion.
Both players had chances to win a tight final frame, but when Higgins slammed the corner of the blue, the Welshman made it 2-0 before 52-year-old Ray Reardon in 1985.
The Rocket maintains its course
Ronnie O’Sullivan, who defeated Si Jiahui in the other quarter-final on Wednesday morning, will take a 10-6 lead into the session’s closing round at 19:00 BST.
With a frame difference of 8-4 going into the mid-session period, “the Rocket” traded frames with world number 13 Si to advance to 6-2 overnight.
O’Sullivan, who is chasing a record eighth crown in the modern era, led 9-4 when Si missed a red in the middle when he was 43 points ahead with 43 remaining.
The 22-year-old from China, who had a century in the tenth frame, followed up with runs of 61 and 52.
O’Sullivan, however, showed that he had all of his experience before restoring a solid cushion by combining the 16th frame with a 64-frame break.
Vaibhav Suryavanshi, 14, is “only going to get better,” according to Rahul Dravid, his Rajasthan Royals coach and legend of India. He will also need support in the wake of his newfound fame.
Suryavanshi, the first player to record a 100 in men’s T20s, scored a stunning 35-ball century against the Gujarat Titans on Monday in the Indian Premier League.
How do you handle this, cricket player in this country?
You can’t distance yourself completely, but you also don’t want to get sucked in.
In this circumstance, “finding that happy medium is probably the answer.”
Suryavanshi made his debut against Lucknow Super Giants this month with a deal worth 106 789 (1. 5 crore rupees). He was the youngest player in the IPL when he was signed for a record-breaking price at last year’s auction.
In his third game, he scored 101 from 38 balls with seven fours and 11 sixes, making 34 in his first innings and making 34 in his first.
Sachin Tendulkar, former All-Star Yuvraj Singh, and others have since praised Suryavanshi.
Dravid said, “He’s only going to develop and he’s only going to improve.” He is not a finished article, according to anyone.
No one should be hurriedly proclaiming what he is not. He is who he is.
He’s a very talented young player who is working really hard to improve his abilities and skills, but he’ll need to do so constantly.
Suryavanshi, who was acquired by the Royals last year, became the youngest player to be acquired at an IPL auction.
In a youth test against Australia Under-19s in Chennai, a 13-year-old Suryavanshi scored a 58-ball century for India Under-19s.
He “has a really good hand, bat speed, and obviously, a really high backlift,” Dravid said.
He exhibits good hand-eye coordination when judging length. That’s something that really surprised me.
Paul McCartney, the legendary member of the Beatles, previously tripped in at US President Donald Trump after the veteran singer featured him on his 2018 album, Egypt Station.
Paul McCartney explained that the lyrics to one of his songs were about Trump(Image: NBC, Todd Owyoung/NBC via Getty Images)
Musician Paul McCartney didn’t mince words when he took a swipe at President Donald Trump, with a scathing three-word remark that fans have recently unearthed. The former Beatle and Wings frontman didn’t have many nice things to say about the President of the United States, expressing his irritation towards the politician.
McCartney even wrote a song about the then-president for his 2018 album, Egypt Station. McCartney aired his opinions on Trump while discussing his album in 2018, including referring to him as a “braggart.”
The current commander-in-chief, who has recently admitted he didn’t know where the Congo was located, was best described in a three-word phrase.
In his 2018 song, “Despite Repeated Warnings,” McCartney revealed that climate change and Trump’s alleged indifference served as inspiration for the “existential threat” that the artist poses.
McCartney compared Trump to the “not the smartest” leader the world has ever seen when he explained the lyrics.
Continue reading the article.
The lyrics to the song include the phrase “The captain won’t be listening to what is said, and those who shout the loudest may not always be the smartest.”
The Liverpool legend said in the book, “We’re facing the political situation, especially in the US, where a braggart has been in charge and seems quite unstable, to say the least. He may be the loudest, but he might not be the smartest.
McCartney then claimed that Trump thought climate change was “a hoax” and that “nobody is doing anything” to stop global warming’s dangers.
He continued, “I frequently think, “How can someone get away with some of his statements?” However, two days later, the news cycle will have revealed something else he’s said, and it’s difficult to find the information back.
Sir Paul McCartney didn’t hold back on his feelings (Image: Getty Images)
In a chat with BBC, McCartney explained his viewpoint : “[The song] basically says, ‘occasionally, we’ve got a mad captain sailing this boat we’re all on and he is just going to take us to the iceberg [despite] being warned it’s not a cool idea’.”
McCartney responded, “Well, obviously it’s Trump,” when asked for specifics. There are many of them, so I don’t get too involved. Not just any one, either.
Trump admitted at the beginning of his political career that he thought climate change was a “hoax” being carried out by the Chinese. In 2012, he infamously tweeted that “the idea of global warming was created by and for the Chinese to make American manufacturing non-competitive.”
Trump’s administration recently removed hundreds of scientists from a government report on how global warming affects the United States.
McCartney confirmed that the song was about President Trump among others(Image: Getty Images)
There may not be a formal US government report examining climate change in the country for the first time since 2000, as suggested by the dismissal of numerous professionals.
We are now releasing all current assessment participants from their positions, according to an email sent to those responsible for producing the report. There might be opportunities to contribute or be engaged as the assessment plans develop. I appreciate your assistance.
The public has praised Sir Paul McCartney’s outcry against climate change, and his song, which addresses Trump’s position on the subject, is also hailed as one of his masterpieces.
One fan said, “One of my favorite off of Egypt Station is Despite Repeated Warnings.” “A fantastic album from beginning to end.” Another once said, “I swear, keeps repeating.”
Paul McCartney in Wings(Image: Michael Putland, Getty Images)
Another fan eluded the track after discovering it, saying, “Just stumbled here and listened to the song. blown out. My anthem will be indefinitely this way.
In his book, The Lyrics: 1956 to the Present, McCartney provides insights into his opinion of the Trump administration.
Some people, however, think McCartney should have been harsher in his analysis of the political climate in America.
Continue reading the article.
One claimed that Paul McCartney’s statements about underselling it were untrue. Good day, folks. Do it with your whole f**king chest, Sir Paul, if you’re going to speak up.
Who’s Paul to weigh in on politics, another chimed in with a dash of humor. He is beloved by God. He simply writes good songs.
