A California Couple Fundraised Over $20 Million on Facebook to Help Reunite Families Separated at the US Border

The government of New Zealand, along with the country’s major broadband providers are working to silence the hate speech created by the Australian terrorist accused in Friday’s Christchurch mosque attacks. Videos of the attacks, along with a 74-page, anti-Muslim, white supremacist manifesto have been repeatedly published, and removed, from various online platforms. And, in her latest show of leadership, Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern has vowed to deny the shooter the notoriety he clearly wanted by refusing to mention his name.

“He is a terrorist. He is a criminal. He is an extremist,” Ardern said in an address to Parliament on Tuesday, March 19. “But he will, when I speak, be nameless.”

“And to others, I implore you,” she added, “speak the names of those who were lost, rather than the name of the man who took them. He may have sought notoriety, but we in New Zealand will give him nothing. Not even his name.”

New Zealand’s three largest internet providers, Vodaphone NZ, Spark, and 2degrees, voiced a similar perspective in an open letter to Jack Dorsey (Twitter), Mark Zuckerberg (Facebook), and Sundar Pichai (Google, which owns YouTube), dated March 19.

“You may be aware that on the afternoon of Friday 15 March, three of New Zealand’s largest broadband providers, Vodafone NZ, Spark and 2degrees, took the unprecedented step to jointly identify and suspend access to web sites that were hosting video footage taken by the gunman related to the horrific terrorism incident in Christchurch,” the letter reads.

The letter goes on to acknowledge how, in the global marketplace, this decisive effort at content restriction marks an “extraordinary step” in limiting access to harmful material. Yet, the leaders behind these three New Zealand broadband companies remain steadfast in the belief that taking this step was “the right thing to do.” Their letter implores the three powerful tech CEOs to consider doing the same on their respective social media platforms, as a general practice.

“Although we recognize the speed with which social network companies sought to remove Friday’s video once they were made aware of it, this was still a response to material that was rapidly spreading globally and should never have been made available online,” the letter continues. “We believe society has the right to expect companies such as yours to take more responsibility for the content on their platforms.”

The Association of New Zealand Advertisers agreed, releasing a statement explaining that local businesses would consider pulling their advertising dollars from Facebook if the company didn’t take immediate action to silence hate speech.

“The events in Christchurch raise the question — if the site owners can target consumers with advertising in microseconds, why can’t the same technology be applied to prevent this kind of content being streamed live?” the group said in a statement, according to The New York Times.

In response, Facebook VP and Deputy General Counsel, Chris Sonderby penned a blog post on the company’s site, explaining how Facebook is working to remove videos like the one the shooter uploaded while the Christchurch attack was happening.

“We removed the attacker’s video within minutes of their outreach to us, and in the aftermath, we have been providing an on-the-ground resource for law enforcement authorities,” the post says. “We will continue to support them in every way we can. In light of the active investigation, police have asked us not to share certain details.”

The Facebook blog post also outlined how Friday’s video became viral (and out of Facebook’s hands) so quickly: a user of the website 8chan posted a link to a copy of the video to a file sharing site before Facebook was even notified of the video’s existence. Sonderby also writes that the company helped other social networks identify the video to get it removed, and have been working in conjunction with the Global Internet Forum to Counter Terrorism (GIFCT) to be proactive about curbing terror and extremism online.

(Photo by Hagen Hopkins/Getty)

Last week, Kirstjen Nielsen, the Homeland Security Secretary, testified once again in front of Congress in an attempt to justify the federal government’s ongoing actions against undocumented people at the border. Among her assertions, Nielsen said that the chain-link enclosures used to hold undocumented children could not really be described as cages, and that some parents who had been separated from their children at the border were subsequently deported without their kids. These grim updates to the Trump administration’s “zero-tolerance” policy of immigrant family separation shortly preceded a report from the New York Times that revealed the extent to which family separation remains ongoing — despite a federal judge’s order to halt the practice some nine months ago.

“The latest data reported to the federal judge monitoring one of the most controversial of President Trump’s immigration policies shows that 245 children have been removed from their families since the court ordered the government to halt routine separations under last spring’s ‘zero tolerance’ border enforcement policy,” reads the March 9 Times report.

The Texas Civil Rights Project (TCRP) reports that the total number of immigrant children removed from their families since the summer of 2018 may be even higher. In the six months after Trump issued an Executive Order to end the practice, the organization interviewed nearly 10,000 immigrants and asylum-seekers who entered US border custody at or near McAllen, Texas. Through that process, the TCRP identified 272 adults who said they had been forcibly separated from one or more children under the age of 18.

“The government has admitted what we’ve known for months: they never stopped separating families who came to this country seeking safety,” Efrén C. Olivares, the Racial and Economic Justice Program Director at Texas Civil Rights Project, said in a statement made available to us. “The Trump Administration has tried every strategy it can think of in our courts to continue taking children away from their parents, with no transparency about how these decisions are made, no plan to reunite them, and no accountability.”

According to the TCRP, among the 272 adults they spoke to who said they had been separated from child family members, 38 were parents or legal guardians who reported being separated from a total of 46 children were separated. 25 of these children were reportedly under the age of 10. The youngest infant impacted was 8.5 months old at the time of separation from her mother.

“To date, the government has not reported these children to anyone — neither to the courts nor to Congress — and the government has admitted it may be impossible to find all separated children,” TCRP reports.

The TCRP report recounts an interview with a father who was allegedly separated from his seven-year-old son because of a misdemeanor conviction for battery over 10 years ago. Another father was reportedly separated from his one-year-old daughter and nine-year-old son on “uncorroborated allegations of gang affiliation.” A woman, who fled her country because she was being held captive as a sexual slave, was reportedly separated from her child because officials said she was “a danger to society and unfit to be a parent” after they learned she had shot her captor non-fatally in self-defense. The list goes on and on.

According to NBC News, immigration officials can separate children “if the adult is not the parent or legal guardian of the child” and “if the safety of the child is at risk or because of ‘serious criminal activity’ by the adult.” Legal recourse can be limited for these parents.

But there is hope. Earlier this year, we reported that several law firms including the Southern Poverty Law Center have filed a lawsuit on behalf of 10,000 detained immigrant children due to allegations of unfit facilities, illegal prolonged stays, sexual abuse, and much more.

On March 8, in a promising victory for undocumented families, US District Judge Dana Sabraw ruled in favor of a separate lawsuit by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) against the Trump administration and said that “all migrant families separated during the government’s border crackdown should be included in a class-action lawsuit,” the Texas Tribunereports.

“The hallmark of a civilized society is measured by how it treats its people and those within its borders,” Sabraw wrote in a 14-page ruling. “That Defendants may have to change course and undertake additional effort to address these issues does not render modification of the class definition unfair; it only serves to underscore the unquestionable importance of the effort and why it is necessary (and worthwhile).”

(Photo by John Moore/Getty Images)

Selena Gomez and Benny Blanco have made headlines again, but now Hailey Bieber— and all the alleged drama with her — is back in the picture. We were under the impression she was excited for the couple's engagement, but one fan claims she's back at her shady behavior...and it's making people look at her sideways all over again. Here's what allegedly happened, plus what Hailey had to say about it all!

Scroll to find out if Hailey Bieber actually threw shade at Selena Gomez & Benny Blanco...

Neilson Barnard/Getty Images for Vanity Fair

Hailey Bieber can't seem to catch a break in the news. Though we reported she liked Selena Gomez & Benny Blanco's engagement post last year, there was a suggestion she may have other thoughts about them. It's no secret she and Selena allegedly aren't the best of friends, but we never would've suspected she'd do what one person claims she did.

According to TikTok creator @courtneypresto, Hailey liked a video where she admits to being "a little shady to Selena Gomez." She also shared a couple of interesting pictures of her and Benny's Interview Magazine feature with one of them showing Benny smiling while the singer's two feet are on his cheeks.

But Hailey apparently thinks the creator's claim is "fake news" because her rep told Page Six, "This never happened." To make things slightly worse, the rep also threw @courtneypresto under the bus. "This entire story has been fabricated by a content creator looking to capitalize off of an old, tired narrative." You can't see us, but this statement made us choke on our lattes.

Neilson Barnard/Getty Images for Vanity Fair

Buzzfeed reports the model also shared a personal statement on Instagram, but it's unclear who she was referring to. The message started off with, "pastors and preachers really love to put words together with the same letter and act like it's HITTING so crazy..." before she signed off with "...sh-- drives me bananas."

As for Selena & Benny? They're in their own paradise and the singer's recent post dedicated to the producer proves it. She shared a sweet Instagram carousel that captured intimate moments of their love to celebrate his birthday. "I’m not sure what I did to deserve you but damn am I glad you were born.. happy birthday baby ♥️."

Maybe Hailey Bieber liked the original shady TikTok by accident? Whatever the case, we hope the girls aren't fighting again!

Follow us on Facebook for more celebrity updates!