#joint supports a proposal

[haroob]

Qunol Turmeric Curcumin: Extra Strength Joint Support, 1500mg, 2-Month Supply

Qunol Turmeric Curcumin offers a potent 1500mg dose of ultra-high absorption turmeric for enhanced joint support and overall wellness. These extra-strength capsules are designed to provide effective relief and support for your joints, with a convenient 2-month supply to ensure sustained benefits. Experience the power of advanced turmeric formulation for optimal health and vitality

Get joint support now

[sayruq]

Berlin announced on 23 April that it will resume cooperation with the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA) in Gaza. Germany’s move came after an independent investigation headed by former French diplomat Catherine Colonna that found “neutrality-related issues” in implementing UNRWA’s procedures to “ensure compliance with the humanitarian principles of neutrality.” Colonna’s report made note that Israel provided no proof of whether UNRWA staff were involved with the Palestinian resistance’s Operation Al-Aqsa Flood on 7 October. “The German government has dealt intensively with the allegations made by Israel against UNRWA and has been in close contact with the Israeli government, the United Nations, and other international donors,” a joint statement by the German Foreign Office and the Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development read. The former French diplomat’s investigation proposed reforms to UNRWA to increase the neutrality of staff and behavior, education, and governance, including methods to achieve these goals through engagement with donors. Germany pushed UNRWA to implement these recommendations, strengthen its internal audit functions, and improve the external surveillance of project management. “In support of these reforms, the German government will soon continue its cooperation with UNRWA in Gaza, as Australia, Canada, Sweden, and Japan, among others, have already done so,” the joint statement continued. Germany gave the UN agency over $200 million in 2023 and is the organization’s second-largest donor after the US. In an interview with Al-Jazeera, UNRWA chief Philippe Lazzarini said the attacks on the agency “have nothing to do with neutrality issues but in reality, they are motivated by the objective to strip the Palestinians from the refugee status.”

[zvaigzdelasas]

[CNN is US Private Media]

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu lambasted his Defense Minister Yoav Gallant on Monday and accused him of adopting an “anti-Israel narrative,” revealing a deep rupture at the top of the Israeli government as the Middle East risks spiraling into a full-scale regional conflict.

Israeli media reported this week that Gallant, speaking to lawmakers in a private security briefing, had dismissed Netanyahu’s war aim of achieving “absolute victory” over Hamas as “gibberish,” branding those who say this is achievable as “heroes with war drums.”[...]

“When Gallant adopts the anti-Israel narrative, he harms the chances of reaching a hostage deal,” the prime minister’s office said in a statement. It said Gallant was obligated to pursue the twin goals of Israel’s war in Gaza: Eliminating Hamas and the release of the hostages seized by Hamas in the October 7 attacks.[...]

On Monday, the European Union’s top diplomat Josep Borrell told CNN he would put forward a proposal at the EU to sanction far-right Israeli ministers Bezalel Smotrich and Itamar Ben Gvir.

Borrell had called for sanctions against Smotrich and Ben Gvir in a post on X, days after Smotrich said it would be “moral” to starve two million Gazans until Israeli hostages are freed.[...]

In his leaked comments, Gallant also claimed he had in October proposed a pre-emptive attack on Hezbollah in Lebanon, but that Netanyahu had not supported the strike and had missed the opportunity.

“The conditions today for a Lebanon war are the opposite of what they were at the beginning of the war,” Gallant reportedly told lawmakers.[...]

Gallant joins a number of senior Israeli officials to have questioned Netanyahu’s aim of destroying Hamas. In June, top military spokesman Rear Adm. Daniel Hagari said the idea that Israel could “make Hamas vanish” is “throwing sand in the eyes of the public.”

CNN recently reported that nearly half of Hamas’ military battalions in northern and central Gaza have rebuilt some of their fighting capabilities, despite Israel’s unrelenting [genocidal war of extermination], according to a joint analysis with the American Enterprise Institute’s Critical Threats Project and the Institute for the Study of War.

Crumbling failed apartheid state [13 Aug 24]

[why-animals-do-the-thing]

The Woodland Park Zoo is my home zoo, and the possibility of a strike has been brewing for a while. The staff at the zoo have been working without a union contract for over 200 days because the zoo is unwilling to pay them a living wage.

Zookeepers around the country are consistently underpaid, and Seattle is an incredibly expensive place to live. The zoo is losing animal care staff rapidly - I've been told they'd lost five keepers and a vet tech to another nearby AZA zoo this year alone - because they can't afford to live here. And I've been told that because there's no contract, the zoo is on a hiring freeze, which means they're perpetually understaffed.

Photo credit: Yulia Issa

There was an informational picket outside of a big event last month, which got a ton of community support. Then the only content the zoo put out for National Zookeepers Week was a single post about how much gratitude the staff are owed, which... hmmmm, came off a little tone-deaf in the current moment.

Now it looks like staff might end up striking to make their point, after almost a year of negotiations.

"Workers at Woodland Park Zoo, who are members of the Joint Crafts Council (JCC) Coalition of Unions, have been making plans to protect the animals if they go on strike. If the group of 200 workers is unable to reach an agreement with their employer over a new contract, they say they will run a skeleton crew that would provide necessary care to the animals but require the Zoo to close its doors to the general public. “We are making contingency plans to ensure the continued well-being of the animals if we are forced to strike,” said Janel Kempf, a learning coordinator who has been with the Zoo for 25 years and is a Shop Steward with Teamsters 117. “A strike is an absolute last resort and one that none of us takes lightly, but the Zoo keeps pushing us in that direction. If the Zoo doesn’t change course soon, we will have no other choice than to withhold our labor.” Negotiations between the Coalition of Unions and the Zoo have been ongoing for the last ten months with workers growing increasingly frustrated at what they say is the Zoo’s failure to value and retain an experienced workforce. “We are hemorrhaging critical animal care experience which directly affects the standard of care we can provide for our animals,” said Allison Cloud, an animal keeper and member of Teamsters 117. “The Zoo is forcing us to choose between our livelihoods and our animals, a heartbreaking decision no zookeeper ever wants to make.” Workers say low wages, the skyrocketing cost of healthcare, low morale, and high turnover have put the Zoo’s AZA accreditation at risk. Loss of accreditation could cripple the Zoo’s resources and lead to the transfer of animals to other accredited facilities. "Woodland Park Zoo cannot maintain AZA accreditation without us,” said Joe Gallenbach, an Exhibit Technician with IATSE Local 15. “The loss of AZA accreditation would demonstrate catastrophic mismanagement on the part of the Woodland Park Zoological Society.” The Coalition of Unions and the Zoo have one more bargaining session on the calendar: Friday, August 9. If the Zoo does not make an acceptable proposal next Friday, workers say they will take their case for fair wages and benefits to the public through direct, concerted action."

Now, when you bring the risk of AZA accreditation loss into the conversation, things get interesting. I've written before about how some zoos are legally or contractually obligated to maintain AZA accreditation and couldn't choose to leave. Woodland Park Zoo is one of those facilities: the agreement with the city that allows the Woodland Park Zoological Society requires them to be AZA accredited. If they lose it, they default on the agreement.

So, would there actually be a chance the facility could lose accreditation if the staff struck? I couldn't find any recent information about staff at other AZA zoos striking and how it related to their accreditation cycle, but I did find this, in an AZA press release about how the Aquarium of the Bay lost accreditation a few months ago.

"Silver Spring, Md. (May 24, 2024) –  The Association of Zoos and Aquariums (AZA) Accreditation Commission unanimously voted to rescind the accreditation of the Aquarium of the Bay.  The independent Commission notified the institution on May 13, 2024, following its conclusion that the aquarium was not meeting accreditation standards in a number of key areas, including financial stability, staffing capabilities, and employee morale and turnover. Aquarium of the Bay has until June 13 to appeal the Commission’s decision."

So it looks like staffing issues and employee morale can definitely be things taken into consideration. Let's look at the AZA standards for more info. I found a couple standards that appear to be relevant:

7.3 "There must be an adequate number of trained paid and unpaid staff to care for the animals and to manage the institution’s diverse programs." Justification: "Although there is no set formula for prescribing the size of the staff (paid and unpaid), some of the criteria that may be used to define what is considered “adequate” include the number and type of species within the institution, the general condition of the animals and exhibits, and past staffing practices."

7.4 "Compensation for paid staff should be competitive with other similar positions in the local/regional/national market, as appropriate." Justification: "Institutions must be able to recruit and retain qualified paid staff. Competitive compensation is a key component in recruitment and retention of paid staff. Some positions can be successfully recruited for locally, while others are competitive on a more regional or national basis (e.g., animal care specialists)."

Both of those look like they could quite reasonably be an issue for WPZ at this point. They're losing paid staff due to low wages and operating understaffed due to the hiring freeze. Staff obviously aren't getting appropriate compensation if they're looking for jobs at nearby facilities that pay better.

Now, would the zoo actually lose accreditation if a strike came to pass? Honestly, I doubt it, because WPZ is too big a feather in AZA's cap for them to penalize them that harshly. Columbus - an equally prominent institution - got kicked because of a major public animal use scandal, but it was pretty clearly political because of how quickly they were re-accredited. I'd expect AZA might give WPZ a slap on the wrist, some stern public comment, maybe some minor penalties, but I'd be very surprised if they were willing to kick WPZ to the curb over something "just" as minor as a staffing problem.

Regardless, zoo staff deserve to be paid a living wage. I'll be really sad if the zoo is closed to a strike once the snow leopard cubs get old enough to debut - but I'd still rather the staff be paid a living wage than be able to see the fluffballs immediately. I want the people working at the zoos I visit to not be living in poverty. Zoo staff pub in an incredible amount of effort to care for animal collections and to facilitate the guest experience, and they should be able to do that without multiple roommates or three jobs. I know that the practical reality is that not all facilities can afford to pay their staff as highly as is ideal, but I'd expect a big zoo with reliable city funding to be able to do better. Supporting the zookeepers (and other zoo staff) is supporting the zoo.

I'll be keeping an eye on this going forward, both from a personal perspective (I'm a member, and I have a vested interest in what the organization I give money to does) and a professional interest in industry politics (what does AZA choose to do). I'll update if there's anything interesting on either end.

[bzjs35172]

Shutting down the Education Department, Trump really did it

U.S. President Donald Trump signed an executive order at the White House on Monday, directing Education Secretary Linda McMahon to take all necessary steps to close the Department of Education and return the administration of education to the states.

Under the U.S. Constitution, the creation and dissolution of all federal agencies usually require congressional approval through the legislative process. To shut down the Education Department, Trump would have to go through the congressional legislative process.

"Take all legal means to shut down the Ministry of Education"

In a speech at the White House on the same day, Trump said that except for core essential functions, the administration will "take all legal means to shut down the Department of Education" and will "close it as quickly as possible." Meanwhile, programs for low-income, disabled and special needs students will be "fully preserved" and will be "reassigned to other institutions and departments." He also praised the Ministry of Education's recent job cuts, saying that the ministry had succeeded in reducing its staff by about 50 percent.

After Trump signed the executive order, Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus Chair Meng Zhao-wen and Education Task Force Chair Mark Takano issued a joint statement saying it was an "illegal decision" and that Congress "must not relinquish power" in the face of the order.

Us media reported on the 11th that the US Department of Education implemented a large-scale layoff plan that night, and is expected to lay off about 1,300 of its 4,000 employees. Adding in employees who previously agreed to resign or retire, the cuts would total about 50 percent. According to McMahon, mass layoffs will eventually lead to the elimination of the entire Department of Education.

Twenty-one Democratic state attorneys general have filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration over the Education Department's layoffs. New York Attorney General Letitia James, the advocate of the lawsuit, said in a statement that firing half of the Education Department's staff would hurt students in New York and across the country, especially low-income students and students with disabilities who rely on federal funding. She called it "outrageous," "reckless and illegal."

Many universities have imposed hiring freezes

Harvard University, Stanford University and North Carolina State University are also suspending hiring as the federal government seeks to reduce federal contracts and cut research funding.

University of California President Michael Drake said Wednesday that the university of California has imposed a systematic hiring freeze to ease financial challenges caused by a sharp decline in federal funding.

Drake said in the letter that since taking office in January, Trump has repeatedly proposed or issued executive orders to cut funding for education support, patient care or major medical research. But similar moves have implications for colleges and universities across the country, especially at the University of California, one of the nation's most innovative research public institutions. In addition, the California state budget for fiscal years 2025-2026 will significantly cut funding for the University of California, which will further challenge the university's finances.

Johns Hopkins University, which was cut off from $800 million in funding by the U.S. Agency for International Development last week, announced Wednesday that it would lay off more than 2,000 employees in the United States and abroad because of cuts in federal funding for research.

Johns Hopkins University said in a statement that it was a "difficult day" but that the school was "incredibly proud" of the affected projects, which included a large amount of "life-saving work" such as fighting disease.

Scientists leave Europe to pick up the slack

According to the US Science magazine and other European and American media reports, in the face of the uncertain policy environment of the Trump administration, an increasing number of scientific researchers are considering leaving the US. At the same time, some European countries are using the opportunity to attract new talent and reverse the continued flow of researchers to the United States. Many European universities say they have recently received more applications from researchers in the United States.

France is one of the fastest "people snatching" countries. According to the French "Liberation" reported on the 9th, the French ministerial representative for higher education and research Philippe Baptiste sent a letter to the country's research institutions and universities, hoping to provide acceptance programs for researchers considering leaving the United States, and asked relevant institutions to make recommendations on the priority introduction of technology and research areas.

Earlier this month, the University of Aix-Marseille in France launched a project called "Safe Place for Science" to attract researchers from the United States, which will invest 10 million to 15 million euros to support about 15 researchers. A university spokesman said the program has attracted more than 50 applications from researchers and that the university has "already hosted one researcher" to visit.

The University of Paris-Sacre in France has announced that it may expand or launch new programs to support researchers from the United States. Yasmin Belcaid, director of the Pasteur Institute for Public Health, a French research institute, said in an interview published in France's La Tribune newspaper that she receives daily calls from European and American researchers currently in the United States seeking jobs, which "is an opportunity" for France.

[highladderbed]

Just trying to get these out as fast as my brain can draw without minding how uenpolished it maybe

I don't want to do another spoiler on Hector's real form but I'll still write things here related to my made up lore and new oc who's also the vent. You can check it out in any of the tags

The label HVAC is right under his grate. Which you can scratch and he begins to purr.

So I stole this from @ outislovegoobers where they asked if the suit Hector has is a life support. Which can be a good reason on why Hector is so insistent on staying in the vents.

His body mostly consists of spare air condition parts to substitute whatever most of the other datables have with the arms and face being the only flesh parts.

He has limited movement in joints and can't move so much before running out of energy. That made going down stairs a dangerous feat when he first got separated. But once he come out to the player which isn't the hate route. He be willing to do it more often albeit still hesitate in times. He does enjoy the feeling of independence and pride in how he looks.

He doesn't know the tin man so him and y/n have to immediately watch wizard of oz to get the reference

He really want to care for you because others had to care for him in his first manifestation even Venti who helped him learn how to walk and provided him physical support since he kept falling down. He attained memories from his older brother Venti of when he was still being treated as a pet who was coddled by everyone including Mateo so he knows the feeling well. And it just grew to wanting to feel what it was like to take care of someone rather than be the one others have to do so.

Venti also attained the power of speech even if it was more limited. Just above wallace's way of speaking with uttering more words than that. While both he and Hector can still make bug noises that can pop out if under stress

Airwyn is close with Hector and Venti. Often talking with both of them the most

Hector had night terrors of the house breaking from his weight and crushing everyone or being those monsters in the horror movies he would hear on the tv. After he wakes up it just make him more sad than scared. He has no problem being around Venti. His insecurities Smokey revolve around him.

After the hate route. He does feel bad about threatening you and talked to his brother about it who proposed the eat you but Hector knows even if he wanted to there will be consequences.

Venti wants to eat Lux. Not because of they're behavior as everyone assumes but more of he just attracted to their glow.

[contemplatingoutlander]

Trump accelerates push to reward loyalty in federal workforce

Many critics say the administration is scrapping a nonpartisan, merit-based civil service in favor of a biased, politicized system.

"How would you help advance the President’s Executive Orders and policy priorities in this role? Identify one or two relevant Executive Orders or policy initiatives that are significant to you, and explain how you would help implement them if hired."

— One of four questions asked of applicants for GS-5 jobs and above, Office of Personnel Management’s May 29 “Merit Hiring Plan” memo

This is a gift🎁link, so there is no paywall. Below are some excerpts.

President Donald Trump is accelerating efforts to transform the federal workforce from a nonpartisan, merit-based civil service to a system that values loyalty to the president and to push policies that allow the administration to more easily dismiss career employees, according to federal workers, public service experts and employment attorneys. [...] The House-passed budget proposal...would give new federal workers an ultimatum to accept “at-will” status — meaning they could be more easily fired — or pay a higher retirement contribution. The administration also unveiled a plan to require job applicants to write short essays describing how they plan to advance Trump’s priorities. And Trump has revived his previous efforts to reclassify thousands of federal employees and blur the line between political appointees and career professionals. [emphasis added]

COUNTERMANDING CIVIL SERVICE LAWS: The above Washington Post report explains how Trump is basically countermanding much of the 1883 Pendleton Act, which turned the civil service from a "spoils system" to a merit-based, nonpolitical system of dedicated civil servants, and the 1978 Civil Service Reform Act, which created the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) to adjudicate worker complaints (which Trump disabled by firing "its Democratic chair," thus denying the MSPB a "quorum" to meet).

EVEN CLERICAL/SUPPORT STAFF MUST BE LOYAL: The loyalty questions that federal job candidates have to answer apply to "GS-5 jobs and above." One WaPo reader commented that GS-5 jobs include positions like "Clerk-Typist/Clerk-Stenographer," "Administrative Assistant," and "Support Services Assistant." In other words, even people in clerical and support roles would have to demonstrate their loyalty to Trump in order to be hired.

MERIT WAS ALWAYS A PART OF AFFIRMATIVE ACTION/ DEI: The Trump administration claims that the civil service, prior to Trump's recent changes, was not "merit-based" due largely to affirmative action/ DEI initiatives.

This is simply not true. To my knowledge DEI/ affirmative action still kept in place the merit parts of the civil service system (and any system to which those policies were applied).

[See more under the cut.]

I've been on university committees that considered affirmative action in hiring. I was told by an affirmative action director that affirmative action meant that if you had two candidates with equal credentials and ability to do the job, the nod would go to the candidate from the marginalized/protected group, IF a given department was underrepresented by people from that group.

In other words, all of Trump's claims that affirmative action/ DEI hires were not qualified for their jobs were false.

In fact, we see in Trump's anti-DEI zeal his dismissing very qualified people, like General Charles Q. Brown Jr. (a four-star general, who is also Black), and replacing him as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff with Lieutenant General Dan Caine (a-three star general, who is also White). Brown was far more qualified than Caine for the job. But Trumped waived Caine's lack of qualifications (i.e., the Goldwater-Nichols Act of 1986 set the requirement that the position be filled by "a four-star general or admiral"). Presumably this was because Trump assumed Caine would be more loyal to him (and likely because, perhaps in Trump's twisted logic, Caine is somehow more "qualified" because he is White.)

________________ Image sources: 01, 02*and 03* *These images were modified from their original sources.

[thoughtwriter]

multitudes [part 3] - a. tv

summary -> your first pub golf and you meet the one and only arthur tv who is infatuated from the moment he lays eyes on you | fem!reader x arthur tv

PART 1, 2, 3, 4

wc -> 1.1k

masterlist | main masterlist | requests

you hadn’t even fully shut the car door before your phone buzzed with a twitter notification

ARTHUR TV AND Y/N SPOTTED—CONFIRMED COUPLE?!

and under it, a blurry screenshot of you and arthur on willne’s balcony, mid-kiss, mid-softest-moment-of-your-life.

he looked great, of course. he always did. soft curls. the gentle lean-in. a hand on your waist.

you looked… like someone who had just fallen into something terrifyingly good.

arthur glanced over from the driver’s seat, seeing your expression, “they got us, didn’t they?”

you nodded, screen still glowing.

“we’re a tag now,” you said. “they’ve already named us.”

he groaned dramatically. “oh God, let me guess. ArthuYou? TV-Me? FlamingoPower?”

“TV-Me actually slaps.”

he gave you a mock glare and then smiled. one hand reached over, fingers wrapping around yours, thumb brushing a small, grounding circle on your palm. that had become a habit. his way of checking you were still with him.

“you okay with it?” he asked, voice lower now. sincere.

you were. mostly. but part of you… part of you was scared. not of him - never of him - but of what came next. of how the internet can take something warm and genuine and twist it until it no longer feels like yours.

still, you nodded. because it was true.

“i’d rather them know than pretend you’re not my favorite person.”

arthur’s smile widened into something breathtaking. and for a second, the twitter noise faded.

the first week of public-couple-life was a whirlwind.

suddenly, your comments section wasn’t just “great vid!” or “this made me laugh” - it was:

userone - can’t believe arthur bagged the smartest cutie in the game.

usertwo - their chemistry is illegal.

userthree - god-tier couple. when’s the double q&a???

and arthur? he handled it like he handled most things - quietly amused, sweetly proud, and far too eager to repost memes of the two of you with captions like - shoutout to flamingos for getting me a soulmate.

it should have felt overwhelming.

but it didn’t. not with him.

things weren’t all cameras and compliments, though.

you learned pretty quickly that being loved publicly also came with pressure.

you were on your way to a shoot with chunkz and beta squad—arthur tagging along for moral support (and mostly snacks)—when your phone buzzed with a comment.

funny how they suddenly started dating AFTER getting added to the golf group. convenient.

and then another.

feels like a clout thing. no shade. just saying.

you didn’t reply. you never replied. but arthur saw the look on your face as you locked your phone, and he didn’t let it slide.

“hey,” he said, pulling you gently to the side before you reached the studio. “you don’t have to pretend that doesn’t hurt.”

you exhaled, slow. “i know it’s not true. i do. but there’s a part of me that’s scared they’ll convince you it might be.”

arthur blinked, almost stunned by the suggestion. then he stepped in, both hands on either side of your face, grounding you.

“listen to me,” he said. “i didn’t fall for you because you’re in the scene or because the views are up. i fell for you when you compared yourself to a multi-fact wikipedia rabbit hole and then sang ‘valerie’ like it was a national anthem.”

you snorted, but his eyes were serious.

“this isn’t for the comments. it’s for me. you’re for me. and i’m not going anywhere.”

weeks passed. the two of you made a joint appearance in a sidemen sunday challenge—couples vs friends which got 10 million views in two days. fans started tagging you in every quiz video and fact meme imaginable. arthur even began quietly referring to you as “the smartest person on youtube” in interviews.

your comments? still unhinged. but this time it was stuff like:

can y/n explain black holes while arthur proposes???

my ideal relationship is facts, soft hands, and pub golf flashbacks.

you couldn’t lie. the support was unreal.

but what mattered most weren’t the retweets or thumbnails or couple edits. it was the little things that never made it online: the way Arthur instinctively reached for your hand when you crossed the street. how he always waited until you picked the crisps before finalizing your lunch order. or how, whenever you were filming something nerve-wracking, he’d kiss the back of your hand just before the red light blinked on.

one night, as you lay on his sofa wrapped in one of his hoodies, watching old top gear reruns and arguing about the science of jet propulsion, arthur suddenly went quiet.

you turned, “what?”

he looked at you for a long second before softly speaking, “do you ever think this is it?”

“it?”

“like… the person. the ‘oh-it’s-you’ person.”

the air shifted.

your chest tightened—familiar, but not frightening. just real.

“yeah,” you whispered. “i do.”

arthur smiled, slow and small.

“good. because that’s what i think every time i look at you.”

your next video was a q&a. just the two of you, sprawled on his living room floor with mugs of tea and zero script. it was honest, warm, funny. people loved it.

but the very last question hit different.

“what’s your favorite thing about each other?”

you looked at Arthur. he looked at you.

he answered first.

“y/n makes everything feel like a secret worth keeping. even when it’s not.”

you blinked. you throat tightened. your turn.

“he listens. like, really listens. and he never makes me feel like i’m too much. just… exactly enough.”

the video ended there. no flashy outro. no music.

just a soft cut as arthur leaned over, whispered, “you are exactly enough,” and kissed your temple.

OHHH I LOVED THIS PART

🏷️ @wherethezoes-at

[justinspoliticalcorner]

It is hard to imagine a worse candidate for the American presidency in 2024 than Donald J Trump. His history of dishonesty, hypocrisy and greed makes him wholly unfit for the office. A second Trump term would erode the rule of law, diminish America’s global standing and deepen racial and cultural divides. Even if he loses, Mr Trump has shown that he will undermine the election process, with allies spreading unfounded conspiracy theories to delegitimise the results. There are prominent Republicans – such as the former vice-president Dick Cheney – who refused to support Mr Trump owing to the threat he poses. Gen Mark Milley, the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff under Mr Trump, calls his former boss a “fascist”. America was founded in opposition to absolute monarchy. The Republican nominee models himself after the leader he most admires: Russia’s autocratic president, Vladimir Putin. Mr Trump’s authoritarianism may finish US democracy. He has praised and promised to pardon those convicted in the January 6 insurrection. He has suggested bypassing legal norms to use potentially violent methods of repression, blurring the lines between vigilantism, law enforcement and military action, against groups – be they Democrats or undocumented immigrants – he views as enemies. His team has tried to distance itself from the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025 and its extreme proposals – such as mass firings of civil servants and erasing women’s rights – that poll poorly. But it is likely that, in office, Mr Trump would adopt many of these intolerant, patriarchal and discriminatory plans. He aims to dismantle the government to enrich himself and evade the law. If Republicans gain control of the Senate, House and White House, he would interpret it as a mandate to silence his critics and entrench his power. Mr Trump is a transactional and corrupting politician. His supporters see this as an advantage. Christian nationalists want an authoritarian regime to enforce religious edicts on Americans. Elon Musk wants to shape the future without regulatory oversight. Both put self-interest ahead of the American people. Democracy erodes slowly at first, then all at once. In office, Mr Trump appointed three supreme court justices, who this summer blocked efforts to hold him accountable for trying to overturn the 2020 election: their immunity ruling renders the president “a king above the law”, in the words of the liberal justice Sonia Sotomayor. Since Kamala Harris stepped into the spotlight following Joe Biden’s exit, her campaign has been a masterclass in political jujitsu, deftly flipping Mr Trump’s perceived strengths into glaring weaknesses. With a focus on joy, the vice-president sharply contrasted with Mr Trump’s grim narrative of US decline. In their sole televised debate, Ms Harris skillfully outmaneuvered Mr Trump, who fell into her traps, appearing angry and incoherent. She is confident and composed. He sounds unhinged. [...] Political hope fades when we settle for what is, instead of fighting for what could be. Ms Harris embodies the conviction that it’s better to believe in democracy’s potential than to surrender to its imperfections. The Republican agenda is clear: voter suppression, book bans and tax cuts for billionaires. Democrats seek global engagement; the GOP favours isolation. The Biden-Harris administration laid the groundwork for a net zero America. A Trumpian comeback would undo it. A Harris win, with a Democratic Congress, means a chance to restore good governance, create good jobs and lead the entire planet’s climate efforts. Defeating Mr Trump protects democracy from oligarchy and dictatorship. There is too much at stake not to back Ms Harris for president.

The Guardian Editorial Board's endorsement of Kamala Harris for the 2024 US Presidential Election (10.23.2024).

The Guardian’s editorial board gave a powerful endorsement for Kamala Harris, as our democracy’s survival depends on her winning.

[goldenempyrean]

Not Quite 'Just Fine'

« Advent Day 1: “I thought you were ‘just fine’?” »

« Pairing: Natasha Romanoff x Reader »

« Notes: First advent fic of 2023! Let's go! :D »

〘 Check Out My Masterlist! 〙〘 Advent 2023 Masterlist! 〙

“This sucks.” Came the quiet annoyed grumble of your girlfriend, who had been sitting with her knees tucked up to her chest, her head resting atop them.

Ross was currently on the warpath and had demanded the entire team be pulled into a meeting to lectured on why it was important they keep their operations within the strict protocols set by one of the many accords the government had put into place.

“He’ll be done soon.” You murmured in response as you reached underneath the table to rest your hand on her thigh, “You know how he is when he gets in a mood.”

You both knew all too well how Ross could get but you couldn’t help but feel especially bad for your girlfriend considering that she wasn’t exactly feeling 100% at the moment. The pair of you had only just gotten back from a joint 3 day long mission up in the chilly forests of Siberia. Everything had gone great and smoothly… well except for that fact Natasha had insisted on giving you her thick coat after finding out you’d forgotten yours.

Her thin suit had done little to stave off the harsh chill biting in the air and you’d noticed her shivering throughout the night - even after the pair of you had shared long warm shower together. But when you’d pulled another blanket over her asked if she was okay, Natasha had assured you she was fine.

But now you really weren’t so sure. As Ross continued his lecture, Natasha's shivers grew more pronounced, her tired eyes blinking heavily as she held up her head with her hands. You slipped your hand beneath her hoodie and discreetly rubbed her back - something you knew she aways liked when she was in need of a little extra loving - but you couldn’t help but bite back a sigh as you felt the warmth radiating from her.

She let out a soft, suppressed yawn, and you couldn't help but smile sympathetically.

"You look like you need some rest," you whispered, your hand still on her back. "Maybe we can convince Ross that we need to file a mission report or something. Slip away for a bit. I think we should get some medicine into you, bring that temperature of your’s down a little.”

“I don’t have a temperature.” Natasha sniffled faintly but nevertheless she still nodded. Just as you were about to propose your excuse, her body tensed, and she let out a series of quick, half-stifled sneezes into her hands, “Oh, gross…” She cringed in disgust.

"Great timing sweetheart," You mumbled with a chuckle, handing her a tissue from your pocket. "Let's get out of here. I'll take care of you, come on.”

Clearing your throat you stood up to address Ross, “Sir, if you’ll excuse us, there’s a lot of paperwork that needs catching up on which otherwise will end up on your desk, so, may we?”

The secretary seemed more than displeased at your interruption however when he rolled his eyes and nodded towards the door when Natasha curled into herself with a raspy sounding cough a few moments later.

You nodded back, before turning your attention back to your girlfriend who looked like she wanted to hide in her hoodie and never return. “Come on Natty.” You whispered, offering out a hand when she stood up and had to dizzily grab the table to stable her balance.

Walking down the corridor, you felt Natasha slip her arm around your waist she leaned on you for support .”I thought you were 'just fine'?" You teased, making her blush a little as she buried her head into your side.

She looked up and shot you a half-hearted glare, her voice hoarse, "Don't push it."

You chuckled, guiding her through the corridors, "Well, I did warn you to keep your coat, but no, you had to be the chivalrous girlfriend.”

Natasha snorted weakly, but the action caused her to splutter into a sharp cough making her whine in response, “Rub it in later, will you? I just want to get under some warm covers right now.”

Finally when you reached her room, she gave you a grateful smile, "Thanks for saving me from Ross though. I needed that.”

"Anytime, Agent Romanoff," you replied, helping her onto the bed, pulling the thick duvet over her and she snuggled down into the sheet, “Now, let's get you comfortable. I'll find some meds and we’ll cuddle up for the rest of the day.”

She nodded, a small smile playing on her lips, "You're not too bad at this caring girlfriend sort of thing, y’know.”

You winked, "Years of practice. Now, rest up sweetheart and I'll be right back with that medicine."

〖 Join My Taglist! 〗@sayah13 @mahalkitanova @romanoffskisser @scrambled-brain-eggs @natashamyl0ve @bloomingflowersthings @kathleenmikaelson @shamelessbearunknown @inluvwithfictionalwomen @citrussnz @fluffyblanketgecko @kljhsong @santana1437 @blackwidow-3 @asiangmrchk13 @lovelyy-moonlight @juiles @lots-of-pockets @sashawalker2 @natashamaximoff69 @observeowl @beholdagaywriter @widows201 @llovergirleraa @danveration @idkeithershawty @rainedontknow @poison-blackheart @loveshineslikethesky @somber-sapphic @lexasaurs634 @ahintofchaos @scarlettssub @paisley-yy @wandanats-goodgirl l @nuianced-tck-enby @maomaoincomming

[zvaigzdelasas]

The Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) has extended an offer to the US, proposing exclusive access to its critical minerals and infrastructure projects, reported Bloomberg.

In return, the DRC is seeking security assistance to combat a rebellion that is allegedly supported by Rwanda.

In a direct appeal, Congo has requested an urgent meeting between President Felix Tshisekedi and US President Donald Trump.

The proposed pact is expected to grant US companies privileged access to minerals essential for the global energy transition.

The request, conveyed in a letter to US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, underscores the DRC’s pressing need for support as it contends with internal conflict.

Congo’s mining sector, a significant source of copper, is currently dominated by Chinese companies.

A partnership with the US will enable Congo to diversify its economic alliances and reduce China’s influence.

The proposal includes operational control for US companies, “exclusive” extraction and export rights, participation in a deep-water port project and the creation of a joint strategic mineral stockpile.

In exchange for these economic opportunities, the US would provide military training, equipment, and direct security assistance including access to military bases to protect strategic resources.

The French investigative outlet Africa Intelligence reported that DRC President Félix Tshisekedi dispatched figures within his inner circle and mining industry officials to the United States and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) to discuss strategic mineral partnership agreements in exchange for bilateral military assistance in late February.[1] Africa Intelligence reported that the DRC floated an arrangement with the UAE for a copper and cobalt mining site in the Lualaba province in the southeastern DRC’s Katanga region, but China currently dominates mining in this region and additional details of the proposal remain undisclosed.[2] Tshisekedi had publicly offered the United States and the European Union (EU) “a stake in his country’s vast mineral wealth” and said that the Trump administration could benefit from “a stream of strategic minerals from Congo” in an interview with The New York Times on February 22.[3][...]

The DRC’s proposal mirrors the US-Ukraine critical minerals deal that trades access and investment in Ukraine’s mineral industry for potential US security guarantees.[6] The French magazine Jeune Afrique quoted a “senior American diplomat” who speculated that Tshisekedi drew inspiration for the deal after seeing US interest in Ukrainian minerals.[7] The DRC’s proposal for the Banana port resembles a prior DRC-UAE agreement in 2021, when the UAE-based logistics company DP World acquired 70 percent ownership of the Banana port in exchange for a $1 billion investment in the DRC and the delivery of 30 armored vehicles for the Congolese army.[8]

5 Mar 25

[onnahu]

Nighthunts with The Juniors

On the joint nighthunt of Lan and Jin (and Ouyang Zizhen - he's here unofficialy. His dad does not know.) They run into an unrestful spirit of a young man. Because the best thing to do with a spirit is to liberate it, they fund out what that spirit want. It turns out he had 'never kissed a maiden in his life and he cannot move forward without it', so now he hunts the world in the search of a beautiful girl that will kiss him.

All the female desciples caterogically said no at the idea, and one even kicked Jin Ling when he suggested they do it. (She also kicked Jingyi when he agreed with Jin Ling).

Boys were scared and left the idea. Some of them just wanted to give up and supress the ghost, but little Lans were all like 'it's unethical' and they had to figure out something else.

It was Ouyang Zizhen that suggested crossdressing. He proposed Jin Ling. When Jin Ling shouted ant him that if it's such a great idea he himself should disguise as a girl, Zizhen was all like 'sorry, but my jaw is too musculine'. (Is it? Who's to know. Nobody argued bc Zizhen is actually the only one who knows what shit like that means. The girls were having a blast with it and gave him their full support.)

Jin Ling said that if he was to dress up, he wouldn't do it alone and Jingyi had to do it too. Jingyi tried to argue, but the girls were still pissed at him and said 'if you wanted us to do it you can do it yourself'.

That's how Jingyi and Jin Ling ended up dressed up as maidens and the ghost was so happy at the whole two girls that he didn't look to close.

Jingyi tried to get Sizhui to join them but A-Yuan is no pushover so they're on their own.

The ghost was successfully liberated (by two kisses bc none of them agreed to do it without the other) and they went back to their homes.

Wei Wuxian laughed himself sick and said 'well you both kissed the same guy so it's like an undirect kiss between you two' and made Jin Ling cry. Jingyi panicked and went on a spiral of 'do i have to marry him now???'

Ouyang Zizhen was soooo proud of himself.

[theblackrook]

We know Fabre was executed on charges of plotting with enemy nations and being involved in the Compagnie des Indes case.

And for being corrupted, basically. But he denied everything.

How much responsibility did he really bear in all this? What was he actually guilty of?

Alright, let me start by saying right off the bat that I love you and you are my bestest friend, BUT ALSO — @anotherhumaninthisworld and @edgysaintjust HAVE BOTH made a REALLY really like SUPER amazing and good and spectacular post explaining everything.

I'm so serious PLEASE go read it, this post is bound to be just as long as both of theirs combined.

I will more or less be regurgitating what they so eloquently laid out — just in a more "feeding a baby bird" manner of speaking.

On top of this, I'd also like to gently remind everyone that most of my historical brainpower goes into obsessing over the personalities and feelings of these historical figures — so when it comes to the exact logistics of various executions and political events and all that… I’m just a tiny bit fuzzier. But hey, you can’t win 'em all, right?

ANYWAYS THE POST :

Context is very important so we'll touch on that first and foremost. If you're already well versed in all of this hokey-pokey I advise you to scroll down a bit to the read more.

The French East India Company, founded under Louis XIV, was a major trading monopoly with colonial and financial interests. By the time of the Revolution, it had become heavily corrupt and bankrupt.

In 1793, all joint-stock companies were banned by decree, and the company was to be liquidated.

A finance commission was created to oversee the liquidation: members included Fabre d'Églantine, François Chabot, Joseph Delaunay, Julien de Toulouse, Ramel, and Cambon.

Only the first four of them — Fabre, Chabot, Delaunay, and Julien — became involved in the scandal.

So What Happened?

Delaunay, Chabot, and Julien devised a plan: have the East India Company liquidate itself (which allowed for embezzlement and secrecy), in exchange for bribes. Fabre, initially, opposed this idea and proposed government-led liquidation, backed by Robespierre.

Delaunay attempted to bribe Fabre via Chabot (offering a WHOPPING 100,000 livres!!) — Fabre still ended up rejecting the decree draft and reinstated his amendments supporting government control.

Enter THE TRAP ™ !!

Chabot returned later with a supposed "clean" copy, which Fabre, half-asleep, signed without reviewing, assuming it was the version with his corrections.

Delaunay then altered the signed decree, making it look like Fabre had authored and endorsed a version favorable to the company. This decree was submitted to the Convention, and none of the fraud was noticed immediately.

Then We Get The Unraveling ™

Chabot, who was clearly having second thoughts, fearing exposure (and after being accused of moderation by the Jacobins), bursts into Robespierre's room and confesses the entire thing to him, using the excuse that he had only joined the scheme to expose it.

He went to the Committee of General Security, turned over the 100,000 livres (yes, the same money Fabre never actually touched), and spilled the whole scheme — pinning most of it on Delaunay, Julien, and of course, Fabre.

Now, was that a betrayal? Absolutely. Was it the truth? That's the part we're not so sure about.

The committee arrested the main players, including Fabre, and started investigating. And this is where things get even messier.

Fabre was genuinely surprised when shown the decree. He remembered the one Chabot gave him didn't have any of those suspicious cross-outs. Cambon even backed him up on this — he had seen Fabre's real corrections earlier, and they weren't the ones on the final document.

BUT: by this point, Fabre's name was all over the version that had been submitted. It had his signature. It looked like he had written the thing. It didn't help that Delaunay had literally copied the other signatures under his, and edited it to make it look finalized.

And Fabre, poor guy, never even got to see the original documents during his trial. When he asked? Denied!! 🙃

SO WHAT WAS FABRE ACTUALLY GUILTY OF??

okay, one, damn, calm down! Oy gevalt I'm getting there!! In any case, this is where things get very hazy — and where historians have been arguing for well over a century.

There are two (yes TWO!!!) main schools of thought:

The "He Did It" Camp (Albert Mathiez et al) This group sees Fabre as genuinely corrupt. They argue he accepted the bribe, helped manipulate the decree in favor of the East India Company, and basically sold out his revolutionary principles for cash. This view paints Fabre as an opportunist who finally got caught.

The "He Was Framed" Camp (Henri Houben, Michel Eude, and most modern biographers) This camp argues that Fabre was not guilty of corruption, and that he was manipulated and then scapegoated. According to this view, he never took the bribe, tried to prevent the fraud, and was misled into signing a falsified version of the decree. When things blew up, he became a convenient fall guy — partly due to his position, and very largely due to his reputation.

Which brings us to a key point:

Fabre's Reputation

I imagine that when most of you picture this 'first prize'–winning poet, you don't exactly envision an angelic cherub strumming a tiny lute. And would you have it — not many people during his time did, either.

Fabre had what we might call… a reputation. He was a dramatist by profession, known for scandals, affairs, and some shady side gigs (like the iNfAmOuS shoe supply controversy), basically the works. He was close to Danton and had long been seen as too flamboyant and maybe a little too slippery for comfort.

So when his name popped up in a scandal, people were more than ready to believe the worst as he naturally had enemies. He was already associated with the "Indulgents," and in a political climate as volatile as the year they were in, that was more than enough.

It's actually heartbreaking: he may have been undone more by who he was perceived to be than by anything he definitively did.

Also worth noting: he wasn't just executed for the East India stuff. The charges thrown at him also included vague stuff like "plotting with enemy nations" and being part of a conspiracy. It was the same broad, paranoia-fueled wave of accusations that he himself had thrown at Hérault. But in the end, it didn't help: it just added more fuel to the fire, and all those names got pulled into the same whirlwind.. Poor Hérault.

What Do I Think?

I think Fabre was careless, possibly just a TAD naïve, and almost definitely not the main conspirator.

He didn't handle the situation well — that much is clear. Signing a document without checking it was a massive blunder. But the evidence we do have suggests that:

he opposed the company-friendly plan from the start,

he didn't accept the bribe,

and the version of the decree he saw and corrected was not the one that went to the Convention.

Add in the fact that he was denied the chance to even see the document he was accused over during his trial? That smells a lot more like political expediency than due process.. Ahem ahem coughh coughhhh...

So to answer your original question:

How much responsibility did he really bear in all this?

Not none — but not nearly as much as he was punished for. He wasn't blameless, but I don't believe he was the architect of the scheme either.

What was he actually guilty of?

At most? Being reckless, being too trusting, and — as always — being in the exact wrong place at the wrong time. And, of course, being Fabre d’Églantine. That alone was sometimes enough.

[pupmkincake2000]

So, I played Baldur's Gate 3 four times (as Gale rpmancing Astarion, as Astarion romancing Gale, as Durge romancing Halsin, as Durge romancing Gale) and here are the conclusions I came to:

Gale is soooo main character/leader coded. I enjoyed playing as Durge, but playing as Gale and watching him through all 4 playthroughs I realized he is better for this role than anyone else. He's smart, intelligent, kind, he has seen some shit in his life, and won't die on the first day after the nautiloid's crash. Yes, physically he may be weaker than many other characters, but with the amount of knowledge and magic power he is capable of a lot things, and he is also sweet and helps those in need (I consider canon the route when the hero does a lot of good things, including saving the Grove, saving prisoners in Moonrise Towers, etc. ) and is ready to give up god powers for the one he loves. He would be a great leader. You may disagree, but I think hes perfect as a main character.

Despite my dislike of Astarion as a character (and my sudden love for Durge x Gale ship), I think Gale's romance with him is the best and most... uncliched? And I just love it so much! It is precisely because they are two halves of the same coin, they have a lot in common and are able to make each other better. Considering that Astarion's best ending is the one in which he, remaining a vampire spawn, becomes either a traveler or happily married to Gale. Just imagine: Astarion will finally have a loving family, a home, a loving husband (and I’m not even surprised that Gale is the only one who proposes marriage to his lover), he will have a happy, well-fed life, he can choose a profession he enjoys or he can travel with Gale when Gale, as a professor, gets his vacation. After all, every Academy has summer holidays, and Gale himself says that sometimes he misses adventure. And I wouldn't mind reading a story about them travelling the world together again.

Ascended Astarion is the worst version of Astarion, no matter what anyone says (I decided to ascend him in my last playthough and oh gods he's so disgusting!). He doesn't love his consort, I will never believe he does, not to mention his consort is nothing but a pet to him. He is also even more narcissistic and manipulative and is just another Cazador, just a bit worse. This is exactly the impression I got. Plus, he is an evil that needs to be eradicated.

I really enjoyed playing as Durge. Moreover, I really like his redemption. This is that very case when redemption actually works and the character can actually start their life anew. But to be honest, I missed Gale's reaction to Durge's revival after Bhaal drained him of all his blood and after Jergal brought him back to life. But probably any romantic character has no reaction to this.

Wild Magic. The best magic ever.

Karlach and Wyll are made for each other. In my first two playthroughs, Karlach either died or became an illithid, but then I managed to send her with Wyll to Averno. The way he asks her to go with him so that she won’t be lonely, the way he later talks at a party about their joint adventures, the way Karlach says that if it weren’t for Wyll, she would never have returned there... all these moments are the best. It's even more than enemies to lovers, it's a full-fledged healthy relationship built on friendship, trust, support… it's amazing. Just think about it: Wyll did this for her sake, he literally agreed to go with her to hell, where the conditions of survival for a human being are very difficult, just so that she would not be lonely and so that she would not die. I want to believe that they will still be able to repair Karlach’s heart and return to Faerun together.

[lonestarflight]

Cancelled Missions: Apollo-Soyuz Test Program II, with a Salyut Space Station

"The Apollo-Soyuz Test Project (ASTP) had its origins in talks aimed at developing a common U.S./Soviet docking system for space rescue. The concept of a common docking system was first put forward in 1970; it was assumed at that time, however, that the docking system would be developed for future spacecraft, such as the U.S. Space Station/Space Shuttle, not the U.S. Apollo Command and Service Module (CSM) and Soviet Soyuz spacecraft in operation at the time.

A joint U.S./Soviet space mission served the political aims of both countries, however, so the concept of a near-term docking mission rapidly gained momentum. In May 1972, at the superpower summit meeting held in Moscow, President Richard Nixon and Premier Alexei Kosygin signed an agreement calling for an Apollo-Soyuz docking in July 1975.

NASA and its contractors studied ways of expanding upon ASTP even before it was formally approved; in April 1972, for example, McDonnell Douglas proposed a Skylab-Salyut international space laboratory . A year and a half later (September 1973), however, the aerospace trade magazine Aviation Week & Space Technology cited unnamed NASA officials when it reported that, while the Soviets had indicated interest in a 1977 second ASTP flight, the U.S. space agency was 'currently unwilling' to divert funds from Space Shuttle development.

Salyut Apollo docking diagram

Nevertheless, early in 1974 the Flight Operations Directorate (FOD) at NASA Johnson Space Center (JSC) in Houston, Texas, examined whether a second ASTP mission might be feasible in 1977. The 1977 ASTP proposal aimed to fill the expected gap in U.S. piloted space missions between the 1975 ASTP mission and the first Space Shuttle flight.

The brief in-house study focused on mission requirements for which NASA JSC had direct responsibility. FOD assumed that Apollo CSM-119 would serve as the prime 1977 ASTP spacecraft and that the U.S. would again provide the Docking Module (DM) for linking the Apollo CSM with the Soyuz spacecraft. CSM-119 had been configured as the five-seat Skylab rescue CSM; work to modify it to serve as the 1975 ASTP backup spacecraft began as FOD conducted its study, soon after the third and final Skylab crew returned to Earth in February 1974. FOD suggested that, if a backup CSM were deemed necessary for the 1977 ASTP mission, then the incomplete CSM-115 spacecraft should get the job. CSM-115, which resided in storage in California, had been tapped originally for the cancelled Apollo 19 moon landing mission.

FOD also assumed that the ASTP prime crew of Thomas Stafford, Vance Brand, and Deke Slayton would serve as the backup crew for the 1977 ASTP mission, while the 1975 ASTP backup crew of Alan Bean, Ronald Evans, and Jack Lousma would become the 1977 ASTP prime crew. FOD conceded, however, that this assumption was probably not realistic. If new crewmembers were needed, FOD noted, then training them would require 20 months. They would undergo 500 hours of intensive language instruction during their training.

FOD estimated that Rockwell International support for the 1977 ASTP flight would cost $49.6 million, while new experiments, nine new space suits, and 'government-furnished equipment' would total $40 million. Completing and modifying CSM-115 for its backup role would cost $25 million. Institutional costs — for example, operating Mission Control and the Command Module Simulator (CMS), printing training manuals and flight documentation, and keeping the cafeteria open after hours — would add up to about $15 million. This would bring the total cost to $104.7 million without the backup CSM and $129.7 million with the backup CSM.

The FOD study identified 'two additional major problems' facing the 1977 ASTP mission, both of which involved NASA JSC's Space Shuttle plans. The first was that the CMS had to be removed to make room for planned Space Shuttle simulators. Leaving it in place to support the 1977 ASTP mission would postpone Shuttle simulator availability.

A thornier problem was that 75% of NASA JSC's existing flight controllers (about 100 people) would be required for the 1977 ASTP in the six months leading up to and during the mission. In the same period, NASA planned to conduct "horizontal" Space Shuttle flight tests. These would see a Shuttle Orbiter flown atop a modified 747; later, the aircraft would release the Orbiter for an unpowered glide back to Earth. FOD estimated that NASA JSC would need to hire new flight controllers if it had to support both the 1977 ASTP and the horizontal flight tests. The new controllers would receive training to support Space Shuttle testing while veteran controllers supported the 1977 ASTP.

The ASTP Apollo CSM (CSM-111) lifted off on a Saturn IB rocket on 15 July 1975 with astronauts Thomas Stafford, Vance Brand, and Donald Slayton on board. The ASTP Saturn IB, the last rocket of the Saturn family to fly, lifted off from Launch Complex (LC) 39 Pad B, one of two Saturn V pads at Kennedy Space Center, not the LC 34 and LC 37 pads used for Saturn IB launches in the Apollo lunar program. This was because NASA had judged that maintaining the Saturn IB pads for Skylab and ASTP would be too costly. A 'pedestal' (nicknamed the 'milkstool') raised the Skylab 2, 3, and 4 and ASTP Saturn IB rockets so that they could use the Pad 39B Saturn V umbilicals and crew access arm.

Once in orbit, the ASTP CSM turned and docked with the DM mounted on top of the Saturn IB's second stage. It then withdrew the DM from the stage and set out in pursuit of the Soyuz 19 spacecraft, which had launched about eight hours before the Apollo CSM with cosmonauts Alexei Leonov and Valeri Kubasov on board. The two craft docked on 17 July and undocked for the final time on July 19. Soyuz 19 landed on 21 July. The ASTP Apollo CSM, the last Apollo spacecraft to fly, splashed down near Hawaii on 24 July 1975 — six years to the day after Apollo 11, the first piloted Moon landing mission, returned to Earth.

The proposal for a 1977 ASTP repeat gained little traction. Though talks aimed at a U.S. Space Shuttle docking with a Soviet Salyut space station had resumed in May 1975, no plans for new U.S.-Soviet manned missions existed when the ASTP Apollo splashed down. Shuttle-Salyut negotiators made progress in 1975-1976, but the U.S. deferred signing an agreement until after the results of the November 1976 election were known.

In May 1977, the sides formally agreed that a Shuttle-Salyut mission should occur. In September 1978, however, NASA announced that talks had ended pending results of a comprehensive U.S. government review. Following the December 1979 Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, work toward joint U.S.-Soviet piloted space missions was abandoned on advice from the U.S. Department of State. It would resume a decade later as the Soviet Union underwent radical internal changes that led to its collapse in 1991 and the rebirth of the Soviet space program as the Russian space program."

-Article from "No Shortage of Dreams" blog: link

Drew Granston: link

source, source, source

[nerdishpursuits]

It's rather obvious the lavender marriage will, eventually, happen. And I'm not against it, given it's 1958. In fact, I think it can lead to interesting storylines if handled smartly (I know, I know ... smart isn't really the MO here) However? I have some gripes with the way they're introducing this scenario. Gripes which by no means lessen my enjoyment of the show. Like I keep saying, this is a novela de sobremesa and, thus, subject to the whims of its genre: nonsensical timelines, plot-points that don't quite connect, pacing issues etc. Nonetheless, it doesn't deter my amused nitpicking nor my eyebrow-rising routine.

Marta & Pelayo have known each other for 2.5 seconds.

There's currently no threat in sight that would merit Marta & Fina considering this suggestion (S. is in jail; the people who know them, and support them in their own way, wish them no harm; Marta is a wealthy widow, has a surname that carries weight, a social standing and, momentarily, needs no protection - if anything, it's Fina being perpetually single that would raise/raises most eyebrows; Marta & Fina have their own life and rhythm that requires no upgrade; Marta's business deal is going swimmingly etc.)

The one who stands to profit the most from this is Pelayo himself, who keeps repeating he has no interest in anything sentimental, unlike Marta & Fina who have been fortunate enough to win the sapphic lottery. This is a business decision for him, of course, yet he also confesses he envies their relationship. Pelayo then tries to sell this idea of a sudden epiphany he’s had? One he tries to wrap up in a neat little bow and market as the best thing since sliced bread? Ultimately, it involves invading the sanctuary he’d just praised for reasons that, at present, are largely selfish (befitting his character as a ruthless businessman and the show’s timeline). I will say I love the fact that in the preview for the next episode Marta goes “WE have a reply”, ergo. Fina and Marta herself.

Most of Marta & Fina's circle of family and friends are aware of their relationship and Pelayo would only expose himself (I assume most of the Mafin friends and allies would piece it all together and Jesús wouldn't hesitate to use this information to his own gain)

Even if this is a lavender-marriage, Marta would lose her freedom: socially and financially. She’d have to attend all kinds of functions and play the dutiful wife. Is it manageable? Eventually. And a lot of the conflict will derive from it, I think. At the same time, do I think a more solid reason is needed for Marta to take this step and for Fina to agree with it? Yes. But who knows. Maybe Marta’s own ambition will end up playing a part? More information is needed here. I will say, I hope they refuse at first.

Commendation to Marta's before and after reaction … hahaha, you’re kidding me … you’re kidding me, right?

I find myself pondering if, at first, they only want to test the waters with this idea. Introduce it as a possible option these characters can fall back on. To me it would make sense for Marta & Fina to initially refuse Pelayo's proposal. Their friendship can then continue to grow and when their backs are against the wall, which will inevitably happen, the lavender marriage-card can be pulled out of the sleeve. Ergo, Pelayo might be in danger and they decide to help him, Marta might be in jeopardy herself etc. As it comes across right now? They’re racing downhill without breaks. I suppose we'll see what they have in store for them, won't we? I have to say it was lovely to see Marta & Fina behave like a couple while in company. I don't think they've ever acted as relaxed in front of anyone, not even Carmen. Which is why I'd love to see their friendship with Pelayo continue to mature in a way that brings the three of them closer, making joint decisions. For now, I'd say more time is needed to grow a true sense of camaraderie. But hey: we're on novelita time and it has its own quirks. Other than that? Carmen inadvertently running her mouth in front of Tasio? Drop the ball she did. At least, she vehemently pressed hubby dearest to promise he'd hold his tongue. A tall order indeed, because knowing Tasio and his chronic foot-in-moth syndrome? It's only a matter of time before he shits the bed. Granted, he didn’t react as badly as I thought he would, but it’s obvious he considers Marta and Fina’s relationship an aberration, something laughable and ridiculous. Let’s hope he fully comes around and becomes the brother Marta deserves. And speaking of Carmen: she really needs to loosen up with Marta who's done nothing but bow her head, plead guilty and ask for forgiveness. I still think Carmen should have understood Marta’s position and anguish and shown more empathy. If not as a friend and Fina’s partner, at least as a fellow woman? It’s still unclear to me if she learned the extent of Santiago’s abuse? But given her attitude, I gather she’s still clueless.

Case in point? Carmen is pulling at this thread with Marta so hard it'll end up snapping and hitting her square in the face. And I do confess I'd like to see Marta finally bite back. Carmen is treating Tasio as if he doesn't have two brain-cells to rub together, incapable of making his own decisions and subject to the most devious manipulations. Not to mention Marta has never treated any of them as if the class divide mattered. And now Carmen heaps that reproach onto Marta's overflowing plate as well. Might be Carmen needs a healthy dose of Fina's volcanic temper. Front-row seats to that, please and thank you. If Carmen can go full-blown unreasonable over her troglodyte husband? Then Fina can go full-blown reality check over her fiercely protective wife.

Ahoy!!! Onto next week’s drama.