#and that this is after the ultimate enemy - wherein which he allied himself with the JL to fight against dan

[hailsatanacab]

A Persuasive Argument - dpxdc

"Great!" Danny says, clapping his hands together to get everyone's attention. The dinner table falls silent as everyone looks towards him. It's a full house today and, honestly, Danny's a little nervous. "I'm sure you're all wondering why I gathered you here today."

"It's dinnertime. In our house." Duke mutters, while doing a very bad job of concealing his yawn. He holds his fork poised over the braised beef, but, just like everyone else, still looks towards Danny before tucking in. It's intriguing enough to wait.

"Yeah, no one misses Alfie's dinner." Dick says, with a brilliant smile that Danny can't help but return.

"Precisely! What better time to talk to you all than when you're all actually here!"

"Wait, I thought you came round to work on our English essays?" Tim asks, blinking owlishly.

"I'm afraid I've lured you here under false pretences, Tim."

"This is where I live."

"I would still really appreciate help on that essay though, I mean, what the hell is Hamlet even about? I just don't get that old time-y language, like 'Hark! A ghost hath killed me!' - absolute rubbish, what does that even mean?"

"The ghost never kills anyone in Hamlet, he's there to tell Hamlet that he was murdered. Have you actually read it?"

"No, but it sounds like you have. Tim, I want this guy to help me with my essay instead. I know for a fact that you haven't read Hamlet, either."

"So? We don't need Jason, I've read the Sparknotes."

"Hi Jason, I'm Danny, pleasure to meet you, summarise Hamlet in three sentences or less."

"Am I auditioning to help you write your essays? I can't believe you’ve gone through your whole school life without reading it, it’s good!"

"Hamlet, along with a number of other classics, was banned in our house because it portrayed ghosts as intelligent and sympathetic beings rather than evil, animalistic beasts. I didn’t even get to see The Muppet's Christmas Carol until last year with Tim! It was surprisingly good, and I hate Christmas because everyone always argued and it sucked. But we're getting off topic. I—"

"No, no, please go back to that, because what the fu—"

"Boys, please." Bruce interrupts, looking to the world as if he wants to hang his head in his hands. "Danny, you were about to say something?"

"Oh, yeah, Mr. Wayne! Thanks!"

"Please, call me Bruce."

"Well, that very succinctly brings me to my point, because I'd actually really like to call you dad."

Nobody says a word. Nobody even blinks, all as shocked as the other, watching open-mouthed as Danny pulls his laptop out from beside his chair. Bruce can definitely feel a headache coming on.

"Before you say anything, I've prepared a 69 slide PowerPoint presentation on why you, Bruce Wayne, should adopt me, Danny Last-Name-Pending. Please save your questions, comments, and verdict until the end, thank you."

[rustyvanburace]

Truthfully, as much as I do earnestly love Navarre in SMT IVA, his portrayal in that has always been a mix bag for me. There are certain facets that feel off-putting to me insofar as his role and continuity.

But what I do really love is that the game takes time to highlight (or rather, introduce) some of his more positive traits that we don’t get to see in IV at all.

Namely, we get to see that Navarre actually does care for people other than himself and doesn’t shy away from expressing his genuine approval or concern for them -- even if he is quick to retreat to his braggart front. He deeply loves his younger brother Gaston and worries for his safety, but he also doesn’t fly to his defense when Gaston gets rightfully accosted for his behaviour. Navarre also offers some thoughtful introspection on a number of occasions regarding his past, family, and even his former fellow Samurai. The latter is especially notable as he no longer looks down upon his fellow Samurai and now regards them favourably.

As a ghost, he is physically not able to do much. But where he lacks, he makes up for it by providing valuable encouragement and insight. Literally this is what he does as a partner by bestowing ally buffs and enemy debuffs. It is a MONUMENTAL change from when he was still alive and walked all over everyone -- the tree stump in his IV artwork is actually symbolic of that.

And that all leads me to believe that Navarre, after losing his sanity, his status, his family, and finally his own life, was able to sit down and really reflect on himself and his past actions. That of course doesn’t excuse his shit in IV whatsoever, but his turn-around shows that there is a want for change in him. Even if that isn’t shown outright or consistently throughout IVA.

And it’s THAT that I had wanted to see in him for so, so long when I was first playing IV. The realization and taking steps to do better for the sake of others, even while dead. I actually hoped he would be a much bigger character in IV.

It’s also why his portrayal in IVA is honestly mixed for me. Navarre is constantly treated as the gag and butt-of-all-jokes in this game. He is constantly being put down by the cast even in the moments where he is being sincere or trying to help. At times he deserves it, and other times it’s just needless and taking light away from the redeeming qualities he now shows. But it’s also not that the cast doesn’t ever acknowledge his good either.

I believe that Atlus were trying to make Navarre into the Cute Quirky Creature Mascot that’s trend in some of their other titles, yet that also fell flat as they didn’t fully commit to that effort either.

Continuity-wise, in some ways Navarre is a completely different character. Navarre in IVA lauds himself as a Samurai, despite never wanting to be one in IV and having adamantly sworn off the position altogether during his sidequest. In IV, he suffers from debilitating PTSD that is practically non-existent in IVA. His mere existence of being a ghost in Tokyo hinges entirely on IV’s escort sidequest wherein he begs Flynn to take him away from Mikado, yet that event is (not to my knowledge) referenced at all in IVA. These are all important to his character development in IV, small as they may be, yet they are barely acknowledged in the sequel.

Nonetheless though, IVA still shines in showing Navarre’s good, redeeming qualities as well as adding some nuance to his character and family.

What I especially love is Navarre’s introspection of his family’s high expectations and pressure to preserve the family honour, something which Gaston also struggled with and ultimately failed at despite his earnest efforts. His failure leads to the Kingdom of Mikado disowning him as well as humbling him. This little factoid on their family gives so much more nuance to these two.

I do wish that IVA was more consistent with Navarre and did him better -- namely, not introduce his “comedic” perversion or at least referenced his sidequest in IV. But as for everything else, I’m very content. Funny thing actually: I’m so enamoured with this POS that I was actually pretty upset when I learned he dies in IVA, lmao. But in retrospect, him dying really was for his betterment.

[nateofgreat]

The pathetic life of (MMO) Darth Revan

This is going off the MMO version of him so there’s no need to bring up comics or books in the replies. This is just for fun.

Revan’s been built up as one of the greatest Jedi and Sith to have ever lived, powerful beyond measure. But taken all together, Revan’s actually lived a pretty pathetic life.

First Revan is a Jedi who goes to war against the Mandalorian’s to protect the Republic, building his own faction of Jedi to aide in this pursuit. Only to go and confront Vitiate who be mind-tricked into turning evil, causing him to kill a good chunk of his allies and then turn on the Republic he’d been fighting for moments earlier.

Then the Jedi capture him and erase his mind, turning him back to the light. Wherein Revan then cripples the Sith Empire he’d only just finished building and then leaving the Republic (decaying thanks to him) behind to go and confront Vitiate... Again.

Whereupon Vitiate immediately defeats him and his fangirl the Exile and shoves him in a prison for three hundred years. Until he finally gets sick of him and lets Revan go so he’ll lead him to the Foundry. Which Revan does without hesitation.

Fortunately for the Galaxy the Empire stops Revan from unleashing a genocide scheme that would cripple both the Empire and Republic. His apparent death resulting in his light and dark halves being severed from each other. As Vitiate released him and everything went according to plan I can only count this as Revan’s third defeat against Vititate.

After suffering his third defeat, Revan gathers up supporters and... Decides to confront Vitiate for a fourth time. Somehow still thinking he’s the only one who can stop him despite demonstrably aiding his rise to power at every turn.

And so Revan launches attacks on the Empire and Republic. All with the mad scheme of undoing the Jedi Knight’s work in defeating Vitiate so that Revan can get a fourth shot at killing him. Only for this plan to backfire and restore Vitiate to power instead. Resulting in Revan’s fourth defeat at his hands.

Vititate goes on to eat an Imperial planet.

So in summary. Revan spent his entire life flip-flopping in his allegiances, constantly building up factions only to turn on them and tear them down a few years later or otherwise see them destroyed by his enemies. And all this is interspersed with him repeatedly challenging and being defeated by the same guy, over and over again. To the point he actually manages to un-defeat Vitiate just so he could come back and beat him a fourth time.

MMO Revan might just be the most pathetic force user in history. For all his power he ultimately managed to accomplish nothing and cause horrible damage to everyone he ever tried to support. The only person he ever benefited? Was Vitiate himself.

[bestworstcase]

on ‘villainy’ and varian’s and cassandra’s moral codes

for all that varian’s and cassandra’s villain arcs get compared to death they’re really more different than they are similar, and i think one of the more interesting distinctions is the characters’ moral perspectives on their own actions--namely that varian recognizes his own choices as villainous and consciously self-identifies as a ‘bad guy’ and cassandra not only…doesn’t do that but appears legitimately taken aback when varian says she’s ‘become the villain.’ from this we can infer that varian is transgressing his own personal sense of right and wrong while cassandra isn’t.

and… well with varian i think it’s pretty straightforward: he’s a kid who desperately wants to make the world a better place and make his father proud, but his impulsivity and recklessness and general disregard for lab safety foil his plans and get him into trouble. then one of his accidents puts his dad into what is essentially a magical coma and varian becomes singularly focused on reviving him--and, when he realizes that the king is more invested in covering up the problem than fixing it and his only hope lies with a zealously guarded relic belonging to the kingdom, he decides that the only way to achieve this goal is to start breaking the rules.

so he asks rapunzel--his friend who promised to help him--to retrieve some information the king is trying to steal from him, and then persuades her to help him access the sundrop vault; then when she balks at stealing it he makes it clear that he no longer trusts her and escapes with the flower. at this point he’s in the morally dubious zone; being strategic about what he tells rapunzel to make sure she helps him, spiking cookies with truth serum to sow chaos and get information he needs, and doing things that are crimes on paper but also largely victimless. i think these were things varian could probably rationalize as okay--not exactly good, but no one got hurt and he got what he needed.

except the flower’s magic is gone. he drugged the palace, manipulated rapunzel and broke her trust in him, and committed treason all for something useless because the actual magic of the sundrop is in rapunzel herself. now he’s in trouble, because he needs rapunzel’s help but his desperate measures guaranteed she won’t be willing to help him again. and this is when varian realizes that his only options are 1. give up on saving his dad and turn himself in and hope rapunzel takes pity on him, or 2. accept that no one is going to help him now and do whatever it takes to free quirin himself.

so--mutating ruddiger, attacking the city, kidnapping arianna and threatening her with encasement in amber, building an automaton army to defend him while he works--these are all things that varian feels are wrong, but chooses to do anyway because he doesn’t trust that anyone else will even try to save his father. despite his anger and his rationalizations, at the end of the day varian sees himself as doing bad things for good reasons. (“Believe me, I know/I’ve sunk pretty low” & “I’m the bad guy, that’s fine”)

and when his reasons fall through--when he fails to free his dad--he falls quickly into guilt and despair over having hurt people for nothing. he stews for a year in how unforgivable and ashamed he feels, and even when he teams up with the separatists, he’s doing it in, basically, pursuit of a reset button: he wants to take back what he did. and when rapunzel shows him that he can be forgiven, he can have a second chance, he does have people who are willing to help him and trust him again, he drops the memory-wiping idea and his alliance with the separatists without a second thought--because what rapunzel actually does is give him a way to pursue his goals without sacrificing his conscience, which is what he really needed the whole time.

now, cassandra, on the other hand…

cass is an interesting character in this regard because, while she does want to be a hero, she’s not at all altruistic. she’s consumed by her lack of autonomy and she craves not only control over her own life but also respect from the people around her--her desire to be a hero is very self-interested, at its core. and moreover she has a somewhat fatalistic view of the world wherein some people (not her) matter and some… just don’t. 

moreover cassandra, despite her ambitions of becoming a guard, doesn’t so much as blink at eugene’s or the pub thugs’ criminal pasts--she is suspicious of lance at first, but on the grounds that he’s an unrepentant thief who showed up out of the blue under suspicious circumstances to ‘reconnect’ with his old partner in crime; eugene is also distrustful of lance, for the exact same reasons--and of course she doesn’t think twice about breaking the law herself. literally one of the very first things we see cassandra do is commit treason to make her friend happy. cass doesn’t care about the law, and she only wants to be a guard because she associates getting the job with having her dad’s approval and it’s also her ticket out of lifelong servitude.

on the other hand, cass does seem have a strong sense of right and wrong where people she cares about are concerned. she is constantly putting the desires and well-being of her friends ahead of not just her ambitions (e.g. in beginnings for rapunzel, or great expotations for varian) but also her own safety (e.g. risking her livelihood and home to sneak rapunzel out for the night in bea, or setting aside her misgivings about the sketchy bird people in freebird). 

which is all to say--cass isn’t exactly amoral but the moral framework through which she sees the world is… more complicated than varian’s. she doesn’t seem particularly motivated to help strangers but she’ll move mountains to help people she cares about; she doesn’t care much about rules or laws except insofar as she doesn’t want to get caught breaking them, and she has this hierarchical mindset that some people matter--meaning, they get to make decisions for themselves and have people care about what they need and want--and some don’t, and that she herself is stuck in the latter category despite her best efforts to climb out of it.

which brings us to the subject of the moonstone, and cassandra’s villain arc, and why cass, unlike varian, doesn’t consider herself a bad person.

i think what it comes down to most is this: taking the moonstone is an act of defiance against not only rapunzel but also fate itself. waiting in the wings sets up cassandra’s resigned acceptance of this hierarchical order and her own cosmic insignificance, and then in crossing the line she REJECTS that same order. she’s raging against rapunzel but also against the cultural and legal and destined systems that put rapunzel on top and forced cass into subservience. she is very literally fighting for her freedom against the universe itself.

and when cass was not an altruistic or heavily morally motivated or even particularly law-abiding person before, and when her conscience has always been predominantly oriented around taking care of her friends first and herself second, and when the thing that drove her to this breaking point was her friends spitting that back in her face… well.

it’s easy to say “cass literally tried to murder rapunzel a bunch of times, how can she possibly believe she’s the good guy?”--but rapunzel maimed cass, blamed her for it, and consistently prioritized her destiny over cassandra’s wellbeing; and rapunzel represents the cosmic order that cass is fighting to liberate herself from. and while i know that the -popular- take on be very afraid is “cass is terrified of hurting rapunzel,” i submit it’s actually “cass is terrified of having to fight rapunzel, because she still believes that fate is literally tilted in rapunzel’s favor and she can’t win a direct fight with rapunzel.” that’s why she’s so scared; that’s why rapunzel seemingly deleting the red rocks hardens her resolve; that’s why she marches into corona with maximum drama and bluster and builds a fortress and tries so hard to mess with rapunzel’s head before the battle begins. she’s trying to even the odds. and that’s why, when rapunzel stomps her into the curb, cassandra’s immediate response is “i need an army.”

cassandra isn’t scared for rapunzel. she is scared OF rapunzel.

we do also see cass trying not to harm people she considers to be innocent bystanders; she uses the truth serum on varian bc she needs the incantation, but afterwards she doesn’t even bother to restrain him until after he starts pestering her, she says flat out that she doesn’t want him to get hurt when she fights rapunzel; similarly she is willing to hurt calliope to force rapunzel to comply, but--despite her deep personal dislike of calliope--uses a minimum amount of force and again verbally expresses that she doesn’t particularly want to hurt her, that it’s a means to an end and nothing more. attacking rapunzel? that’s fine, rapunzel is her enemy. attacking eugene? of course, he’s rapunzel’s closest ally. mind controlling the brotherhood? that kills two birds with one stone--eliminating powerful enemies with a vested interest in taking the moonstone away from her and turning them into allies who can level the playing field between her and rapunzel. and when she does finally snap and raze corona to the ground? the people of corona attacked her first. i think cass ABSOLUTELY sees herself as fighting a purely defensive war against people who have or will hurt her.

and this is, of course, ultimately why varian failed to get through to her during ‘nothing left to lose’--he appealed to her sense of morality and her sense of morality shrugged. 

as for the thing that snaps her out of it? the moment that forces her to question whether she’s really as right as she thinks she is? it’s learning who her new friend really is. it’s the shock of finding out that she’s been allied with, confiding in, taking advice from a legendary villain, from a monster she likely grew up hearing stories about. cass takes it as a given that zhan tiri is evil--and if she’s friends with zhan tiri, what does that make her? and even then, cass is resistant to the idea that she might be a villain--“No, no, I’m nothing like you. Just because I’m pursuing my destiny doesn’t make me a bad person!”--which is, ultimately, very telling of her whole mindset. she’s not a bad guy, she’s fighting for her freedom. she’s not a bad guy, she’s protecting herself against people who want to exploit her. she’s not a bad guy, she’s just putting herself first for once.

and OAH generally, i’d argue, is not actually about cassandra trying to reconcile with rapunzel or redeem herself or be a better person, it’s… literally cass trying frantically to prove she’s NOT the bad guy. it’s “oh yeah? you think i’m a bad person? well could a bad guy do THIS? *lies and impersonates a former coworker and gets up on a stage to justify her own actions in front of a crowd*” it’s “a bad guy wouldn’t apologize, rapunzel never apologized for anything, and to prove i’m a better person I’M going to apologize! see? SEE!?”--and then everyone in corona attacks her and she goes “FINE, i’m the bad guy, fuck you all” and wrecks the place.

only then--only in plus est en vous--does cassandra get into a mindset similar to varian’s, of “i am the bad guy but if i can pull this off it will be worth it.” she’s not sorry. she still sees rapunzel as an enemy trying to get her under control again, and the only thing that’s really changed is cassandra acknowledging that she has in fact done bad things too.

and… i would argue that by the end of plus est cassandra… feels some guilt but isn’t sorry. “i’ve failed” and “i’ve done terrible things” and “i tried to prove i was more than everyone thought but they were right”--her anguish is not like varian’s anguish in RR, where he was consumed with despair because no one could possibly forgive him for the things he did. cassandra is upset because she did awful things and failed and she perceives that failure as proof of her own worthlessness. she’s right back to feeling how she felt in waiting in the wings but with a hefty new helping of self-disgust and shame for having been stupid enough to believe she could change anything for herself. 

she’s not sorry. she’s not pleading for forgiveness. she just wants rapunzel to give up and leave her alone--& then, after rapunzel convinces her that she’s wrong, and she does have worth as a person, and she does have a destiny of her own, cass does what’s necessary to clean up the crisis she created and then… just bounces. she gets the freedom she wanted and leaves without a backward glance.

(which. good for her.)

tl;dr: varian’s villain arc explores his moral scruples and what it takes for him to be willing to ignore them, whereas cassandra’s villain arc explores her incendiary reaction to a lifetime of injustices; she isn’t amoral but her sense of right and wrong is, unlike varian’s, very contextual and personal. varian is a pragmatic idealist who wants to be lawful good but is capable of setting his own morals aside in pursuit of a goal he considers to be important enough, and cassandra is one radicalizing incident away from realizing that her grievances are not a unique personal failing but a systemic problem and then leading a class uprising.

[victoriajeansadia]

As Heroes...

Heroes are fictional or real-life characters we look up to as we live our lives. They portray bravery, determination, courage, and a lot of other positive traits we can think of. 

Do you ever wonder how these heroes live their life? Do they have their routine every morning or a weekend getaway? 

Probably we cannot have exact answers to that but we can dive into the stages (from Joseph Campbell’s Monomyth)  that our heroes went through in living their heroic lives. One example of  a hero is Hercules:

Hercules is one of the famous heroes in mythology for his strength and heroic adventures. In the movie Hercules (1997), his story started showing his full of love and cozy life, first with his god parents and with his mortal parents, that is the ordinary world (1st stage) of every heroic character. Then he was called to an adventure (2nd stage) after hearing from his mortal parents that he was just adopted when they saw him crying alone as a baby. With this knowledge, Hercules was eager to meet his parents, which he fortunately did meet his father, but he cannot go back to where he used to be. He must have to be a hero in order to do live again at the Mt. Olympus with his father Zeus and mother Hera. However,Hercules came to a sort of refusal to the call (3rd stage) having his doubts to himself and fears of outside world. Nevertheless, he still managed to decide to go for the journey and met the mentor (4th stage) who helped him cross the threshold (5th stage) from being a destructive boy because of his god-like-strength to a hero that he has to be. However, becoming a hero was not easy because there are so many tests, allies, enemies (6th stage) Hercules have to deal with. There are people who did not trust his purpose and skills, there are some who acted like his ally but turned out to be his enemy, and there are tests that really required heroic skills in order to be passed. These were just a phase of small triumphs and minor dangers that Hercules faced before approaching the inmost cave (7th stage) wherein he dealt with giving up his strength over love in the middle of the ultimate test in his heroic life. Upon giving up his strength, he overcame the ordeal (8th stage) in which he fought the giants and cyclops without his supernatural strength and with only his human skills. On one hand, it is fortunate that he was able to won over these monsters which he gained a reward (9th stage) that was to reunite with the love of his life. On the other hand, instead of heading road back (10th stage) with the triumph he just gained, Megara (his love, she’s a mortal by the way) died so he decided to save her soul from hell in exchange of his own soul. He successfully saved Meg and both of them were resurrected (11th stage) from a near death experience. This turn of events led Hercules to return with the Elixir (12th stage), acquired back his supernatural strength, and lived happily with Megara as mortals.

Heroes go through a lot before achieving their titles and acknowledgments which is also the same as with the life of mortals. I think we can relate to heroes, in a way, just without the supernatural aspect of it. We can say that we are all heroes for certain people that we’ve met.

But if I were a hero, I’m thinking if there would be a stage/stages in a hero’s journey that I would skip. I don’t want to skip any stages because I think all stages are essential in order for you to be a hero or to become something you wanted to be. But if I could, as much as possible, I would not like to experience having allies who would turn into my enemies. It would be very painful just having the thought of it to have these people in your life. I can’t imagine how I would deal with monsters after knowing that a friend of mine betrayed me. I think it’s more heartbreaking than have the monsters reap my body (Just kidding! But that’s the metaphorical pain I would relate it to).

I hope we can all be heroes who are able to live our life helping ourselves and others in the most ways we can. As well as face the journey of life as brave as the heroes we look up to.

Ciao!

[wazafam]

In the DC Extended Universe, the gods have a lot to do with the powerful artifacts bequeathed to heroes and villains alike. Wonder Woman 1984 showcases such an object: a stone forged by an Old God that gets into the wrong hands. There are other such treasures and weapons scattered throughout the universe. From its inception, the DCEU has showcased a number of them throughout the movies.

Wonder Woman is in possession of a great many gifts from the gods, but she is not alone. The films have introduced a few magical objects that were actually made by gods in an effort to imbue their champions with strength and fortitude. Each item is born by someone worthy enough to use its powers for good. This is the purpose behind the creation of each piece of equipment. When such items get into the hands of a greedy or power-hungry individual, however, they can have devastating consequences.

Related: What The DCEU Can Do After Wonder Woman 1984's Divisive Release

The artifacts created by the gods are boons to the heroes of the Justice League and those who aid the cause of righteousness. The films explore the power these objects deliver to their owners and those who would take advantage of the gifts of the Old Gods. Here is a breakdown of the tools created by the hands and materials of the gods. (Note: It should be noted here that, as with many items and characters in comic books, the origins of these objects have been retconned numerous times.)

Forged from the girdle of the Earth goddess Gaea, the Lasso of Truth is a creation of Hephaestus, the god of fire, smithing, and metallurgy. It is a weapon made to be indestructible and immutable, withstanding any battle. It can alter in length depending on the wielder's purpose. It has many powers, including the power to cast hypnosis, dispel illusions, restore repressed memories, and shield those in its circle from supernatural attacks. Its main capability, due to being imbued by the fires of Hestia, is to compel anyone held in its grasp to utter only the truth. This power is volatile, as it forces one to face the truth of their violent deeds.

In the wrong hands, the Lasso is great and terrible. Under the control of the villain Genocide, the weapon was used to attack the souls of her victims, bringing even powerful opponents to their knees. The tool has frightening potential, and it is necessary that one pure of heart be in control of its force. The tool, also dubbed the Golden Perfect, the lasso is Wonder Woman's primary weapon, and with her strength and speed, it can be used as both a defensive and offensive weapon, which fits her pacifist yet powerful fighting style.

Worn by all the Amazons of Themyscira, the Bracelets of Submission are indestructible silver cuffs that symbolize years of bondage under the rule of the tyrannical Hercules. The bracelets protect against blasts, small missiles, and gunfire, serving as the main method of defense for every Amazon woman starting at age fifteen. When the Amazons reach that age, they pledge themselves in service to the goddess Aphrodite and are gifted the cuffs.

Related: Wonder Woman Becomes The DCEU's Superman AND Batman In 1984

Hephaestus modified the cuffs given to Diana, reinforcing them with Eighth Metal, a metal favored by the gods. The original cuffs were made from the metal of Athena's Olympian Aegis shield, not only protecting against bullets, but serving as a way to harness an Amazon's power, building up a massive strength boost when they are released.

The God Killer, a creation of Hephaestus, was first offered to Deathstroke in order to assassinate an enemy of the Olympians, a mad Titan named Lapetus. The sharp and durable blade has also been seen in the wrong hands, both in the clutches of Grail, daughter of the New God Darkseid, in an attempt to usurp the throne from Hippolyta, and in the possession of Cheetah, Wonder Woman's foe. It is a powerful weapon, one that Diana is not sure she wants to wield. She retrieves the weapon from a tower in Themyscira, believing it to be the only thing powerful enough to destroy Ares, the God of War. Diana utilizes the sword on the battlefield as well as to dispatch General Ludendorff when she believes him to be Ares.

Ultimately, the real Ares reveals to Diana that the sword itself is not the God Killer, but that Diana is. Ares destroys the sword before Diana defeats him. The sword's remains have not been mentioned again in the DCEU. In Justice League, Diana has a new sword: the Sword of Athena. The weapon was created and wielded by the Olympian goddess of wisdom, crafts, and strategy, and it is gained by Diana sometime after World War I. Like its predecessor, the sword is extremely sharp and durable, even managing to slice off Doomsday's right arm. Diana is worthy of wielding the artifact, which has inscribed on the blade in Greek, "Life is killing life all the time, and so the goddess kills herself in sacrifice of her own animal."

Also called the Talaria, the Sandals of Hermes are magical footwear that grants the wearer flight and enhanced speed. Though Wonder Woman has been in possession of these sandals on many occasions, she also gifts them to her allies in order to allow them access to those gifts. Wonder Woman has used the sandals to cross over the mystical field that separates Paradise Island from Man's World when she is needed or called upon. The Air of Chaos that acts as a barrier between the two realms is dangerous, but the sandals allow her to pass through it safely.

Related: Why Doesn't Wonder Woman Fly In BvS Or Justice League?

In different times through Wonder Woman's history, the sandals have been loaned out. During her time as Wonder Woman, Artemis wore the sandals. Diana's mother Hippolyta utilized them in her battle against Imperiex Probes. Teen Titan Cassandra Sandsmark used them for a short time after meeting Diana. An Amazon named Pythia stole them from Diana in an effort to find Harvard professor Julia Kapatelis. The sandals represent one of the many reasons that Wonder Woman is a worthy hero: she shares her power instead of hoarding it.

There are many stories of who created the Dreamstone, or Materioptikon. It is said to have been crafted by Dream of the Endless, also known as the Dream Ruby. Into the Dreamstone, Dream poured his essence, making it the most powerful of the twelve stones he created. In another version showcased in Wonder Woman 1984, the stone is created by an Old God named the Duke of Deception in order to incite chaos and misrule in the world. Touching the stone and speaking one's true wish would grant the deepest desires of humanity, but at a cost. Like the proverbial monkey's paw, the stone is not to be used lightly.

In the year 1984, the stone resurfaces at the Smithsonian Institute where Diana is working. It is being analyzed by geologist Barbara Minerva, but it is stolen by con artist Maxwell Lord, who has searched for the legendary stone for decades. He wishes to become the stone himself, gaining its wish-granting power as it drains him of health and energy. The Dreamstone wreaks havoc on the world, causing erratic, violent behavior in ordinary people, increasing murders and even plane crashes. As mayhem increases, Wonder Woman fears the power of wishing, and knows all the wishes must be undone. She forces Max to face the truth of his shortcomings, making him realize what truly matters to him and what his greed has done to the world.

It is not only tools and weapons created by the gods in an effort to aid their heroes, but entire places as well. Zeus created the isolated island in the Mediterranean Sea in order to protect his beloved creation the Amazons after their race was threatened by gods like Ares. The city-state is reminiscent of ancient Greece in architecture and climate, and it is protected by magical barriers that conceal it from the outside world.

Related: Wonder Woman 1984: Every Plot Hole Created By Steve Trevor's Return

For centuries after Zeus's creation of Paradise Island, the civilization of the Amazons flourished under the peaceful reign of Hippolyta, the mother of Diana. She knew that Ares would one day return, and so the warriors trained in the art of combat, surpassing the skills of men. The island remained undisturbed until 1918 when a pilot named Steve Trevor crash-landed off the coast and was rescued by Wonder Woman. Unfortunately, the German Navy was able to track Steve to Themyscira, bringing conflict and death to the immortal Amazons once more.

It's not only Wonder Woman who is gifted the power of the gods. Aquaman's DCEU movie finds the source of his power in the Trident of Atlan, the king who founded Atlantis. The trident was forged from the steel of Poseidon in the Kingdom of the Deserters, giving King Atlan mastery over the Seven Seas. The trident was used by Atlan for many purposes, including imprisoning the Karathen, a giant sea creature so powerful that even the king feared her. Atlan became too over-reaching with his use of the trident, and, during an experiment gone awry, the force of the trident released a great wave of energy that sunk Atlantis to the bottom of the ocean. Atlan felt palpable shame after the fall of Atlantis, exiling himself to the same abyss, the Hidden Sea, wherein he put the Karathen, admonishing her to protect the trident from all but the rightful heir to his throne.

When his mother's trident is destroyed, Arthur Curry makes a voyage to the Hidden Sea in order to retrieve the god's weapon and retake his rightful place as King of Atlantis. He proves himself worthy to the Karathen and the uses the trident to unite all creatures in the ocean. With the power of the Sacred Trident in his possession, Aquaman is able to defeat the armies of his enemies and become the hero of the waters both in the comics and in the DC Extended Universe.

More: Wonder Woman 1984 Theory: Asteria Is Also A Daughter Of The Gods

Wonder Woman: Everything Created By The Gods In The DCEU from https://ift.tt/3c2ozJp

[benperorsolo]

Don't do the first one I messed up lmao okay so heisaki and zutara for 001, ben solo for 002 and for 003 zuko, aang, sokka, katara, toph

001. (heisaki)

when I started shipping it if I did:

I honestly don’t even remember. I usually don’t start shipping couples as I watch a show, but after when I’m looking for fanfic to distract me from my schoolwork. So sometime after finishing S1.

my thoughts:

Heisaki pretty much caters to every grossly trash thing I like in ships: enemies to lovers, preferably with some kickass woman and some super-evil looking masked dude with Secret Depths and Softness™ (I know I’m garbage okay I’ve made my peace), where Sad Angry Scary Dude is shown affection from someone who believes in their goodness more than they’re disgusted by their evil, and Strong But Soft Woman discovers tenderness and support in the unlikeliest of  places.

What makes me happy about them:

All of the above, and also the way they cycle through various identities with each other in canon, the way canon teases them as people who would make an amazing team if they weren’t pawns for organizations bigger than themselves. The way both of them are uncompromising in their work but have secret private vulnerabilities. The way both of them love the stars. 

What makes me sad about them:

The way canon bastardized Misaki in the second season into being obsessed with catching Hei because of her weird unresolved feelings for him. But not in a cool or respectful way; just in a way that made Misaki into a lovesick waif whose personality completely went out the window. 

things done in fanfic that annoys me:

Mostly when Hei becomes to emotional or emotionally honest with Misaki without a lot of buildup, considering he’s been emotionally constipated for going on a decade now and for reasons that involved not dying. Likewise when Misaki turns into a damsel to be saved.

things I look for in fanfic:

Some sort of clear ideological friction between the two of them; Misaki’s discovery of the Black Reaper’s identity and/or interacting with the Black Reaper in person. 

Who I’d be comfortable them ending up with, if not each other:

No one? Hei’s other options are Amber, a ship which I find interesting as something in Hei’s past but not one I would endgame bc abusive, and Yin, who is mentally basically a child and it feels like pedophilia.

My happily ever after for them:

Haaaa the grossly indulgent Office AU. Hei becomes a contractor working with Section 4, develops a little friend/family unit with Section 4 and astronomics; he and Misaki get married; Hei reconnects with his family in China; Hei and Misaki have a little girl named Seiko and it’s gr9. Everything is beautiful and occasionally hurts but never, y’know, forever.

who is the big spoon/little spoon:

Hei, probably. But it could vary. They’re just about equal in height so there’s no reason one should be the big spoon over the other.

what is their favorite non-sexual activity:

Stargazing.

001. zutara

when I started shipping it if I did:

Don’t even remember. Sometime after finishing Book 3, I think. 

my thoughts:

Gold standard ship. The ship I keep shipping in other fandoms, just in different iterations. The ying-yang, ‘you rise with the moon, I rise with the sun’ way they complement each other, and yet at their cores are so similar: highly driven, compassionate, passionate people who are proven in battle to make a great team.

What makes me happy about them:

The way their relationship beautifully unfolded over three seasons of mortal enemies, to maybe-allies (and then would-be-ally and traitor), to allies and friends. The way each season of ATLA ends with a fight between them; the first two against each other, and the last one with each other. The way they are safe places for the other— Katara confiding to him in the crystal caves, and again about her mother in Southern Raiders; Zuko confiding to Katara about his fear of facing his uncle, and Katara’s reassurance, and then the way Zuko took Katara with her to fight Azula because he knew he needed a steadfast ally he could trust.

What makes me sad about them:

The way Bryke have insulted the ship over the years, calling it too ‘dark and mysterious’ for Nick, but then fucked up all of the canon relationships in ATLA by having their kids have extremely dysfunctional relationships with their parents, or just making the relationships straight-up dysfunctional coughMaikocough 

things done in fanfic that annoys me:

When Katara gets the Mary Sue Strong Independent Woman treatment, or when she becomes some helpless crying waif (usually Book 1 kidnapping fics, which can be good, okay, they can), and likewise when Zuko post-redemption is still a jerkass. I mean he can still be a jerk, but he’s not a jerkass.

things I look for in fanfic:

I’ll read almost anything. I like S1 fic (typically Zuko captures Katara, and Katara takes none of his shit, and then TEAMWORK HAPPENS), s2 fic where crotchety I-once-did-something-good-and-gave-myself-a-coma Zuko and Katara are forced to work together in lovehate, and post-s3 Western Air Temple fics where Zuko has to earn Katara’s forgiveness. 

Who I’d be comfortable them ending up with, if not each other:

No one lmao. I’m not a multishipper.

My happily ever after for them:

Fire Lord Zuko and Fire Lady Katara rule the Fire Nation in peace and harmony and are happy, the end.

who is the big spoon/little spoon:

Zuko’s the big spoon.

what is their favorite non-sexual activity:

Sparring.

002. Ben Solo

How I feel about this character:

ALL THE THINGS. I LOVE MY BOYFRIENDSON BEN SKYWALKER-ORGANA-SOLO.

More seriously— I love how he’s desperate for villainy, and yet cannot achieve it no matter how hard he tries. I love that this is a character who has to pray away the Light within him. I love how even after killing his father, the Light still won’t go away. I love that he is the beloved son of one of the most loved couples in cinematic history, related in a significant way to almost everyone in the prequels, OT, and sequels. I love that he effectively flips the conflict of the original films, wherein the fallen father is saved by the goodness of his son, and now it is the fallen son who will be saved (mark my words) by his father. I love the angst inherent in watching this character, who was practically born to be a hero, do everything he can to shirk his destiny and ensure his Darkness, and yet fall short. And most of all, I love the possibility (inevitability) of his redemption. I love the idea of getting to explore what redemption looks like when you don’t die before its completion, like Anakin. I love the idea of Ben realizing that his father did save him after all; of getting to smile at his uncle again;  of getting to hug his mother again; of it hurting so much— the hurt of a healing wound, at last, and not the hurt of the Dark Side. Of Ben getting to reclaim the person he might have been, had Snoke and misfortune and his own hamartia not found him, so that he no longer has to hide behind a false name and a mask, but can finally as himself face the sun, unafraid. Ben Solo means a lot to me. Maybe the hypotheticals of his character more than what we have now. But I honestly think that my strange compassion for this fake person has made me a better person. Because, if I can sit here and rail for his redemption no matter his sins— then what excuse do I have not to try to become a better person myself?

All the people I ship romantically with this character:

Rey the bae all the way.

My non-romantic OTP for this character:

BenPoe/Knightpilot, especially involving them as childhood friends, and Poe having to come to terms with Ben, who he was, and who he is, after Ben defects back to the Resistance. Some of my favorite character pieces to this end are This Thing of Darkness I Acknowledge Mine and Orbital Period. Also the BenPoe fandom are pretty much the nicest people ever?

My unpopular opinion about this character:

The fact that I like him is probably an unpopular opinion. 

Okay okay my real unpopular opinion (ESSAY AHOY) is my insistence of Kylo Ren’s true name still being Ben Solo (ofc you know this is a thing with me bc you very diplomatically asked me to talk about ‘Ben Solo’ and not ‘Kylo Ren’ in your ask lmao, and you know I call him ‘Ben’ just like I call Vader ‘Anakin’— practically always, in both cases, because it’s for the same reason). Kylo Ren is a shadow archetype, an alter ego, a mask and a costume— the thing Ben is trying desperately to become and yet never will, not only because he failed so horribly at being a proper villain in TFA (going for Rey instead of the droid; not torturing the bejeezus out of Rey immediately; feeling immediate regret after killing his father, not pushing Rey off a cliff during their fight when he had the chance, and then losing to her), but because it’s just how Star Wars works. It’s the same with Anakin and Vader— as Luke says to Vader in ROTJ, ‘[Anakin] is the name of your true self; you’ve only just forgotten,’ and ultimately Luke is proven right. Throughout canon, the Dark Side is depicted as a corruption of your true self; a warping of who you really are. Your Dark Side is not your authentic self, it’s a gross imitation, and whatever you call yourself under the thrall of the Dark Side is not your true name either. This is how it functioned for Anakin/Vader in the OT; and how it was for Galen Marek/Starkiller in the EU. Your Dark Side name is your slave name. It’s just another mask; a type of verbal disassociation— another way to remove yourself from the reality of what you’re really doing and what you have become. There is also the gross, skeevy observation that Anakin was given the name Vader by Palpatine, the creep who groomed him, and it’s not a difficult leap to assume that Snoke, the creep who groomed Ben in utero, gave Ben the name Kylo Ren. It is canon that Snoke has forbidden the name ‘Ben Solo’ to be spoken by anyone in the First Order, including Ben. But who the hell knows that Kylo Ren is Ben? It’s treated as an extreme secret, and currently I’d say the number is limited to Snoke, Hux, and Ben himself. So who is Snoke really forbidding from saying the name Ben Solo? Ben. He’s forbidding Ben. He’s giving Ben a gag order on his own name— which should immediately ring your bells as being sketchy AF for OBVIOUS REASONS, including but not limited to the fact that you only forbid people from doing things you know they are in danger of doing. If Ben were really completely dead, if he were really Kylo Ren all the way down, then what is Snoke afraid of? All of this to say, it annoys the everlasting and eternal fuck out of me when I see fics or headcanons where a redeemed Ben does not go back to that name, because then to me it represents a person who is still hiding behind the verbal equivalent of a mask. It would be like a redeemed Anakin still going by the name Darth Vader. It’s watching a man stand by the name of his abuse. It stands in literal opposition of everything a true redemption symbolizes, especially in Star Wars, and it’s gross gross gross I hate it.

One thing I wish would happen / had happened with this character in canon:

A REDEMPTION ARC BITCHESSS

my OTP:

Reylo. Okay technically Reyben. But yeah. More recently I’ve become obsessed with the idea of them as parents, because it would be such a beautiful capstone for them both. Rey, lonely, orphan Rey, finally having a family of her own. Rey being terrified of motherhood, because she can’t even remember her mother. Rey feeling that fierce, wolfish upwelling of maternal protectiveness for the first time and knowing she wouldn’t trade it for the world. Ben, terrified of making the mistakes his parents made with him; Ben, terrified of his past poisoning his children’s future. Ben, now a father, realizing the sort of unbreakable love that let his own father walk out on that bridge knowing he might die, and still taking the chance on his child. Ben, looking at the bundle in his arms and knowing he’d do the same. asdfghjkl;

my cross over ship:

Ben Solo x happiness, probably. I know it’s a wild concept.

a headcanon fact:

Ben is naturally good at pazaak and other gambling/card games. It’s one of the few roguish/smugglerish things he has in common with Han. Poe, Finn, and Rey always accuse him of using the Force to cheat, but he never does. During sessions of strip Pazaak (Poe’s idea), Poe, Finn, and Rey will be almost completely naked while Ben sits across the table fully clothed.

003. zuko, aang, katara, sokka, toph

1. zuko

2. aang

3. katara (tied w/ aang but just for overall character arc aang’s affects me more powerfully)

4. sokka

5. toph

[courtneytincher]

To Win Re-Election, Bibi Netanyahu Is Waging ‘Wars’ at Home and Abroad

Oded Balilty/GettyTEL AVIV—Benjamin Netanyahu is firing in all directions these days. Facing a tight re-election bid next Tuesday, the long-serving Israeli prime minister has just in the last two weeks launched air strikes against multiple neighboring Middle Eastern countries, pushed back against a potential U.S.-Iran détente, attacked the local media and his own Arab citizens, and called into question the legitimacy of the entire electoral process.After the Netanyahu Fail, What Is Trump’s Israel-Palestine Solution? Let Others Pick Up the PiecesIn a bid for every last right-wing vote, on Monday Netanyahu again promised to annex wide swaths of the West Bank if he were re-elected—a move that if implemented could spell the end of any two-state solution with the Palestinians and, with it, the end of Israel as both a democratic and Jewish state.The impression is either of a master strategist in complete control, pulling multiple political, military and diplomatic strings both here and abroad; or, alternatively, a hysterical politician in the twilight of his reign doing everything within his ample powers to maintain a grip on power. There is, of course, the likelihood that it’s both.  The military dimension to Netanyahu’s recent offensive is arguably the most consequential precisely because it’s so out of character. Despite his hardline international reputation, Netanyahu is extremely cautious when it comes to the use of force. Yet, in the span of 24 hours late last month, Israeli aircraft reportedly struck Iranian-affiliated targets in Syria, Lebanon and Iraq. In recent years Israel has admitted openly to launching hundreds of strikes inside Syria to forestall what officials here call Iran’s “military entrenchment” in its war-torn neighbor: Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps personnel, Shiite militia fighters, and advanced weaponry like precision guided missiles. Such Israeli military action—officially termed the “campaign between wars,” since it’s intended to shear Iranian power ahead of any wider conflict—has now extended into Lebanon and Iraq. How do we know this? Because Netanyahu confirmed it. “I’m doing everything to protect the security of our country from all directions—from the north against Lebanon and [the pro-Iranian militia] Hezbollah, in Syria against Iran and Hezbollah, and unfortunately also in Iraq against Iran,” Netanyahu said on August 30 during a Facebook live chat with supporters, days after the reported strikes in those three countries.A “senior Israeli defense source,” likely Netanyahu himself (who currently also doubles as defense minister), repeated similar claims a few days later to local military reporters. Indeed, the Israeli military has been extremely expansive in recent weeks detailing Iran’s efforts to arm Hezbollah with precision guided missiles on Lebanese soil. A drone attack in Beirut, in the heart of Hezbollah’s Dahiyeh stronghold, reportedly targeted high-value equipment meant to upgrade the Lebanese militia’s arsenal. Here, too, the military briefed reporters on the exact details of what allegedly was hit. This was all a sharp break from Israel’s usual policy of “purposeful ambiguity,” wherein it declines to take responsibility when something mysteriously blows up across the border—thus sparing its enemies’ blushes so as to avoid pushing them towards a response. (A limited response ultimately did come on September 1 in the form of a cross-border Hezbollah attack on an Israeli army jeep.)  To be clear: not even Netanyahu’s harshest domestic critics allege that, mere weeks before an election, he’s purposefully pushing the country into war. As The Daily Beast reported in February, there is widespread consensus that Iranian proxies armed with upgraded precision guided missiles are a severe threat to the country’s security, now deemed second only to Iran’s possible pursuit of a nuclear weapon. Most Netanyahu critics even accept the official position that the timing for these strikes was due to Iran’s escalating efforts in this area (primarily recent inroads in Iraq and Lebanon). What they do take issue with, however, is Netanyahu’s non-stop public rhetoric after the fact—verging on a Middle Eastern “end zone dance” in the face of Iran and Hezbollah—that could lead to deadlier follow-up attacks and a wider conflagration. Israel until recently used to speak softly and carry a big stick, which it deployed to great effect against Iran and its regional proxies. Netanyahu is now publicly trading insults with Hezbollah chief Hassan Nasrallah and IRGC Gen. Qassem Soleimani, who have vowed to respond in kind. Netanyahu’s chief rival, Benny Gantz, head of the Blue and White party, has strongly supported the government’s regional policy against Iran. Yet even he called into question the increasing “talk and breaking of the [prior] ambiguity,” saying Netanyahu is trying to “score political points” off of the national security debate.Ron Ben-Yishai, the dean of Israel’s military correspondents going back five decades, told The Daily Beast that even a prime minister-cum-defense minister doesn’t plan operations, the motivating force for which is usually the military and Mossad, Israel’s foreign intelligence agency. Netanyahu, Ben-Yishai said, “wouldn’t launch an operation because of an election, and the army chief of staff isn’t a servant of any prime minister… but the talk [surrounding it] is without doubt political.” The danger of all this talk, Ben-Yishai added, is that it’s like “poking [Iran in] the eye. Especially in the Middle East, the issue of honor could lead to a response.” Nevertheless, after years burnishing his reputation as Israel’s “Mr. Security,” an election campaign dominated by military crises could help Netanyahu with his base and the many undecided voters. But part of the audience for all this mounting “blather,” as some have termed it, may in fact be farther afield. The same weekend that Israel was bombing across the Levant, President Donald Trump was at the G-7 summit in France, where he indicated a willingness to meet with Iranian President Hassan Rouhani to resolve the impasse over Iran’s nuclear program. A short while after Trump made positive comments about Iran, Netanyahu issued a video where he reminded the world (including, presumably, the U.S. president) of where he stood on the issue.    “Iran is working on a broad front to carry out murderous terrorist attacks against the State of Israel,” Netanyahu said. “Israel will continue to defend its security however that may be necessary. I call on the international community to act immediately so that Iran halts these attacks.”As Axios reported, Netanyahu was unable to reach Trump by telephone during the G-7 summit. In the following days the Israeli prime minister had calls with Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and Vice President Mike Pence – but tellingly not with Trump.A snap visit to London last week, primarily to meet with U.S. Secretary of Defense Mark Esper, likely failed to console the Israeli leader.“Iran,” Esper said, “was inching toward that place where we could have talks.” Senior British officials with whom Netanyahu met were also inclined to support a French-led diplomatic process. Israeli defense officials reportedly are convinced that a Trump-Rouhani summit is now a “done deal.” Trump on Monday reiterated his openness to meeting with the Iranian leader, despite Netanyahu just hours earlier revealing what he claimed was a secret Iranian nuclear weapons facility (another cynical use, many Israeli analysts observed, of sensitive intelligence for political gain.) Earlier on Monday, Trump fired his ultra-hawkish national security advisor, John Bolton, saying he “disagreed strongly with many of his suggestions.”  A lot is riding on whether Netanyahu can maintain U.S. support for his hard line against Iran and its proxies—not least his own political future. Israelis will again go to the polls on September 17 after Netanyahu failed to form a government in the wake of the original April ballot. According to the polls, Netanyahu is once more in a very tight race for re-election. He has in recent weeks seemingly stopped at nothing to ensure that his now 10-year reign (thirteen overall dating back to the 1990s) continues. Massive banners of Netanyahu and Trump shaking hands adorn tall office buildings and billboards across the country, underlining the premier’s close relationship with the U.S. president and his overall image as a global statesman (including taking credit for the American withdrawal from the Obama-era nuclear deal). Both points would be severely undercut if there were, in fact, a U.S.-Iran rapprochement. Just as he’s attacked Iran across the region, Netanyahu with equal vigor has gone after his perceived domestic enemies. He has called for a boycott of the country’s most popular television station—Channel 12—because it has deigned to publish extensive leaks from inside the myriad investigations of Netanyahu’s alleged corruption. “A terror attack against democracy,” the prime minister termed it. The channel’s legal correspondent, Guy Peleg, now travels with bodyguards.More perniciously, in a Trumpian twist, Netanyahu in the last week has railed constantly against voter fraud among Israel’s Arab minority, alleging that irregularities in this demographic cost him and his right-wing allies victory in April. “The problem of fraud and theft of the elections is real. We will not allow the coming elections to be stolen,” Netanyahu said, priming his supporters to reject the outcome of next week’s poll if it doesn’t go their way. No matter that the Central Elections Committee, police, attorney general, and other neutral observers say no such fraud actually took place and reject Netanyahu’s demand that cameras be placed in polling stations. Israeli President Reuven Rivlin called the allegations “unsubstantiated and even irresponsible political attacks” intended to “undermine public trust in these [electoral] bodies.”It seems that Netanyahu is willing to attack the very foundations of Israeli democracy, and again incite against the country’s Arab minority in order to galvanize his nationalist base. It’s a well-worn tactic Netanyahu has deployed in the past—the so-called Gevalt campaign, Yiddish for “alarm.” “Gevalt is always real and Netanyahu is a panicker to begin with, which is probably what makes him so effective [as a politician],” Tal Shalev, Walla News’ chief political correspondent, told The Daily Beast. “He’s never calm.” Yet Shalev, a keen Netanyahu-watcher who traveled with him to London, said that despite the public hysteria purposefully sown, the prime minister seemed calm, confident and in a good mood in recent days. There’s a contrast between what he’s broadcasting to those around him and what he’s saying publicly, she added. “But he’s acting a bit more ruthless than usual now, and breaking all the rules, due to the situation he’s in. It’s a battle for the rest of his life.” Without his right-wing bloc of parties winning an outright majority of 61 seats in the Knesset, Netanyahu could be finished politically—and then there are his looming corruption indictments, with a pre-trial hearing set for early next month. A former ally on the right, Avigdor Lieberman, has turned against him, forcing the repeat election in the first place and now demanding a national unity government with Blue and White—which the latter refuse to countenance so long as the legally compromised Netanyahu still heads the Likud party. The political machinations after September 17 could be even more extreme than the election campaign itself. Yet there’s another possibility, perhaps even more likely, that against all the odds, and all these enemies—some real, most manufactured—Netanyahu actually wins outright. The polls aren’t looking favorable, but it’s important to recall that in the April ballot, a small right-wing faction was only 1400 votes short (out of 4 million cast) of entering parliament and thereby giving Netanyahu his majority. Last time, too, the right-wing essentially threw away six to eight seats via parties that didn’t pass the electoral threshold, a scenario now mitigated by a recent Netanyahu pact with a far-right faction that pulled out of the election.Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar Barred From Israel—But a Conflagration Is ComingA source in Blue and White told The Daily Beast that the current polls, both public and internal, were very consistent—a Netanyahu victory isn’t a done deal. “This is going to be close, and will come down to the last few days,” he vowed. With the margins so fine, Netanyahu is pushing Israel to the very edge. Read more at The Daily Beast.Got a tip? Send it to The Daily Beast hereGet our top stories in your inbox every day. Sign up now!Daily Beast Membership: Beast Inside goes deeper on the stories that matter to you. Learn more.

from Yahoo News - Latest News & Headlines

Oded Balilty/GettyTEL AVIV—Benjamin Netanyahu is firing in all directions these days. Facing a tight re-election bid next Tuesday, the long-serving Israeli prime minister has just in the last two weeks launched air strikes against multiple neighboring Middle Eastern countries, pushed back against a potential U.S.-Iran détente, attacked the local media and his own Arab citizens, and called into question the legitimacy of the entire electoral process.After the Netanyahu Fail, What Is Trump’s Israel-Palestine Solution? Let Others Pick Up the PiecesIn a bid for every last right-wing vote, on Monday Netanyahu again promised to annex wide swaths of the West Bank if he were re-elected—a move that if implemented could spell the end of any two-state solution with the Palestinians and, with it, the end of Israel as both a democratic and Jewish state.The impression is either of a master strategist in complete control, pulling multiple political, military and diplomatic strings both here and abroad; or, alternatively, a hysterical politician in the twilight of his reign doing everything within his ample powers to maintain a grip on power. There is, of course, the likelihood that it’s both.  The military dimension to Netanyahu’s recent offensive is arguably the most consequential precisely because it’s so out of character. Despite his hardline international reputation, Netanyahu is extremely cautious when it comes to the use of force. Yet, in the span of 24 hours late last month, Israeli aircraft reportedly struck Iranian-affiliated targets in Syria, Lebanon and Iraq. In recent years Israel has admitted openly to launching hundreds of strikes inside Syria to forestall what officials here call Iran’s “military entrenchment” in its war-torn neighbor: Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps personnel, Shiite militia fighters, and advanced weaponry like precision guided missiles. Such Israeli military action—officially termed the “campaign between wars,” since it’s intended to shear Iranian power ahead of any wider conflict—has now extended into Lebanon and Iraq. How do we know this? Because Netanyahu confirmed it. “I’m doing everything to protect the security of our country from all directions—from the north against Lebanon and [the pro-Iranian militia] Hezbollah, in Syria against Iran and Hezbollah, and unfortunately also in Iraq against Iran,” Netanyahu said on August 30 during a Facebook live chat with supporters, days after the reported strikes in those three countries.A “senior Israeli defense source,” likely Netanyahu himself (who currently also doubles as defense minister), repeated similar claims a few days later to local military reporters. Indeed, the Israeli military has been extremely expansive in recent weeks detailing Iran’s efforts to arm Hezbollah with precision guided missiles on Lebanese soil. A drone attack in Beirut, in the heart of Hezbollah’s Dahiyeh stronghold, reportedly targeted high-value equipment meant to upgrade the Lebanese militia’s arsenal. Here, too, the military briefed reporters on the exact details of what allegedly was hit. This was all a sharp break from Israel’s usual policy of “purposeful ambiguity,” wherein it declines to take responsibility when something mysteriously blows up across the border—thus sparing its enemies’ blushes so as to avoid pushing them towards a response. (A limited response ultimately did come on September 1 in the form of a cross-border Hezbollah attack on an Israeli army jeep.)  To be clear: not even Netanyahu’s harshest domestic critics allege that, mere weeks before an election, he’s purposefully pushing the country into war. As The Daily Beast reported in February, there is widespread consensus that Iranian proxies armed with upgraded precision guided missiles are a severe threat to the country’s security, now deemed second only to Iran’s possible pursuit of a nuclear weapon. Most Netanyahu critics even accept the official position that the timing for these strikes was due to Iran’s escalating efforts in this area (primarily recent inroads in Iraq and Lebanon). What they do take issue with, however, is Netanyahu’s non-stop public rhetoric after the fact—verging on a Middle Eastern “end zone dance” in the face of Iran and Hezbollah—that could lead to deadlier follow-up attacks and a wider conflagration. Israel until recently used to speak softly and carry a big stick, which it deployed to great effect against Iran and its regional proxies. Netanyahu is now publicly trading insults with Hezbollah chief Hassan Nasrallah and IRGC Gen. Qassem Soleimani, who have vowed to respond in kind. Netanyahu’s chief rival, Benny Gantz, head of the Blue and White party, has strongly supported the government’s regional policy against Iran. Yet even he called into question the increasing “talk and breaking of the [prior] ambiguity,” saying Netanyahu is trying to “score political points” off of the national security debate.Ron Ben-Yishai, the dean of Israel’s military correspondents going back five decades, told The Daily Beast that even a prime minister-cum-defense minister doesn’t plan operations, the motivating force for which is usually the military and Mossad, Israel’s foreign intelligence agency. Netanyahu, Ben-Yishai said, “wouldn’t launch an operation because of an election, and the army chief of staff isn’t a servant of any prime minister… but the talk [surrounding it] is without doubt political.” The danger of all this talk, Ben-Yishai added, is that it’s like “poking [Iran in] the eye. Especially in the Middle East, the issue of honor could lead to a response.” Nevertheless, after years burnishing his reputation as Israel’s “Mr. Security,” an election campaign dominated by military crises could help Netanyahu with his base and the many undecided voters. But part of the audience for all this mounting “blather,” as some have termed it, may in fact be farther afield. The same weekend that Israel was bombing across the Levant, President Donald Trump was at the G-7 summit in France, where he indicated a willingness to meet with Iranian President Hassan Rouhani to resolve the impasse over Iran’s nuclear program. A short while after Trump made positive comments about Iran, Netanyahu issued a video where he reminded the world (including, presumably, the U.S. president) of where he stood on the issue.    “Iran is working on a broad front to carry out murderous terrorist attacks against the State of Israel,” Netanyahu said. “Israel will continue to defend its security however that may be necessary. I call on the international community to act immediately so that Iran halts these attacks.”As Axios reported, Netanyahu was unable to reach Trump by telephone during the G-7 summit. In the following days the Israeli prime minister had calls with Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and Vice President Mike Pence – but tellingly not with Trump.A snap visit to London last week, primarily to meet with U.S. Secretary of Defense Mark Esper, likely failed to console the Israeli leader.“Iran,” Esper said, “was inching toward that place where we could have talks.” Senior British officials with whom Netanyahu met were also inclined to support a French-led diplomatic process. Israeli defense officials reportedly are convinced that a Trump-Rouhani summit is now a “done deal.” Trump on Monday reiterated his openness to meeting with the Iranian leader, despite Netanyahu just hours earlier revealing what he claimed was a secret Iranian nuclear weapons facility (another cynical use, many Israeli analysts observed, of sensitive intelligence for political gain.) Earlier on Monday, Trump fired his ultra-hawkish national security advisor, John Bolton, saying he “disagreed strongly with many of his suggestions.”  A lot is riding on whether Netanyahu can maintain U.S. support for his hard line against Iran and its proxies—not least his own political future. Israelis will again go to the polls on September 17 after Netanyahu failed to form a government in the wake of the original April ballot. According to the polls, Netanyahu is once more in a very tight race for re-election. He has in recent weeks seemingly stopped at nothing to ensure that his now 10-year reign (thirteen overall dating back to the 1990s) continues. Massive banners of Netanyahu and Trump shaking hands adorn tall office buildings and billboards across the country, underlining the premier’s close relationship with the U.S. president and his overall image as a global statesman (including taking credit for the American withdrawal from the Obama-era nuclear deal). Both points would be severely undercut if there were, in fact, a U.S.-Iran rapprochement. Just as he’s attacked Iran across the region, Netanyahu with equal vigor has gone after his perceived domestic enemies. He has called for a boycott of the country’s most popular television station—Channel 12—because it has deigned to publish extensive leaks from inside the myriad investigations of Netanyahu’s alleged corruption. “A terror attack against democracy,” the prime minister termed it. The channel’s legal correspondent, Guy Peleg, now travels with bodyguards.More perniciously, in a Trumpian twist, Netanyahu in the last week has railed constantly against voter fraud among Israel’s Arab minority, alleging that irregularities in this demographic cost him and his right-wing allies victory in April. “The problem of fraud and theft of the elections is real. We will not allow the coming elections to be stolen,” Netanyahu said, priming his supporters to reject the outcome of next week’s poll if it doesn’t go their way. No matter that the Central Elections Committee, police, attorney general, and other neutral observers say no such fraud actually took place and reject Netanyahu’s demand that cameras be placed in polling stations. Israeli President Reuven Rivlin called the allegations “unsubstantiated and even irresponsible political attacks” intended to “undermine public trust in these [electoral] bodies.”It seems that Netanyahu is willing to attack the very foundations of Israeli democracy, and again incite against the country’s Arab minority in order to galvanize his nationalist base. It’s a well-worn tactic Netanyahu has deployed in the past—the so-called Gevalt campaign, Yiddish for “alarm.” “Gevalt is always real and Netanyahu is a panicker to begin with, which is probably what makes him so effective [as a politician],” Tal Shalev, Walla News’ chief political correspondent, told The Daily Beast. “He’s never calm.” Yet Shalev, a keen Netanyahu-watcher who traveled with him to London, said that despite the public hysteria purposefully sown, the prime minister seemed calm, confident and in a good mood in recent days. There’s a contrast between what he’s broadcasting to those around him and what he’s saying publicly, she added. ��But he’s acting a bit more ruthless than usual now, and breaking all the rules, due to the situation he’s in. It’s a battle for the rest of his life.” Without his right-wing bloc of parties winning an outright majority of 61 seats in the Knesset, Netanyahu could be finished politically—and then there are his looming corruption indictments, with a pre-trial hearing set for early next month. A former ally on the right, Avigdor Lieberman, has turned against him, forcing the repeat election in the first place and now demanding a national unity government with Blue and White—which the latter refuse to countenance so long as the legally compromised Netanyahu still heads the Likud party. The political machinations after September 17 could be even more extreme than the election campaign itself. Yet there’s another possibility, perhaps even more likely, that against all the odds, and all these enemies—some real, most manufactured—Netanyahu actually wins outright. The polls aren’t looking favorable, but it’s important to recall that in the April ballot, a small right-wing faction was only 1400 votes short (out of 4 million cast) of entering parliament and thereby giving Netanyahu his majority. Last time, too, the right-wing essentially threw away six to eight seats via parties that didn’t pass the electoral threshold, a scenario now mitigated by a recent Netanyahu pact with a far-right faction that pulled out of the election.Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar Barred From Israel—But a Conflagration Is ComingA source in Blue and White told The Daily Beast that the current polls, both public and internal, were very consistent—a Netanyahu victory isn’t a done deal. “This is going to be close, and will come down to the last few days,” he vowed. With the margins so fine, Netanyahu is pushing Israel to the very edge. Read more at The Daily Beast.Got a tip? Send it to The Daily Beast hereGet our top stories in your inbox every day. Sign up now!Daily Beast Membership: Beast Inside goes deeper on the stories that matter to you. Learn more.

September 10, 2019 at 06:38PM via IFTTT

[quranreadalong]

THE BAD QURAN, PT 8: SURAH 9

As a preface to this, Mohammed/Allah’s behavior throughout our history lesson qualifies as part of the Bad Quran’s Very Bad Context!

An incredible 70/129 of this surah’s ayat are horrible. Over half the entire surah is terrible and even worse when you know the context! Starting with the very first line!

9:1-3 has Allah informing the Muslims that they’re allowed to break their treaties with non-Muslims. The non-Muslims will have the sacred months as a grace period, during which time they should remember “that ye cannot escape Allah and that Allah will confound the disbelievers”. A painful doom awaits the disbelievers.

9:5 issues the following command relating to any non-Muslims who refuse to submit to Islam:

Then, when the sacred months have passed, slay the idolaters wherever ye find them, and take them (captive), and besiege them, and prepare for them each ambush.

Islam is peace!!!!!!!

9:8-10 says that most non-Muslims are wrongdoers and evil transgressors with no honor, which is why you don’t need to honor your treaties with them. In fact, Allah tells Muslims, they’d have broken their treaties with you... if you hadn’t done it first! Yeah, okay, Allah.

If the disbelievers break treaties (like you have just done yourself...), 9:12-13 tells Muslims that they must “fight the heads of disbelief” because they attacked the Muslim(’s allies) first. This is referring to the Banu Bakr and Khuzaa feud, if you remember from #59, which did not have a damn thing to do with Islam but was nonetheless used as a hammer with which to bludgeon the disbelievers. Mohammed used this as an excuse to break his treaties despite the fact that he violated the treaties many times before this with no adverse effects.

9:14:

Fight them! Allah will chastise them at your hands, and He will lay them low and give you victory over them 

Islam is peazzzzz

According to 9:16, Allah won’t allow the Muslims to live in peace because he has to know who among them will engage in jihad (good Muslims) and who won’t (bad Muslims).

9:17 says that non-Muslims aren’t allowed to be caretakers of the Kaaba; also all “their works are vain and in the Fire they will abide”. Disbelievers who tend to the sacred mosque and give water to thirsty pilgrims are worth less than Muslims, specifically Muslims who give their money and lives for Islam, says 9:19-20.

According to 9:23-24, Muslims shouldn’t choose non-Muslims as their auliya (friends, etc) even if they are their own parents or siblings. If you do that, you’re a wrongdoer.

Discussing the Battle of Hunayn, Mohammed says in 9:26 that

Allah sent His peace of reassurance down upon His messenger and upon the believers, and sent down hosts ye could not see, and punished those who disbelieved. Such is the reward of disbelievers.

(This was that time right after Mohammed conquered Mecca when he “heard word” that the Banu Hawazin were going to attack the city, so he went to attack them first, then took their property, women, and children. When they surrendered and “converted” he gave them the option of getting their enslaved people back or their possessions, but not both. Nice guy!)

9:28 says that polytheists aren’t even allowed near the Kaaba anymore because they’re “unclean”.

9:29 again explicitly commands Muslims to conquer non-Muslims until they either convert or pay money to Muslims (jizya). This time it is specifically in reference to Jews and Christians, regarding the Tabouk silliness:

Fight against such of those who have been given the Scripture as believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, and forbid not that which Allah hath forbidden by His messenger, and follow not the Religion of Truth, until they pay the tribute readily, being brought low. 

9:30 calls Jews and Christians perverse disbelievers and says that “Allah himself fighteth against them”. 9:31-32 accuses them of viewing their rabbis and priests (who are greedy and will be branded in hell, according to 9:34-35) as “lords” and of trying to put out Allah’s light.

Allah commands Muslims to “wage war on all of the idolaters as they are waging war on all of you” in 9:36, and if you’ve read the history lessons, you know how bullshit this is. In context it is Mohammed telling Muslims to go conquer people. 9:37 says that disbelievers are evil.

9:39 has words for Muslim men who refuse to go on Mohammed’s dumbass conquering spree:

If ye go not forth He will afflict you with a painful doom, and will choose instead of you a folk other than you. 

God damn we still have like 80 ayat to go. I told you this surah was terrible!!

Allah tells Muslims that jihad, or “striving” with their lives (in Tabouk) and wealth (the zakat) is for the best in 9:41. 9:42 clarifies that this is referring to armed warfare, saying that those men who refuse to march to Tabouk are destroying their souls. Real Muslims would never try to get out of going to Tabouk (9:44), only fake Muslims would do that (9:45), and they will go to hell (9:49).

Then Allah calms down a moment and reconsiders. Actually, he says in 9:46, he prevented some people from going to Tabouk, because he doesn’t like them. They would have just gotten in the way anyways, says 9:47.

But Allah changes his mind yet again and goes back to blaming the guys for refusing to march to Tabouk, immediately after saying that he was the one who kept them from going. He instructs Mohammed to tell those who stay behind that they will be destroyed either by Mohammed himself or by Allah (9:52), and that their taxes/zakat will never be accepted by Allah because they are disbelievers (9:53-54). Allah uses their children and money to punish them... somehow (9:55, also 9:85).

Uh, right. Moving on. 

People who make fun of Mohammed are going to hell, according to 9:61. Actually, people who oppose him in any way are going to hell, clarifies 9:63. Actually, says 9:68, non-Muslims in general (who are losers, according to 9:69) are going to hell!

9:73:

O Prophet! Strive against the disbelievers and the hypocrites! Be harsh with them. Their ultimate abode is hell, a hapless journey's end.

Islam is pzzzzzzzzzz (9:74: they’re wrongdoers for not believing in Islam and are going to hell.)

People who are ungrateful for Allah’s blessings are cursed to be among the munafiqun, according to 9:77. Such people, and those who mock other Muslims for their almsgiving, will never be forgiven by Allah (9:80).

Mohammed goes back to complaining about the guys who didn’t march with him to conquer the Christian cities of northern Arabia in 9:81. They’re going to hell, yet again (see also 9:90, 9:95). They will weep when Allah punishes them (9:82). If they change their minds and want to go with Mohammed on a future expedition, Allah says they can’t come, and also tells Mohammed that he should never pray for any of them if they die (9:83-84). Allah has sealed their hearts (9:87), specifically those who have no financial excuse to avoid going off to fight (9:93).

Those of the Bedouin clans who refused to fight for Mohammed are wrongdoers, says 9:96. The Bedouin in general are more likely to be disbelievers than city-dwellers according to 9:97, and an evil fortune awaits those of them who are against Mohammed (9:98). Those Bedouin and townspeople of Medina who are fake Muslims are hellbound (9:101).

Men who didn’t go to Tabouk but now feel bad about it may be “purified” and cleansed of their sins by giving money to Mohammed, according to 9:103.

9:107-10 describes a curious incident wherein Mohammed burned down a mosque after “Allah” informed him that it was created to “cause dissent among the believers”. Mohammed forbids his followers from praying in any such mosque (one not approved by Mohammed himself) and says that those who do so are hellbound. The mosque will cause its builders’ hearts to be torn to pieces.

9:111:

Allah hath bought from the believers their lives and their wealth because the Garden will be theirs: they shall fight in the way of Allah and shall slay and be slain. 

Islam zzzzz

9:113-14 tells Muslims to never pray for their disbelieving relatives, who are enemies of Allah. 

Muslims are not allowed to prioritize their own lives over Mohammed’s, according to 9:120.

9:123:

O ye who believe! Fight those of the disbelievers who are near to you, and let them find harshness in you, and know that Allah is with those who keep their duty (unto Him). 

Iszzzzzz

When Mohammed reveals a new surah, it increases the wickedness in the hearts of disbelievers, according to 9:125. Allah turns their hearts away from the truth (9:127).

...........So like I was saying, the main takeaway from this surah is that Islam is peace.

SPECIAL BONUS SECTION: HALL OF SHAME!

The following ayat condemn disbelievers to hell and pinged our kuffar hell counter. They will be copied and pasted word-for-word. Enjoy… the doom!

Give tidings (O Muhammad) of a painful doom to those who disbelieve

It is not for the idolaters to tend Allah's sanctuaries, bearing witness against themselves of disbelief. As for such, their works are vain and in the Fire they will abide.

If ye go not forth [to battle] He will afflict you with a painful doom, and will choose instead of you a folk other than you.

Lo! hell verily is all around the disbelievers. 

Allah will afflict you [fake Muslims who didn’t go to Tabouk] with a doom from Him or at our hands. 

Those who vex the messenger of Allah, for them there is a painful doom. 

Know they not that whoso opposeth Allah and His messenger, his verily is fire of hell, to abide therein? That is the extreme abasement. 

Allah promiseth the hypocrites, both men and women, and the disbelievers fire of hell for their abode. It will suffice them. Allah curseth them, and theirs is lasting torment. Even as those before you who were mightier than you in strength, and more affluent than you in wealth and children. They enjoyed their lot awhile, so ye enjoy your lot awhile even as those before you did enjoy their lot awhile. And ye prate even as they prated. Such are they whose works have perished in the world and the Hereafter. Such are they who are the losers. 

O Prophet! Strive against the disbelievers and the hypocrites! Be harsh with them. Their ultimate abode is hell, a hapless journey's end. They swear by Allah that they said nothing (wrong), yet they did say the word of disbelief, and did disbelieve after their Surrender (to Allah). And they purposed that which they could not attain, and they sought revenge only that Allah by His messenger should enrich them of His bounty. If they repent it will be better for them; and if they turn away, Allah will afflict them with a painful doom in the world and the Hereafter, and they have no protecting friend nor helper in the earth.

Ask forgiveness for them (O Muhammad), or ask not forgiveness for them [the people who didn’t march to Tabouk]; though thou ask forgiveness for them seventy times Allah will not forgive them. That is because they disbelieved in Allah and His messenger, and Allah guideth not wrongdoing folk. Those who were left behind rejoiced at sitting still behind the messenger of Allah, and were averse to striving with their wealth and their lives in Allah's way. And they said: Go not forth in the heat! Say: The fire of hell is more intense of heat, if they but understood.  Then let them laugh a little: they will weep much, as the reward of what they used to earn. If Allah bring thee back (from the campaign) unto a party of them and they ask of thee leave to go out (to fight), then say unto them: Ye shall never more go out with me nor fight with me against a foe. Ye were content with sitting still the first time. So sit still, with the useless.  And never (O Muhammad) pray for one of them who dieth, nor stand by his grave. Lo! they disbelieved in Allah and His messenger, and they died while they were evil-doers.

A painful doom will fall on those of them who disbelieve.

We, We know them [munafiqun/fake Muslims], and We shall chastise them twice; then they will be relegated to a painful doom.

Is he who founded his building upon duty to Allah and His good pleasure better; or he who founded his building on the brink of a crumbling, overhanging precipice so that it [mosque built without Mohammed’s approval] toppled with him into the fire of hell? Allah guideth not wrongdoing folk.

It is not for the Prophet, and those who believe, to pray for the forgiveness of idolaters even though they may be near of kin (to them) after it hath become clear that they are people of hell-fire.

Mohammed truly went hard in this surah, didn’t he.

Surah 10 is a complete change of pace from this one. It’s from Mecca and it is extremely... bland, compared to what we just read. But blandness isn’t so bad, I guess. That surah will go by much faster than this one did.

And with the completion of surah 9, we have officially read the last chronological surah of the Quran. So if you’re just here for Mohammed/Allah’s final thoughts... there you have it. The beauty of it all can bring a tear to even the most hardened soul. Unless Allah blinded your heart in which case you’re going to hell LOL!!

⇚ previous day | next day ⇛