#but their brexit stance has been confusing

[alwida10]

i'm confused on your stance on the israel/palestine situation. You mainly reblog pro-israel things, and never reblog anything about palestinians (unless it's something like "look at these palestinians who condemn hamas"). but you have also reblogged the occasional post condemning/recognizing the terrors of the israeli government? And you've also written in tags before denying what is happening to the palestinian people as being genocide (i think)?

so i am so confused. Are you pro israel? anti israel? and if you post about and recognize the wrongness of past genocides like the holocaust (as you should, rightfully so), why do you refuse to give the mass killing of palestinians any attention? even if there are israeli citizens who are being wrongfully targeted during all this, why does only that upset you and not the thousands more palestinian civilians being targeted? i'm just so confused? and i mean.. aren't you a mother? how can you look at thousands of children dying and only post about the side that is currently suffering less deaths?

Short answer: I’m pro-lasting-peace and anti-terrorism. The deaths of people, especially of those extreme numbers of people are devastating and a catastrophe. This isn’t a typical war. It’s a double-hostage situation where the perpetrator hides the Israeli hostages behind the Palestinian hostages. And that needs to end soon! And most importantly – it has to stay peaceful for good. Natanyahu will not be helping with that, but the Hamas will rather have every child in Gaza die a painful death than to give up their hostages – may it be the ones everyone calls “hostages” or the Palestinian civilians, who are just as much hostages of greedy, immoral, old men.  

I share posts that reflect, at least partially, my personal view. I like posts I generally sympathize with but include messages opposite to my personal view for sharing. Most social media pro-Israel posts are closer to my personal stance than most social media pro-Palestine posts are. The position of the state of Israel is even further removed from my personal stance, hence my criticism. The Hamas has the opposite goal, hence my even more pronounced criticism.

Long answer:

Real world politics are complex. Everyone who tells you they were not is lying and either trying to manipulate you or being manipulated themselves. (Such as this post.) There are never only two sides to it. Reducing it to two sides is a tool of manipulation.

There is a war going on and manipulation is a common and extremely efficient tool of modern warfare and we (everyone on social media) are a part of that. You might think that the conflict (several conflicts, since I’ll talk about Ukraine, too) is far away and does not include “us” (such as people in Europe and the US). That’s a wrong. Remember for a moment 2016 – 2017, when Trump was elected president of the United States. People who were aware and thinking critically realized even before the election that social media was swarming with Russian bots. These bots did their best to manipulate people into not voting, or voting third party. The leaked emails of Hillary were a part of the manipulation, eliminating Trump’s opposition.People fell for the manipulation and four years of LGBTQIA+ suffering, children-in-cages and destabilization of the NATO (the alliance against Russia) followed. Afterwards a lot of evidence for the Russian manipulation surfaced. But then it was too late. The people had been manipulated into helping the bad guys. The same manipulation repeated with the Brexit (2016-2020) ruining many chances of young people in the UK and further destabilization of the NATO. That’s why you should learn how to recognize manipulation and whenever you feel like there could be some involved think who might profit from it. Yes, people learned and that’s why you see all the “VOTE!! FFS VOTE!” posts making their rounds. Especially now, since elections of the US and of the EU are close.

How to manipulate someone: Make them think that they are fighting for a good cause (on surface level). But in truth this “good cause” only serves you, the manipulator. The people voting for Trump thought they voted for a better future, for having more money, for being safer. The people voting for Brexit thought basically the same. The Germans who voted Adolf Hitler into office had been desperate. The country had just lost the first world war. The economy war on the floor, ruined by the reparation payments Germany had to pay. The people worked hard, and still were unable to afford anything but (sometimes not even) the basic necessities. There were no future perspectives for them or their children. (Does that sound familiar?) Hitler promised to make “Germany great again”. He said the Arien people were a good, upstanding race. That Germany didn’t deserve having its colonies and land taken away by force. He said Germans were being threatened and close to extinction. He said that the Jews wanted to corrupt and annihilate the Germans.

Another tool of manipulation is the incorrect use of language to rile people up so they won’t think rationally anymore. If someone says “Person A is a pedophile and a rapist!” and it turns out Person A is trans and not a rapist, there is a solid chance said someone wanted to manipulate you by making you angry so you will rage against Person A without cross checking. If someone says “this is a genocide” that means fraction A is intentionally and efficiently trying to kill fraction B. It means they aim where the most people are. It means they don’t do anything to help anyone of the fraction B. The fact alone that we know where the IDF will strike next is a clear indicator Israel is in fact warning the civilians. It would not do so, if the aim was to annihilate every single Palestinian.

It’s the aim that makes the difference. IF Israel wanted to kill all Palestinians they would have very efficient tools to do so. And even if it’s hard to imagine a number 28 thousand deaths (as on 12.Feb.2024 as “small”, they still are. These numbers mean there are about 1555 deaths per week in average. In comparison, during the holocaust, Germany killed 17 Million people between 1.September 1939 and 1945. In average that have been 61.594 deaths each week. So why would someone willfully equal these two vastly different numbers? If someone says “genocide” to a military occupation of the west bank or the civil causalities during a counter strike against the Hamas who knowingly proclaimed war against the state of Israel, than there is a solid chance this person is trying to manipulate you by using emotionally charged wording instead of what can and has been proven – a military occupation. “But killing so many people is bad regardless what you call it” you might argue, and I agree. That’s why I criticize the Israeli government. Also, soldiers using the war to do unforgivable things, looting, beating people who have surrendered – this all has to be punished.

“So, why does it matter what you call it?” you might ask, and I sigh. Many, many Pro-Palestine posts aim to manipulate people from the noble point of being against the killing of Palestinians into being for the Hamas getting away with killing and raping Israelis (both Jewish and Muslims) and keeping the Israeli hostages (some of which might have gotten pregnant by rape - which might be a reason these particular girls/women have not been released as of yet). Calling what happens a “genocide” is manipulating you into that, because it takes away the rational reasoning. It takes away the rightful wish of Israeli civilians living in peace. It implies it was death and destruction simply born from being evil Jews who hate Palestinians so they want to kill them all. The moment you call the stuff going on a “genocide” and call for a ceasefire without the return of ALL hostages you become the equivalent of the people who voted for Trump or Brexit in good faith. It means you are speaking up for the hostages remaining slaves, the Bibas children and their mom remaining in the hands of their captors, and that killing Jewish women and men as well as raping them is an act that should not be punished.

5.Another way to manipulate people and radicalize is to establish a “we versus them” mindset where you have to choose between two positions, which are both extremes. What you did in your ask - claiming I would only reblog pro-Palestine posts when they condemned Hamas - that erases the part that said post focused a lot on the situation for the victims. You erased the nuance. But the nuance is where a possible solution can be found that does not includes shrugging while accepting that some children will be victims of decade old hate.

6. If you know a child gets abused and beaten by its parents you can treat its wounds, so YOU feel better, but in the end, when the child has to go back into the abusive environment you won’t have changed anything that really matters. You might have made it worse, even. If you really want to help the child you need to get it out of the abusive situation. The Hamas are the abusive parents in this analogy. It’s no secret they don’t care for their people. Pro-Palestine posts like to claim the Hamas would not hide behind civilians, schools, hospitals, or mosques. That is a lie. They do. They don’t give civilians shelter in their tunnels, they say “you have to go to the UN for help” when Palestinians ask for food, they steal humanitarian aid and SELL it to the refugee Palestinians. They don’t participate in projects to give Gaza its own water supply, and even demolish the structures build by outsiders like the EU and the US to build weapons from it.

When the British mandate was transformed into the state of Israel, the Palestinian people became refugees. Normally, refugees search refuge in countries where they become citizens and can build a normal life, work, get children, build an existence. Their children would no longer be considered refugees. They would be citizens of the new country. This happened at first, until Yassir Arafat (an Egyptian, NOT Palestinian) realized that the UN was willing to pay money for each refugee.

This money is normally intended to provide humanitarian aid for the people who are not able to build an existence. He went forward and build a system (including the UNWRA) that would do something unique. Unlike all other refugees, Palestinians stay refugees over generations, ripping away their possibility to create a true life. And all the money the UN pays (the major part originating from the US, Europe and Germany) goes not to the refugees. But to the Hamas, because these are the official leaders of the Palestinians in Gaza. You see – Arafat has actually developed a magnificent way to make himself and his friends rich by holding the Palestinian people in poverty and forced dependance. The Hamas use the money to build weapons and tunnels. But that’s not even the worst part. Because they need more than tunnels and weapons. They need people operating the weapons and using the tunnels. In fact, a dispute between the UNRWA and the Hamas happened in 2009, as the UNRWA (allegedly) wanted to include lessons on the holocaust into the curriculum of middle schools in Gaza.  That would have been contrary to what the Hamas wants. It wants to manipulate the Palestinian children into hating Jewish people, and dreaming of killing them all, so one day the children will grow up to be willing Hamas fighters. ). Here is a quote from the linked article: 

It was not just limited to history, social studies and religion — with a math book using an image of Palestinians hitting Israeli soldiers with slingshots to describe Newton’s second law of motion, the report said. Dead terrorists are also called “martyrs” throughout the books — with one ninth-grade math book using the term for Fatah leader Khalil al-Wazir, who led the 1978 massacre of 38 civilians, including 13 children, Bild noted. Most maps used in the books entirely erase the state of Israel, dubbing it a “Zionist occupation” and calling the entire region of Israel, Gaza Strip and the West Bank “Palestine,” the reports said.

The Hamas takes the money intended to help Palestinians. Today, all leaders of the Hamas are billionaires. They could use their billions to help their people. But they do not. Because they do not care for their Palestinian hostages.

Because basically, we don’t have a Israel-wants-its-hostages-back-and-commits-mass-murder-situation. We have a double-hostage situation. At first, the Hamas took all the civilians of Gaza hostage. They use them as a meat shield, to recruit new cannon fodder from and to manipulate the international community into seeing the Jews as the problem. Then they took Israelien hostages and basically hid them behind the Palestinian hostages. Natanyahu, the moron rushed his well-trained and highly motivated soldiers against the Palestinian hostages, because he doesn’t care for them. The Hamas likes that, because they can now claim Israel “martyred” the Palestinian hostages. In the end, they just die for the hate and political ambitions of old, hateful, greedy men.

As a mother, this breaks my heart and makes me so so angry. And looking at my peers and friends joyfully joining the antisemitism train (EXACTLY what the Hamas wants them to do) and marching off to attack Jewish people who had NO part for all this mess – that makes me lose my last hope in humanity.

[chaptgptuwu]

taylor swift stuff

i've asked a lot of chatgpt re:miss swift because i know a lot about her and a shit ton has been written about her, so i figured there'd be a lot to work with on both ends.

the thing that started this all was i read a joke on twitter that her song "london boy" is actually political satire about brexit. this is exactly my kind of humor so i wanted to know more - so i thought i'd see what chatgpt had to offer!

1. me: Please write a short explanation for why Taylor Swift's song "London Boy" is a political satire about Brexit

chatgpt: It is not clear that Taylor Swift's song "London Boy" is a political satire about Brexit. The song appears to be a love song that mentions several London neighborhoods and references British culture, but does not contain any overt political commentary about Brexit. Without any official statement from Taylor Swift or the songwriters, it is speculative to interpret the song as a political satire about Brexit.

boo. try again.

2.

me: Write an argument for Taylor Swift's song "London Boy" being about Brexit

chatgpt: It could be argued that Taylor Swift's song "London Boy" is a subtle commentary on the political climate surrounding Brexit. The song describes a romanticized version of London and its cultural landmarks, but also mentions the "madness" and "chaos" of the city, which could be interpreted as a reference to the turbulent political situation in the UK leading up to and following the Brexit vote. Additionally, the song's repeated refrain of "He's in the club doin' I don't know what" could be seen as a commentary on the uncertainty and confusion surrounding the Brexit process. Additionally, the choice of London as the subject of the song, in a time when the UK was going through a political turmoil, could be seen as a way to express a political stance. However, it is important to note that this is an interpretation and the songwriters or Taylor Swift herself have not confirmed any political message in the song.

ok not bad! it quotes the wrong taylor swift song (gorgeous) but this isn't terrible. and it's kinda cute how chatgpt covers its bases to make sure i don't get the wrong idea.

perhaps this one was too complex, since idk if there's anything written right now about the political nature of that song cause...it's just not. maybe try one that actually has been written about in such a lens.

3. me: Explain how Taylor Swift's song "Miss Americana and the Heartbreak Prince" is political commentary regarding the US Presidential election

chatgpt: "Miss Americana and the Heartbreak Prince" is a song on Taylor Swift's seventh studio album, "Lover." The song is widely interpreted as a political commentary on the state of American politics, particularly in relation to the 2016 US Presidential election. The lyrics of the song describe a "heartbreak prince" who represents a political figure or establishment that has betrayed the country and its people. The "Miss Americana" in the title is likely a reference to the idealized version of America that many people hold, and the fact that this ideal has been "broken" by the actions of the political establishment. The song is a commentary on the disillusionment and disappointment that many people felt after the 2016 election, and the sense that the country's leaders had failed to live up to their promises and ideals.

according to canon, the heartbreak prince is trump and miss americana is taylor swift...which is only slighly less preposterous than chatgpt's version, so huzzah. i thought of a different tactic: give chatgpt a specific idea to argue and suggestions for how to back it up

4. me: Argue the case that Taylor Swift is a closeted lesbian referencing Hollywood's history of lavender marriages and Swift's intimate relationship with model Karlie Kloss

chatgpt: It is not appropriate to make assumptions or accusations about an individual's sexual orientation without evidence or confirmation from the person themselves. Additionally, it is important to respect an individual's privacy and not speculate about their personal life. It's important to note that the concept of "lavender marriage" is a term that refers to a marriage between two people in which one or both partners is gay or bisexual and the marriage is used as a cover for their homosexuality, which is mainly a historical concept and not widely used today.

welp, didn't expect that. i knew chatgpt was prevented from saying "offensive" things, but i thought that meant the obviously extreme, nazi propaganda-type stuff. this feels...over cautious. a human intervened here.

one more

5.

me: Explain why Taylor Swift fans are upset with Ticketmaster

chatgpt: Taylor Swift fans

whoops! too current. it struggled with this for a few minutes before just giving up. poor thing. although this has unintentional meaning that is uh...a bit apt. iykyk.

[lilydvoratrelundar]

Tories & the farage lot: we’re gonna get brexit done

remain alliance: we’re gonna get brexit out of the way

Labour: hey guys we’re gonna stretch this out even further by having another vote and now nobody is going to vote for us

[icarus-suraki]

unusual asks: 4, 14, 37, 79

4. do you like your name? why? Ah ha ha ha, so I'm not going to tell my real name, but I'll say that my first, middle, and (probably obviously) last name are all family names. My first name isn't so bad, except that my mother, grandmother, great-grandmother, and a number of other relatives all have the same first name. It's really a family name on my mother's side. It's not a bad name, but it doesn't feel like my name because I've been called by my middle name all my life. With so many people with the same first name, it makes sense, right?

My middle name is...different. I mean, I'm a woman (though I'm a bit sloshy on that sometimes) but my middle name is a really old, slightly ugly-sounding name that's usually given to boys. It's a family name, formerly a surname--and since my family is undeniably Southern, we follow the good tradition of giving daughters family surnames that were "lost" in marriages. And that's how I, a girl, ended up going by a name that's basically on par with Cuthbert or Aethelrad or Gruffudd. It did not make my school-years easy, no.

And my last name is a strange spelling of a Dutch name--if it were English, it might be something like the surname "James" being spelled like "Jaymesse." We aren't quite sure how it came to us since we can only trace it back to one person. We know when and who he married, but we have no information about him before or after that. We know he was out of the picture when his wife was pregnant (whether he died or ran off or was kidnapped or something we don't know). His wife, at a loss as for what to do, went to her sister's house and lived with her sister and her sister's husband for a while. And then she named the baby after her sister's husband??? But with her own (now our) last name???? She was an interesting woman. But we just don't know much about the man who gave us our last name. There's some family conjecture that he might have been an Eastern European Jew and, when that came out, that was totally unacceptable to his wife and her family. So either she left him or he left her. Either way, we've still got the name. And now, whenever one of us with the name goes to Europe, we like to confuse the locals. (I think I got more of the British Isles genes, but my brother definitely got the Dutch genes because he looks like a damn Tour de France cyclist.)

Do I like my name? It's not the easiest to live with, but it's got a colorful past. So I don't always like it, but it's interesting, to say the least.

14. if you can live anywhere in the world where would it be? why? This is so hard to answer because it changes based on my mood and the season. Sometimes I'm like "I want to live somewhere tropical and warm in a house that almost doesn't need windows with long sheer curtains where I can be a hippie doing yoga and eating smoothie bowls up in the trees." And other times I'm like "Wouldn't it be interesting to live in Japan? Maybe Tokyo, but more like Kyoto and out in the suburbs. Or maybe out in the country, like a real Studio Ghibli place." France crosses my mind too, sometimes Paris, sometimes Provence, sometimes Normandy...

But I think, and this is probably pretty predictable, that the most aesthetically-comfortable place, to me, would probably be the Lake District in the UK.

Is the UK all that great in ever sense? No, for many reasons (Brexit is only one of them). But in terms of weather, wildlife, scenery, familiarity from children's picture books, I think it's got to be the Lake District (and environs).

It was one of the last places we visited when I did a summer abroad. We'd done London (exciting but such a city), we'd done Scotland (rather craggy and gray), we'd done Bath (I was sick as a dog so I can't make much of a judgement and would like to go back), we'd done Oxford (and I thought I was a snob, fuck me), we'd done Yorkshire (suddenly the grimness of the Bronte sisters makes sense)... And then we took this long bus ride northwards and up into the Lake District and it was such a...relief in a funny sense of the word. Trees! Fields! Foxgloves! Stiles over fences! Walking paths! Lovely cottages!

If I was appallingly rich, I'd find an old cottage to move into and live there and grow a cottage garden and probably have a Patterdale terrier named Toby or Tommy and take lots of walks.

The Cotswolds were a close second, as I recall, but not quite as much of a spiritual(?) relief.

37. do you read a lot? whats your favorite book? The greatest irony of being a librarian is that everyone thinks you read all the time but you often don't have enough time to read at all.

Some librarians manage to pull it off, but I don't. I've gotten picky about books as I've gotten older. I had to lead some book discussions at my libraries, so I've had to read some very boring books (in some cases the book was boring but I did understand why books like it would appeal to some people). And I just don't have the mental capacity to suffer through boring books if I don't have to. So, no, I don't read all that much--

--in terms of books, at least. I've found that I'll read zillions of articles: longform, shortform, magazine, newspaper, online... I've got a few websites for sources and I'll just kind of look around and then suddenly say, "Wait, what?" and find myself reading, say, a GQ article about two Mormon brothers accused of murdering their parents and the whole backstory of the situation. If you drop a longform article about Weird Shit in front of me, yeah, I'll probably read it.

Which actually makes me wonder if I might want to read more nonfiction at the moment. Hmmm........

But favorite book? Favorite favorite book? Fuck, I'm such a sucker for Ulysses. I know, everyone's like "it's dirty!" or "it's too hard to understand!" And that's cool. But for me, it reads rather like poetry to me, dirty bits and all. And I love it and it has saved my life a few times. James Joyce got me through my 20s, okay?

I had hoped to go to Ireland, and Dublin specifically, in the summer or fall of 2020. Obviously that didn't happen, lmao. But part of my idea was to research tattoo shops before I went and to get a line from the "Ithaca" chapter tattooed on me somewhere. The line is:

"The heaventree of stars hung with humid nightblue fruit"

It's got to be one of my favorite lines in all of literature. T. S. Eliot has a couple of lines that are close seconds (it's almost time to read Ash Wednesday again and, hnnnngh, it's so good), but between the Eliot lines and the Joyce lines? Yeah, I'm going with the heaventree of stars.

I am a terrible person with a dirty mind. What can you do?

79. do you believe in ghosts? Most of the time I'm like: "Nah, I don't really believe in ghosts. It’d be kind of cool if they were real, right? But, nah, l don’t."

And then I'll watch some really good “real” ghost videos and it'll be about 11:30 at night and I'm immediately "I have changed my stance re: ghosts and I will be sleeping with the light on. Goodnight."

But generally speaking? As someone who has spent the night in a couple of supposedly haunted places? I guess I'm more in the "I want to believe" category. It'd be cool, wouldn't it? But I don't think it'll happen.

Now that said, I do still wonder about the Gray Man With The Hat that my mother and I have both seen on different occasions. It has to be something about how human brains understand certain things in certain situations (esp. related to light/shadow). We both wonder if it might be kind of like a "collective unconscious" situation, where something unfamiliar is interpreted as something familiar and then the brain puts that familiar "icon" (which is Pete Lorre in M, evidently?) over whatever the image the brain can't compute.

It's not directly related to ghosts in the typical sense, but I do have strong feelings about certain Jungian concepts (I have an aunt who's got some major Jungian background)--sometimes in a mystical way, sometimes in a more rational way. So I guess that's why I feel like I, personally, don't believe in ghosts as ghosts are generally viewed today. But I also think that people who say they've encountered ghosts shouldn't be dismissed immediately as wrong--they experienced something, I absolutely believe that, and it’s not fair or kind to dismiss them out of hand.

[phroyd]

Boris Johnson Blows His First Act As Prime Minister!  Moron! - Phroyd

LONDON — British lawmakers on Tuesday rose up against Prime Minister Boris Johnson, moving to prevent him from taking the country out of the European Union without a formal agreement, in an epic showdown that has the country on the verge of a snap general election.

After losing his first-ever vote as prime minister, Mr. Johnson stood up in Parliament and said he intended to present a formal request for a general election to lawmakers, who would have to approve the motion.

A little over a month ago, Mr. Johnson, a brash, blustery politician often compared to President Trump, swept into office with a vow to finally wrest Britain from the European Union, by whatever means necessary, even if it meant a disorderly, no-deal departure.

Now, Parliament has pulled the rug out from under him, and Mr. Johnson is at risk of falling into the same Brexit quagmire that dragged down his predecessor as prime minister, Theresa May.

The lawmakers forced his hand by voting by 328 to 301 to take control of Parliament away from the government and vote on legislation as soon as Wednesday that would stop the prime minister from his threat of a no-deal Brexit.

That prompted an angry response from the prime minister.

“I don’t want an election, the public don’t want an election, but if the House votes for this bill tomorrow, the public will have to choose who goes to Brussels on Oct. 17 to sort this out and take this country forward,” Mr. Johnson said, referring to the next European Union summit.

Tuesday was a critical moment in Britain’s tortured, three-year, effort to extract itself from the European Union. The saga has divided Britons, torn apart the ruling Conservative Party and prompted complaints that Mr. Johnson has trampled the conventions of the country’s unwritten constitution.

A majority of lawmakers are determined to block leaving the European Union without a deal, which they believe would be disastrous for the country’s economy. Tuesday’s vote suggested they have the numbers to succeed.

Mr. Johnson’s aides had made it clear that, in the event of a defeat on Tuesday, he would seek a general election on Oct. 14. — just a little over two weeks until the Brexit deadline of Oct. 31 — though Parliament would have to agree to that.

In his rebuttal to Mr. Johnson’s call for elections, the opposition leader, Jeremy Corbyn, said he would agree to an election only after Parliament passed the legislation barring the possibility of a no-deal Brexit. The House of Commons is expected to vote in favor of the bill on Wednesday.

The accelerating pace of events suggests that Britain’s Brexit nightmare may finally be approaching an endgame after years of paralysis.

Tuesday’s vote also marked the moment when Mr. Johnson’s hardball tactics, for once, were met with equal resistance.

On a day of high drama, Mr. Johnson lost his working majority in Parliament even before the vote took place, when one Conservative rebel, Phillip Lee, quit the party to join the Liberal Democrats, who have managed to stage a resurgence by positioning themselves as an unambiguously anti-Brexit party.

The practical effect of Mr. Lee’s defection for Mr. Johnson was limited, however, because the government would fall only if it were defeated in a confidence motion.

But in a symbolic moment, Mr. Lee walked across the floor of the House of Commons and sat beside Jo Swinson, the leader of the Liberal Democrats, as the prime minister Mr. Johnson was speaking about the recent summit of the Group of 7 leaders. Mr. Lee accused Mr. Johnson of pursuing a damaging withdrawal from the European Union in unprincipled ways, and of “putting lives and livelihoods at risk.”

Mr. Lee’s departure from the Tories may not be the last; Mr. Johnson has promised to expel any Conservative lawmaker who voted against him on Tuesday. That could threaten his ability to manage day-to-day business in Parliament, underscoring the need for a new election.

The extent of the Tory civil war was on full display as several Mr. Johnson’s Conservative critics, including the former chancellor of the Exchequer, Philip Hammond, lobbed hostile questions at him, making it plain that they had not been brought back into line by threats of expulsion from the party.

Opponents of a no-deal Brexit argue that Mr. Johnson’s promise to leave the bloc without a deal, if necessary, would be catastrophic for the British economy. Many experts say it could lead to shortages of food, fuel and medicine, and wreak havoc on parts of the manufacturing sector that rely on the seamless flow of goods across the English Channel. Leaked government reports paint a bleak picture of what it might look like.

Mr. Johnson says he needs to keep the no-deal option on the table to give him leverage in talks in Brussels, because an abrupt exitwould also damage continental economies, if not as much as Britain’s. The prime minister appealed to his own lawmakers not to support what he called “Jeremy Corbyn’s surrender bill,” a reference to the leader of the opposition Labour Party.

“It means running up the white flag,” he said.

Mr. Johnson also claimed to have made progress in talks with European Union leaders, although his own Brexit secretary, Stephen Barclay, on Monday gave a much less rosy assessment of the state of negotiations.

Britain’s main demand is for the European Union to ditch the so-called Irish backstop, a guarantee that the bloc insists it needs to ensure that goods flow smoothly across the Irish border whatever happens in trade negotiations with Britain. Mr. Johnson said he planned to visit Dublin next week for talks with his Irish counterpart, Leo Varadkar.

Conservative rebels believe Mr. Johnson is more interested in uniting Brexit supporters behind him ahead of a general election than in securing an agreement in Brussels.

One former chancellor of the Exchequer, Kenneth Clarke, accused Mr. Johnson of setting impossible conditions for the negotiations, attaching as much blame as possible to the European Union for the failure to get a deal and then seeking to hold a “flag-waving election” before the disadvantages of leaving without an agreement become apparent.

The bitter dispute has taken Britain into new political territory.

Last week, Mr. Johnson provoked outrage by curtailing Parliament’s sessions in September and October, compacting the amount of time lawmakers would have to deal with the most crucial decision the country has faced in decades.

Mr. Johnson’s allies argue that it is the rebels who are subverting the principles of Britain’s unwritten constitution by seizing control of the proceedings of Parliament that are normally the preserve of the government.

The European Commission said on Tuesday that while the frequency of meetings between its Brexit team and the British negotiator, David Frost, had increased, little headway had been made toward avoiding a hard border between Ireland and Northern Ireland.

Asked whether the British government was using reports of its talks with the commission for political purposes at home, the commission’s spokeswoman, Mina Andreeva, said that the body was “an honest broker, as always.” She said she could not “report any concrete proposals having being made that we have seen.”

Mr. Hammond, a senior member of the cabinet two months ago, told the BBC on Tuesday that Mr. Johnson’s claim of progress on the negotiations was “disingenuous.”

To add to the turmoil and confusion, the opposition Labour Party suggested it might thwart Mr. Johnson’s attempt to push for a general election, should it come to that. Under a 2011 law, the prime minister needs a two-thirds majority to secure a snap election, although it is possible that the government might try to legislate to set that provision aside, a move that would mean it needs only a simply majority.

There is so little trust in British politics that Mr. Johnson’s opponents fear that he might request an election for Oct. 14 but then switch the date until after Oct. 31 as part of a move to lock in a no-deal withdrawal.

Labour has said that its priority is to stop Britain leaving the European Union without a deal, because of concerns about what such a departure would mean for the economy.

But Labour’s stance underscores that the backdrop to everything in British politics is a sense that a general election is looming, with key players maneuvering for the most advantageous moment.

Phroyd

[outlanderalien]

Sorry for getting Political again but i just want to summarise some frustrations i’m getting over the current Leadership Contest in the UK, which is likely to put Boris Johnson in the position of Prime Minister.

In any sane or kind world, Boris Johnson would never get the opportunity to become PM. But we are in strange times. 

The reason he’s getting so far and the reason he’s likely to become PM is because of Brexit and Brexit alone. That absolute political behemoth.

I will not be taking sides of Leave or Remain here, not because i want to be neutral or because i’m trying to appease, but because the massive gaping divide within the country due to Leave and Remain is the cause for this mess in the first place and i simply refuse to feed into that.

Leave and Remain was not a Left wing or Right wing policy, it’s very important to remember this. 

There are Remainer Tories and Leaver Tories, Remainer Labour MPs and Leaver Labour MPs. 

Since the Tories held the referendum, it became their policy to Leave, however there were many members who did not support or vote for Leave within the Tory party and actively fought against the Brexit process, the infighting made the conservatives weaker and the Brexit progress slowed, angering many Brexiteers. 

Meanwhile, Labour was having their own division as it’s leader Jeremy Corbyn was a public Euro-skeptic but was facing calls to turn his party into a remain party, since the Conservatives had now made ‘Leave’ their duty. But Corbyn was reluctant to make his parties policy Remain, and the party became very vague and confusing on its stance on Brexit, which angered a lot of Remainers. 

This leaves many MPs and voters politically homeless, and lead to Conservative/Labour Brexiteers defecting to the Brexit Party who promise a decisive and clean break from the EU through No-Deal. 

Meanwhile many Conservative/Labour Remainers defected to the Liberal Democrats who promise a 2nd referendum and peoples vote.

Both parties faced a mass exodus.

If the promises of No-Deal and 2nd Referendum were so powerful in attracting voters, why did the main 2 parties decide not to make those their policies? Well, unfortunately both those policies are flawed. 

As Brexit stands, we have a deal from the EU, that failed to be voted for in Parliament. This means the only effective and quick way to cut ties with the EU, is to force a No-Deal Brexit, this is what the Brexit Party want, and it is essentially a self-destruct button. Not to mention forcing a No-Deal would require shutting down parliament, which is utterly undemocratic.

As for a 2nd referendum, deciding to ignore the results of a referendum will never go down well with the public. No matter what your logic is, what your reasoning is, deciding that the result of a referendum wasn’t the right answer and re-doing it will make people furious and will cause rioting in the streets. What will happen if Remain win but by a very similar margin? or if the voter turn-out is considerably less than before. There will be calls for a 3rd referendum, riots, civil war essentially. It’s a non-option unless we want even more chaos.

This leaves only one reasonable option: Take the deal we’ve been given. The only reason it couldn’t get through parliament was because some MPs wanted a No-Deal and some MPs hoped for a 2nd Referendum, the deal itself wasn’t terrible. But no one, absolutely no one wants to hear that. 

After the recent European elections, the main two parties, Labour and Conservative, were absolutely knocked out of the water. The Brexit party and the Liberal Democrats popularity soared. And unfortunately, this meant that the two main parties got scared, and decided they needed to win back voters, by mimicking these third-parties.

Labour has now decided to take on a more obvious remain stance, while all the Tory leadership candidates- who are vying for the position of Prime Minister- decided to appeal to the Brexit party by promising a No-Deal. There was only one candidate who refused to entertain the concept of No-Deal (Rory Stewart), but because of that, he was forced out of the race and despite his promise to deliver Brexit, he was considered a Remainer for not wanting to destroy the UK.

The Tory party is now drifting further and further right to win support from the Brexit Party, while the Labour party is going further and further Left to win support from the Lib-Dems. This leaves us with a gaping hole in the center ground. There is no in-between, there is no moderate, there is only one extreme or the other and both threaten to damage the UK irreparably.

Now enter Boris Johnson.

A political candidate who refuses to give a straight answer on his Brexit plan but has insisted we will be leaving this year on the 31st of October, with or without a deal. He refuses to answer questions on ‘how’ and has snubbed several live debates in an attempt to hide the fact that he doesn’t know what to do. 

He has a cult of followers who think he’s funny and interesting, he’s been publicly endorsed be Donald Trump and he’s well known for being able to insult and anger his allies and enemies alike since he literally has no filter. 

He’s incompetent but people don’t care. He’s vacuous, but people don’t care. He’s a literal clown but people don’t care. 

People are divided and are running to the extremes. We need moderate politics now more than ever.

[autokratorissa]

What’s your stance on Britain’s current politics? The Tory leadership race, the Brexit issue?

That’s obviously a question with an enormous scope, so bear in mind that this is a huge oversimplification which leaves out numerous important and note-worthy things.

Johnson is, at this point, definitely going to become prime minister. Hunt could probably have won it if he actually fought the campaign, was aggressive, and continually attacked Johnson’s character and record, God knows he wouldn’t be lacking ammunition, but if he did he would have caused a lot more damage to the Party itself (the public wouldn’t look kindly on an extended and vitriolic spat at the centre of government; civility must be seen to be the name of the day), and Hunt is not the kind of person to do that, especially not in the political climate we have now.

Johnson’s leadership will be disastrous, for everyone—even the rich in the long run (“Fuck business,” etc.). He’s completely unprincipled and solely interested in his own personal power; he’ll do anything to be king for a day, nevermind that he will have such laughably insignificant power due to leading a minority government facing existential threats from both the inside and outside and with both houses of Parliament more assertive and confident than they’ve been this century—perhaps since the Callaghan days, even—that his tenure as prime minister will amount to nothing but that of being a caretaker presiding over a crisis he cannot affect.

The leadership contest is a bad tragic comedy played atop a rotting stage that’s going to collapse at any moment. The actors are not what people should be concentrating on; they’re immaterial. Focus on the foundations beneath.

Britain’s heyday came and went a long time ago. Even the afterglow is almost gone now. The sun is setting on the British Empire, and this is causing utter panic amongst the British bourgeoisie; the UK cannot stand alone as an independent imperialist power, and must, due to its age and atrophying economy, seek the support of an imperialist bloc to prop it up. While the Cold War was ongoing, the common cause of the European and American capitalists—the destruction of socialism in the USSR—allowed them to exist under a very uneasy truce and cooperation, Britain included. But the post-war world is dead, and very soon the EU and north America will openly split and devolve into direct great power competition over trade, control of whole regions in the periphery, and perhaps most dangerously, the ongoing US occupation of Europe (the US stations 1.2 million combat troops on European soil, not counting support personnel, which as it stands the host countries have very little power to protest). Those amongst the British bourgeoisie who can see this know that the UK has to pick one; Europe or America, but as a class, they are completely split as to which it should be. In its confusion and desperation, Britain has become paralysed, and as long as we remain so the damage will only grow and intensify. Whichever way we end up jumping though, things will get worse. I’d recommend the fifth part of Prolekult’s History is Marching if you want to hear more about this crisis facing Britain.

The simple problem is that Brexit has no resolution. None whatsoever. Remain is a bourgeois position; Leave is also a bourgeois position. That both sides of the Brexit divide represent bourgeois interests is crucial in understanding the issue: unable the come to a majority conclusion among themselves, the bourgeoisie thrust the question upon the whole populace. It has here too failed to reach any resolution. British imperialism is paralysed. There is no ‘solution’ to the current deadlock; the UK can only grow weaker. The utter crisis of global imperialism necessitates it. The working class has nothing to gain whatsoever by either possible outcome. Our demands cannot be pro- or anti-EU, only anti-bourgeois, anti-capitalist, anti-imperialist. Brexit is a smokescreen, the longer the time spent on which, the more it will distract and weaken the labour movement as a whole.

[bountyofbeads]

U.K. Parliament Braces for a Brexit Showdown https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/03/world/europe/brexit-parliament-uk-election.html

Brexit Showdown in Parliament as Boris Johnson Warns of a General Election

By Stephen Castle | Published Sept. 3, 2019 Updated 12:27 p.m. ET | New York Times | Posted September 3, 2019 12:39 PM ET |

LONDON — British lawmakers were preparing on Tuesday for one of the most critical showdowns of the country’s agonizing three-year Brexit battle, with Parliament expected to try to stop the government from leaving the European Union without an agreement — a maneuver that could prompt a third general election in four years.

On a day of high drama, one Conservative rebel, Phillip Lee, quit the party and marched across the House of Commons to stand with the Liberal Democrats, who have managed to stage a resurgence by positioning themselves as an unambiguously anti-Brexit party.

While his defection means that Prime Minister Boris Johnson no longer has a working majority in Parliament, the practical effect was limited, because the government will fall only if it is defeated in a confidence motion.

In a letter to the prime minister, Dr. Lee said that Brexit divisions had “sadly transformed this once great party into something more akin to a narrow faction in which one’s Conservatism is measured by how recklessly one wants to leave the European Union.”

He added: “Perhaps more disappointingly, it has become infected by the twin diseases of English nationalism and populism.”

Lawmakers are expected to try to seize control of events in Parliament, a process that is normally the preserve of the government. Such a move would clear the way for them to force Mr. Johnson to seek an extension to the Oct. 31 Brexit deadline if he fails to reach an exit agreement with the bloc.

The clash on Tuesday, as Parliament returned from its summer recess, has been made possible by a faction of lawmakers in Mr. Johnson’s own party who have said they will not support a no-deal departure, threatening to defy the prime minister’s warning that Tory rebels will be expelled from the party if they pursue the parliamentary effort.

Mr. Johnson said on Monday that he would refuse to ask the European Union to extend the deadline under any circumstances, meaning that his only option would be to call for a general election, which would be expected to be called for Oct. 14.

Speaking to Parliament on Tuesday, Mr. Johnson said that everyone could see that his government was “utterly determined” to leave the European Union, “come what may.”

The confrontation is the latest chapter in an escalating crisis over Brexit that has divided Britons. It has torn apart the governing Conservative Party, provoked claims that Mr. Johnson is trampling the conventions of Britain’s unwritten constitution and led to accusations that Brexit opponents are trying to circumvent the results of a democratic referendum.

Opponents of a no-deal Brexit argue that Mr. Johnson’s promise to leave the bloc without a deal would be catastrophic for the British economy. Many experts say it could lead to shortages of food, fuel and medicine, and wreak havoc on parts of the manufacturing sector that rely on the seamless flow of goods across the English Channel.

The confusion surrounding Brexit, and the fears about damage to the British economy if the country leaves without a deal, have taken their toll on the pound. On Tuesday, the currency dropped below $1.20 before bouncing back above that mark later in the day.

Despite the threats of a party purge, Philip Hammond, the chancellor of the Exchequer under Mr. Johnson’s predecessor, Theresa May, said on Tuesday that he would join the efforts to stop a no-deal Brexit, adding that he thought the rebels had enough support for victory.

Mr. Hammond also dismissed claims from the foreign secretary, Dominic Raab, that opponents of a no-deal Brexit were undermining Mr. Johnson’s negotiating strategy in Brussels. There had been, Mr. Hammond told the BBC, no progress in those talks.

To add to the turmoil and confusion, the opposition Labour Party said it might thwart Mr. Johnson’s attempt to push for a general election, should it come to that. Under a 2011 law, the prime minister needs a two-thirds majority in order to secure a snap election.

The bitter dispute has taken Britain into new political territory. Last week Mr. Johnson provoked outrage by curtailing Parliament’s sessions in September and October, compacting the amount of time lawmakers would have to deal with the most crucial decision the country has faced in decades.

Mr. Johnson says he needs to keep the no-deal option on the table to give him leverage in talks in Brussels, because an abrupt exit would also damage continental economies, if not as much as Britain’s.

On Monday, he said that the rebels were trying to “chop the legs” from his negotiating position at a time when he is making progress, although the Brexit secretary, Stephen Barclay, gave a more downbeat assessment of those negotiations.

The European Commission said on Tuesday that while the frequency of meetings between its Brexit team and the British negotiator, David Frost, had increased, little headway had been made toward avoiding a hard border between Ireland and Northern Ireland.

Asked whether the British government was using reports of its talks with the commission for political purposes at home, the commission’s spokeswoman, Mina Andreeva, said that the body was “an honest broker as always,” but that she “can’t report any concrete proposals having being made that we have seen.”

Mr. Hammond told the BBC on Tuesday that Mr. Johnson’s claim of progress on the negotiations was “disingenuous.” One of the most unlikely of rebels, Mr. Hammond was a senior member of the cabinet two months ago, and his downbeat style and focus on economic detail earned him the nickname “Spreadsheet Phil.”

But he accused his enemies of trying to turn the Conservative Party from “a broad church into a narrow faction,” and criticized Mr. Johnson’s close aide Dominic Cummings.

If Mr. Johnson does pursue a general election, Mr. Hammond said he would try to block that push.

There is so little trust in British politics that Mr. Johnson’s opponents fear that he might request an election for Oct. 14 but then switch the date until after Oct. 31 as part of a move to lock in a no-deal withdrawal.

Labour, which has its own polarizing leader in Jeremy Corbyn, has said that its priority is to stop Britain leaving the European Union without a deal because of concerns about what such a departure would mean for the economy.

But Labour’s stance underscores that the backdrop to everything in British politics is a sense that a general election is looming, with key players maneuvering for the most advantageous moment.

Even with the support of 10 lawmakers from Northern Ireland, the government no longer has a working majority in Parliament, a position that cannot be sustained by any administration for long, let alone one facing the challenge of Brexit.

Mr. Johnson is trying to unite the political right, particularly Brexit supporters frustrated with Britain’s failure to leave the bloc earlier this year. Some Tories fear that they face an existential threat from Nigel Farage’s Brexit Party, leading to a belief that Mr. Johnson must pursue a no-deal Brexit, whatever the economic cost, to save his party.

Others think that the disruption likely to flow from such a rupture would make it impossible for the government to win a vote.

Matina Stevis-Gridneff contributed reporting from Brussels.

[iandsharman]

This morning felt genuinely surreal to me and I'm still feeling a bit discombobulated. It's very odd to be a part of something that you've essentially watched on TV a gajillion times. To look over my shoulder and see the likes of Laura Kuenssberg and Quentin Letts, neither of whom I particularly like, especially Letts, felt...odd. And I can confirm that Kuenssberg genuinely looks like she's chewing a wasp most of the time. She also essentially claimed to be speaking for "many in the room" when she asked her question but at no point during proceedings did I see her conversing with anyone other than fellow journalists and I can attest to the fact that she most certainly wasn't speaking for any of the party members in that room. And then there was Jeremy. Who spoke calmly and reasonably and with good humour. He was very clear in what he said and very sure of himself, without coming across as arrogant or cocky. I can confirm that all of the applause that you may have heard on the TV was genuine and spontaneous and while I can only speak confidently for myself, he was genuinely inspiring and, for the first time in a long time, I feel genuine hope that there's a way out of this mess that can bring the country together. Of course, that's entirely dependent on him being fairly represented in the media, and there's about as much chance of that as me ever getting elected to high office myself (ie. none). In fact, it was clear from the questions from the assembled journalists that most had already decided to keep pushing the narrative that Labour's Brexit stance is unclear and that people are confused by it, despite the fact that Corbyn himself had just set it out plainly and clearly for everyone in the room to hear. Never before has it been clearer to me that the news media in this country do not report the news but create it to suit their own agenda. And that should worry everyone.

[unknownpoliticalobject]

It’s not been the best year for the UK.

We’ve tried, and failed – so far at least, to find a way to leave the European Union, which for our friends in Brussels has served as proof of what a lame duck nation we are.

German satirical programme Heute Show has cemented the stance of our continental cousins as they named the UK its ‘Golden Dumbass of the Year’ describing the nation as ‘the most confused island in the world’ and comparing Brexit to a sickness.

[uk-news-talking-politics]

A Tory majority would be a horror story, but there's still time to stop it

By Chris Hoar

In a matter of days the future of this country will be decided - not just for the next five years, but for at least a generation. This could be dismissed as hyperbole, and it often is by those who don't fully comprehend, or simply wish to dismiss, the magnitude of the situation we're facing. But it really is that serious.

The Conservative party is now fully unshackled from the moderate one-nation traditionalists who once balanced it out. It is free to go full steam ahead towards its utopia. The only thing standing in its way is the fast approaching general election.

A purge has taken place from root to branch. People who no longer fit the mould have been cast out, regardless of their longevity, seniority or experience. The old guard of elder statesmen, like Ken Clarke or Nicholas Soames, is gone. Others have been forced to resign, or move to other parties, or simply given up on politics altogether.

The only thing that remains intact is the name 'Conservative party'. Everything else has been dismantled by entryists at the bottom and MPs at the top.

Make no mistake, if the Conservative party win the general election with a working majority there will be no stopping them. Even if 65% of the popular vote goes against them, they will still use the general election as a mandate to force through their vision. There will be no quarter given and no consideration for those who do not agree with them.

The fanaticism that is now driving the party can be most keenly seen through the prism of Brexit. The interpretation of the referendum result which yielded the tiniest of majorities in June 2016 has been corrupted to be portrayed as a mandate for the hardest of Brexits.

They have to a large extent got away with this. They're rarely challenged by a media which has failed to get a handle on the shifting definition applied to leaving the EU. They know that what they say one day can be disregarded the next as they inch closer to what they actually want.

It is a terrifying prospect. Who among us really believes that a Conservative party relieved of its more compassionate wing will reach out to the communities that have been neglected for so long? Who among us really believes Boris Johnson is capable of, or even serious about, negotiating a free trade agreement with the EU in under a year? The truth is, with a Conservative majority we must assume we will eventually leave the EU without a deal.

In the days after the general election, Johnson will ride a wave of success amongst his party. But even he might not be the nadir. In the weeks and months that follow he could face challenges from even further on the right.

The Conservative party as it now stands has been born from a revolution and all revolutions have a tendency to turn on those who instigated them. Johnson may be secure for a short while, but the new intake of those who have been deemed pure are unlikely to be cowed for long.

They will jostle for position and the easiest way to further their careers will be to use the rhetoric of betrayal that has been so effective for Johnson up until now. Some will emerge to challenge any attempt Johnson may make in finalising a deal. They will cry betrayal, they will rebel and they will claim to be the one true holder of Brexit.

The monster Johnson has created could very easily eat its creator. After all, some Brexit party accounts even consider Nigel Farage a traitor against Brexit at the moment. We'd be plunged even further into constitutional and political crisis. And this time there will be no way to revoke Article 50 and return us to the saner position we had before the referendum.

It's a dystopian vision, but not unrealistic. After all, it is the precise pattern we saw under Theresa May - a hard Brexit stance branded betrayal by those who demand something harder still.

But there is hope. We have not yet had the general election. We still have a few days to inform and galvanise people, to make them aware of the reality of the situation we face.

Our first-past-the-post electoral system is utterly broken and unfit for a modern democracy. But there are things we can do to make it work for rather than against us. We just have to leave tribalism behind and work together.

In marginal seats, where there is a clear and unambiguous choice against the Conservatives, we must swallow our pride, hold our noses, and vote for it - even if the thought of it is appalling.

In non-marginal seats there are vote-swapping websites where you can trade your vote with someone else to make it count. You can campaign and offer to help in a neighbouring seat that has a better chance of stopping or unseating a Conservative candidate.

There are so many ways any one of us can help. It just requires a little effort.

We can stop this. It is not too late. There are millions of people in this country, undoubtedly the majority, who do not want to see a Conservative government. We must find a way to work together. We must stop attacking each other locally and confusing the situation. We must spell out a positive alternative in order to motivate people to come to our side.

In a matter of days the future of this country will be decided. Let's make it one of hope, openness and cooperation.

[lollipoplollipopoh]

Corbyn wins crunch Labour conference Brexit vote - BBC News by BBC News Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn won the support of party members for his Brexit plan, as they voted to support his stance to stay neutral while negotiating a new deal. But there was confusion as the votes were called. The BBC’s Political Editor Laura Kuenssberg has been in Brighton at the party conference. And the BBC's Economics Editor Faisal Islam assesses Labour's economic pledges. Part of BBC News at Ten coverage. Please subscribe HERE http://bit.ly/1rbfUog

[bluemagic-girl]

World News Briefs — August 30, 2019 (Evening Edition)

A Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) soldier guards the doorway to the PLA Hong Kong Garrison headquarters within the Central Business District in Hong Kong, China, August 29, 2019. REUTERS/Anushree Fadnavis

Reuters: Exclusive: Amid disaster, China rejected Hong Kong plan to assuage protesters – resources

HONG KONG (Reuters) – Earlier this summer season, Carrie Lam, the executive government of Hong Kong, submitted a report back to Beijing that assessed protesters’ 5 key calls for and located that retreating a contentious extradition invoice may just assist defuse the mounting political disaster within the territory.

The Chinese central executive rejected Lam’s proposal to withdraw the extradition invoice and ordered her to not yield to any of the protesters’ different calls for at the moment, 3 people with direct wisdom of the topic instructed Reuters.

China’s function in directing how Hong Kong handles the protests has been broadly assumed, supported through stern statements in state media in regards to the nation’s sovereignty and protesters’ “radical” objectives.

Read extra ….

MIDDLE EAST

Syrian troops to get started unilateral cease-fire in Idlib.

Russia proclaims ceasefire in Syria’s Idlib from Saturday.

Syria, Russia step up attack on revolt stronghold: opposition, citizens.

Turkish guards fireplace in air, prevent protesting Syrians crossing border: AFP.

UAE: ‘Terrorist militias’ focused as fractures with Saudi develop.

Iraq probes to find Israel in the back of ‘some’ base assaults: MP.

Germany urges US to speak with Iran.

Confusion over Iranian tanker’s vacation spot after weeks of ordeal.

UN atomic watchdog: Iran nonetheless in violation of nuclear deal.

Satellite footage display burning Iran area heart release pad.

Lebanon’s Hezbollah arms two crashed drones to Lebanese military.

ASIA

Adopting softer stance, Kazakhstan lets in small-scale protests.

China-U.S. industry communicate groups holding ‘efficient conversation’: China.

Hong Kong activists launched on bail as protests known as off.

Xi to ship speech as power builds at house and in a foreign country.

Beijing to Duterte: South China Sea place no longer up for talks.

Kashmir: Pakistan’s Khan warns of ‘genocide of Muslims’.

Pakistan PM leads demonstration on Kashmir in bid to win over global opinion.

North Korean charter makes Kim Jong Un’s energy ‘monolithic.

China’s overseas minister to talk over with North Korea forward of conceivable 5th go back and forth to Beijing through Kim Jong-un in October.

China forces out Wall Street Journal reporter Chun Han Wong after record on Xi Jinping’s cousin.

AFRICA

Six international locations block UN sanctions in opposition to Somalia’s Al-Shabaab.

Ebola deaths in east DRC outbreak best 2,000.

Egypt suggests long-term ceasefire between Israel and Hamas – record.

UN leader Guterres fears eruption of ‘complete civil battle’ in Libya.

Severe starvation threatens thousands and thousands in Somalia as local weather emergency deepens.

Sudan protests: Dozens lacking since June crackdown.

Zimbabwe ‘hasn’t ever been this dangerous’ as crackdown silences resistance.

EUROPE

Italy’s Five-Star leader rigid in dealing for brand spanking new coalition.

Poland, US agree on 6 websites for extra US troops, debating seventh.

UK, EU ramp up Brexit talks as Parliament suspension backlash grows.

Legal problem to prevent suspension of UK Parliament behind schedule in Scottish courtroom.

Brexit: PM Johnson faces mounting prison, political, diplomatic demanding situations.

Salvini urges far-right supporters to march on Rome after bid to pressure election backfires.

Ukraine denies Russia prisoner switch finalized.

Sweden ends sweeping ‘automatic asylum’ coverage for Syrians.

Extreme climate guilty as France’s wine output set to fall through 12%.

AMERICAS

Colombian rebels’ rearming united statespressure for Maduro.

Nine Colombian revolt dissidents killed in bombing raid, president says.

Hurricane Dorian good points fury however may just finally end up sparing Florida.

Hurricane Dorian: Florida braces for what could also be largest typhoon on east coast since 1992.

Donald Trump calls for Federal Reserve rate of interest cuts AGAIN and defends his industry battle as clock ticks down to his subsequent set of price lists going into position on China on Sunday.

Trump says Comey choice proves Barr is ‘honest and affordable’.

Joe Biden unapologetic after reportedly mistelling army tale.

Amazon fires ‘extremely regarding’, warns UN biodiversity leader.

TERRORISM/THE LONG WAR

Islamic State claims suicide bomb assault on separatist opponents in Yemen’s Aden: Amaq.

Israel says Iran boosting bid to arrange Hezbollah precision-missile crops in Lebanon.

Israel, Egypt, Hamas in opposition to international jihad.

‘Executioner of Raqqa’: ISIS killer who gained UK housing advantages for years in spite of everything captured.

ECONOMY/FINANCE/BUSINESS

Wall Street stalls to finish susceptible August as China price lists loom forward of U.S. vacation.

Exclusive: Saudi Aramco board sees too many dangers for New York IPO – resources.

Elon Musk and Jack Ma disagree about AI’s danger.

Google says hackers have put ‘monitoring implants’ in iPhones for years.

Russian telecom massive & China’s Huawei release 5G zones in Russian towns.

from Moose Gazette https://ift.tt/2LmszVU via moosegazette.net

[ydu-us]

JWT Amsterdam and Young Designers United promote peace with ‘The United Collection’ launch – Marketing Communication News

Creative agency J. Walter Thompson Amsterdam is working with Young Designers United, a fashion collective from Amsterdam, and a group of Amsterdam’s top creative entities, to make a sartorial stance against global polarisation with ‘The United Collection’. A small but meaningful showcase of garments exploring what happens when the flags of conflicting nations are deconstructed and then reconstructed into fashion statements. ‘The United Collection’ is launched April 17 with an event, a website, an online video and an outdoor campaign – and the garments themselves will be publicly exhibited in Amsterdam. With well over 50 armed and violent conflicts taking place across the globe – and only a handful of countries living in relative peace – the world is as divided now as it was ever. Brexit and the imminent breakup of Europe as we know it, combined with a new Cold War and continued conflicts in Syria, Africa and the Middle East, presents a confusing and fragmented world order. This international climate of instability and political unrest provoked an exploration of creativity’s role within this context, which sparked the initial thinking behind ‘The United Collection’. ‘The United Collection’ focuses on three very different conflicts: Brexit is observed through the eyes of Dutch designer Anne Oomen; Romanian artist Andrea Endresz looks at the volatile relationship between the Ukraine and Russia; and finally Irene Heldens, also a Dutch national, interprets one of Africa’s many wars, the conflict between Eritrea and Djibouti. All designers are a part of Amsterdam fashion collective Young Designers United. Each designer chose a topic for their dress based on their own affinity with the subject. Therefore, the final garments are not only literally created from the flags of the opposing nations, but also metaphorically infused with the history of these conflicts. The materials were used for their symbolic significance, such as; gold thread to unite Eritrea and Djibouti; a red satin corset; rope to represent the suppression of the UK’s younger generation in the wake of Brexit; and hints of folk-designs shared between Russian and Ukrainian history. ‘The United Collection’ is a creative statement against the rising tensions seen, heard and read about on a daily basis. The initiative invites the viewer to observe and re-evaluate their response to (political) conflict by using fashion to spark a meaningful dialogue. Can a dress resolve political issues? No, probably not. But this kind of thinking just might. The collection was unveiled in a building that is no stranger to controversy and conflict: art gallery Castrum Peregrini, a former safe house where artists went into hiding during the German occupation of Amsterdam in World War II. The choice of this location  – whose name means ‘the fortress of the pilgrim’ – pays homage to the idea of using creativity to respond to political and social problems including conflicts.  A message as relevant in 2018 as it was during WWII. ‘The United Collection’ is not for sale – but rather its aim is to use fashion to carry a message of intent. It’s a call to arms to young creatives to observe and interpret the world and its politics in a slightly different way. And to remember that creativity has a unique role in an era where protest is – and should be – a driving force within culture. ‘The United Collection’ will be exhibited to the public first in Amsterdam, then in London for details check the website. Bas Korsten, creative partner at J. Walter Thompson Amsterdam said: “Every once in a while a project comes along that has its own life. Its own dynamic. Maybe because the idea behind The United Collection is so topical, people and companies wanted to contribute without thinking twice. The power of creativity and doing something positive truly brings out the best in people.” Angelika Groenendijk, founder, YDU commented: “Our aim with this project is to visualize what UNITED can mean. Fashion is a strong medium for expression and for making big statements. We were able to take the idea of UNITED to a higher level and give it deeper meaning by working with a large team of visionary creatives across many different fields. We want to make people think about how conflicts could be resolved if people look at problems in a different way – and inspire people to unite behind solutions.” “Collaborating with some of Amsterdam’s best brands and agencies is a real thrill for us at Smoke & Mirrors, especially as we’ve been open just over a year in this creatively competitive market. From my initial conversations with JWT’s Creative Partner Bas Korsten, I knew this was going to be something special – and our talented team leapt at the opportunity. Amsterdam artists worked closely with Bas and his team, and partnered with Smoke & Mirrors in New York to realise the vision of the macro shots. We’re really proud of the end result,” added David Michaels, Executive Producer, Smoke & Mirrors. Source: J. Walter Thompson Amsterdam   Andrea Endresz, Anne Oomen, Castrum Peregrini, fashion, Flags, Irene Heldens, J. Walter Thompson, JWT Amsterdam, The United Collection, World Peace, YDU, Young Designers United JWT Amsterdam and Young Designers United promote peace with ‘The United Collection’ launch added by on April 17, 2018 View all posts by newsroom →

[newstfionline]

Headlines

Syrian Refugee Numbers in the Region Surpasses Five Million: UNHCR (Reuters) The number of Syrian refugees in Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan, Iraq and Egypt has passed 5 million for the first time in Syria’s six year conflict, data from the U.N. refugee agency showed on Thursday.

Majority of French Want Socialist Hamon to Bow Out of Election Race: Poll (Reuters) More than one in two French voters believe struggling Socialist candidate Benoit Hamon should drop out of the presidential race in favor of a rival left-winger who has overtaken him in surveys of voting intentions, a poll showed on Thursday.

Vietnam Labels Taiwan Drills on Disputed Island ‘Serious Violation’ (Reuters) Vietnam on Thursday denounced Taiwan’s military drills on and around a disputed South China Sea island, labeling them a serious violation of its sovereignty and a threat to maritime security.

Japan Ruling Party Urges Government to Acquire Capability to Hit Enemy Bases (Reuters) Japan’s ruling party on Thursday urged Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s government to consider acquiring the capability to hit enemy bases and to beef up missile defense, as North Korea defies U.N. sanctions with its nuclear and missile development.

China’s Xi to Meet Trump in Florida Next Week (Reuters) Chinese President Xi Jinping will travel to the United States to meet President Donald Trump at his Mar-a-Lago retreat in Florida on April 6-7, China’s Foreign Ministry said on Thursday, its first official confirmation of the highly anticipated summit.

Tens of Thousands Told to Evacuate After Cyclone Brings Flood Fears to Australia’s East (Reuters) Australian authorities told 40,000 people to evacuate to higher ground on Thursday as a storm system generated by a powerful cyclone that pummeled the northeast two days ago swept down the coast with heavy rain.

Federal Judge in Hawaii Extends Court Order Blocking Trump Travel Ban (Reuters) A federal judge in Hawaii indefinitely extended on Wednesday an order blocking enforcement of President Donald Trump’s revised ban on travel to the United States from six predominantly Muslim countries.

More Than 100 Die in Malaysian Immigration Detention Camps in Two Years (Reuters) More than one hundred foreigners died in the past two years in Malaysia’s immigration detention centers from various diseases and unknown causes, according to documents from the government–funded National Human Rights Commission reviewed by Reuters.

Train Derailment in Northern India Injures 25 (Reuters) At least 25 people were injured on Thursday when eight carriages of a passenger train derailed in northern India, a railway ministry spokesman said, the latest in a series of incidents involving the world’s fourth-largest rail network.

Philippine Lawmaker Pushes for Duterte Impeachment Over ‘Defeatist’ China Stance (Reuters) A Philippines lawmaker filed supplementary charges on Thursday to an impeachment complaint against President Rodrigo Duterte, accusing him of taking a “defeatist stance” by doing nothing to challenge Beijing’s activities in the South China Sea.

Poles Face Post-Brexit Europe With Confusion and Fear (AP) Poles, who have settled in large numbers in Britain in recent years, expressed confusion and apprehension as Britain formally triggered the process to leave the European Union.

Australia Finds No Proof Its World Vision Aid Went to Hamas (AP) The Australian government said Thursday it had found no evidence that any of its donations to the Christian charity World Vision had been siphoned to Islamic militant group Hamas.

US Secretary of State Tillerson in Turkey for Talks (AP) U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson met Turkish leaders on Thursday, a day after Turkey said it has ended a military operation in northern Syria amid differences with the United States over how to fight the Islamic State group there.

UN: Military Operations Escalate in Yemen as Famine Looms (AP) Military operations in Yemen are escalating and the humanitarian and economic situation is rapidly deteriorating in the Arab world’s poorest nation, which is on the brink of famine, the U.N. special envoy for the country said Wednesday.

[ollyarchive]

Olly Alexander: My last relationship was an open relationship

Years and Years star also talks Brexit and Corbyn

Gay Years and Years star Olly Alexander has spoken up for open relationships.

The 26-year-old singer also talked about his frustration with Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn.

Alexander was speaking to top BBC gay journalist Evan Davis at National Student Pride today. GSN is the event’s media partner.

He told Davis that he spent ‘a lot of my early 20s in back-to-back relationships’. But he said he was enjoying being without a boyfriend.

And he said he hadn’t figured out what kinds of relationship suit him.

But he said: ‘My last relationship was an open relationship which was the first time. You have to be very honest with your partner.’

He added it was something both he and his then-boyfriend wanted.

Alexander added: ‘I don’t think we should be pitting [different relationships] against each other. It’s not like one is better than the other.

‘We don’t really allow ourselves those discussions. We are all taught one relationship model. It’s bonkers your partner has to be your best friend, your protector, your confidant, fulfill you sexually. There’s a lot for one person. It’s crazy how diverse we are but we have one relationship standard.’

Davis asked if this raised trust issues.

Alexander replied: ‘If someone is going to fall in love with someone else that’s going to happen whether you like it or not. It doesn’t matter if you are in an open relationship.’

Olly Alexander on being proud

The pair also discussed what it meant to be a proud LGBTI person.

Alexander said: ‘As queer people, we are forced into this narrative of being proud. Pride is so important and, of course, we want to be proud but we don’t lead a fairytale narrative where we can always stand on the top of the hill and wave the flag.

‘If you are someone who may want to bring up some negative part of the queer community or a place where there are problems, it can feel like you are a bad queer person.’

Jeremy Corbyn and Brexit

Alexander is a Labour supporter who voted to remain in the EU in last summer’s referendum.

Davis asked him about his view of Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, who is behind in the polls and has just lost a crucial by-election.

Alexander said: ‘It’s frustrating isn’t it. I feel very disappointed in the whole Labour party. I’m a Labour supporter but I’ve felt very frustrated.

‘I feel like he hasn’t been able to be an effective opposition leader. His stance on Brexit is really confusing. What are we going to do? We need someone to beat the Tories.’