Daily Archives: September 23, 2019

Sept. 11, 2001, is one of those days etched in the memories of those of us who were alive at the time.

Ive never shared my memories of that day publicly before this year. Ive never felt it was that important since I wasnt directly affected.

However, because the story involves my dad, I felt like I should at least put it down since I no longer have him either.

It was a Tuesday morning, and I was chilling out in my dorm room at Ole Miss. I had classes later in the day. My dad called me and asked if I was watching the TV or knew what was going on.

He said something to the effect of some idiot has flown a plane into the World Trade Center.

I asked him what kind of plane and how somebody could have been so inept they hit a huge skyscraper.

See, at that time, it wasnt known it was an airliner or a deliberate terrorist attack.

My dad was a private pilot, and I had grown up around aviation. He had grown up during WWII and remembered a B-25 Mitchell crashing into the Empire State Building one foggy night.

We had also read stories on the occasional light aircraft hitting skyscrapers because the pilot got too close.

As we were talking about possible ways it could have happened, the second plane hit. That this was no accident was immediately obvious.

I stayed glued to the TV and didnt go to any classes that day. I think they were cancelled, but I dont honestly remember.

I watched on live TV as people jumped to their deaths from the tops of the towers instead of being burned alive. I watched it live when the first tower fell and then the other.

On Sept. 11, 2001, I had been talking with my dad and witnessed an event that for me would be just as memorable as Pearl Harbor was for him.

I remember feelings between sadness and anger for quite some time.

I was studying to be a mechanical engineer at the time. When classes resumed, I remember my thermodynamics professor trying to speculate and explain to our class how the planes might have caused the buildings to collapse.

I remember how united we all were on Sept. 12, 2001.

A lot has happened in the intervening years. Even with protracted conflicts overseas, I am still stunned we have sitting members of Congress who refer to what happened on September 11th as some people did something, or that the New York Times runs a picture of the Twin Towers, stating airplanes took aim instead of the now politically incorrect truth that this was done by radical Islamic terrorists.

I suppose they now blame the jets for hitting the towers, not the evil at the controls, much like guns are now blamed for the actions of those wielding them.

I wish we could return to the unity of Sept. 12, but I would never want to see another 9/11 to make us get to that point.

Hopefully someday the rancor and divisiveness will subside. The lust for power that drives political parties now is ripping the nation apart.

I pray that cooler heads will prevail, and the nation will once again come together.

Greg King is the Franklin County District 4, Seat A commissioner and a Decherd police sergeant.

View post:
Let's get back to the unity of Sept. 12 - Winchester Herald Chronicle

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is fighting to hold on to power with the help of President Trump AP-PHOTO

JERUSALEM (AP) Israelis vote Tuesday in an unprecedented repeat election that will decide whether longtime Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu stays in power despite a looming indictment on corruption charges.

Netanyahu, the longest serving leader in Israeli history, is seeking a fourth consecutive term in office, and fifth overall. But he faces a stiff challenge from retired military chief Benny Gantz, whose centrist Blue and White party is running even with Netanyahus Likud. Both parties could struggle to form a majority coalition with smaller allies, though, forcing them into a potential unity government.

Netanyahu has tried to portray himself as a seasoned statesman who is uniquely qualified to lead the country through challenging times. Gantz has tried to paint Netanyahu as divisive and scandal-plagued, offering himself as a calming influence and an honest alternative.

Tuesdays vote marks their second showdown of the year after drawing even in the previous election in April.

Netanyahu appeared poised to remain in office at the time, with his traditional allies of nationalist and ultra-religious Jewish parties controlling a parliamentary majority.

But Avigdor Lieberman, his mercurial ally-turned-rival, refused to join the new coalition, citing excessive influence it granted the ultra-Orthodox Jewish parties. Without a parliamentary majority, Netanyahu dissolved parliament and called a new election.

News Talk Florida columnists Jim Williams and Alan J. Steinberg breakdown what to expect in the election on The Politically Incorrect Podcast Powered by Warby Parker.

Opinion polls have forecast similar results this time around, potentially putting Lieberman once again in the role of kingmaker.

After voting Tuesday, Lieberman reiterated his promise to force a unity government between Likud and Blue and White. He vowed there wont be a third round of elections and said the parties will have to deal with the constellation that emerges from this vote.

The performance by the Soviet-born politicians Yisrael Beitenu party is just one of the factors that could determine Netanyahus future. Several small parties are fighting to squeak past the minimum 3.25% threshold for entering parliament. The performances of these parties could make or break Netanyahus ability to form a coalition.

The longtime Israeli leader is desperate to secure a narrow 61-seat majority in parliament with his hard-line religious and nationalist allies who are expected to approve legislation that would grant Netanyahu immunity from prosecution.

Israels attorney general has recommended pressing criminal charges against Netanyahu in three separate corruption cases, pending a long delayed pre-trial hearing scheduled next month.

With his career on the line, Netanyahu has campaigned furiously and taken a late hard turn to the right in hopes of rallying his nationalist base.

Hes staged a flurry of media appearances to beseech supporters to vote in large numbers to stave off the prospect of a left-wing government he says will endanger the countrys security. He also has accused his opponents of conspiring with Arab politicians to steal the election, a message that has drawn accusations of racism and incitement.

Heavier turnout by Arab voters, many of whom stayed home in April, could hurt Netanyahu. After casting his ballot, the leader of the main Arab faction in parliament, Ayman Odeh, said Netanyahu was obsessive in his incitement toward Arabs. He said the answer was for that his constituents must be first-class voters on the way to becoming first-class citizens.

Voter turnout has emerged as a key element of this election day, which is a national holiday aimed at encouraging participation. In Aprils election, turnout was about 69%, slightly below the 72% figure in the previous election in 2015.

As of 10 a.m., Israels central election committee said some 15% of Israelis had already cast their ballots. It marked more than a 2% increase over the figure at the same time in April.

Aron Shaviv, who managed Netanyahus 2015 re-election campaign, said Netanyahu believed theres no such thing as bad coverage. But he thought his former boss may be making a mistake by appealing so heavily to hard-liners and giving up on moderate voters.

Hes turned people off, playing the right-left polarization as far as he possibly can, he said.

A centerpiece of his eleventh-hour agenda has been the pledge to extend Israeli sovereignty over parts of the West Bank and to annex all the Jewish settlements there, something Netanyahu has refrained from doing during his decade-plus in power because of the far-reaching diplomatic repercussions.

His proposal sparked a cascade of international condemnation, including from Europe and Saudi Arabia, an influential Arab country that has quiet, unofficial ties with Israel. The U.S., however, had a muted reaction, suggesting Netanyahu coordinated his plan with the Americans ahead of time.

Netanyahu has also been flaunting his close ties to President Donald Trump, and the prospect of a defense pact between their countries shortly after the election, as part of his frantic push get out the vote and dictate the elections agenda on his terms.

Trump chimed in his prediction, telling reporters at the White House on Monday that it will be a very interesting outcome. Its gonna be close.

After casting his ballot in Jerusalem, Netanyahu said he could confirm the vote would be very close.

Voting in his hometown of Rosh Haayin in central Israel, Gantz urged all Israelis to hope. We will bring hope, we will be bring change, without corruption, without extremism, he said.

In his attacks on Arabs, Netanyahu has made unfounded claims of fraud in Arab voting areas and unsuccessfully pushed for legislation to place cameras in polling stations on election day.

He also claimed to have located a previously unknown Iranian nuclear weapons facility and said another war against Gaza militants is probably inevitable. In some of his TV interviews, the typically reserved Netanyahu has raised his voice and gestured wildly as he warned of his imminent demise.

Yohanan Plesner, president of the non-partisan Israel Democracy Institute think tank and a former lawmaker, said he didnt think it reflected genuine panic.

I think youre observing Israels most seasoned and competent politician who knows exactly how to fire up his base and is now using all his tools at his disposal in order to ensure victory, he said.

Polling stations opened at 7 a.m. Tuesday with exit polls expected at the end of the voting day at 10 p.m. Official results are projected to come in overnight.

Thats when the real jockeying may get under way, with attention shifting to President Reuven Rivlin who is responsible for choosing a candidate for prime minister. He is supposed to select the leader who he believes has the best chance of putting together a stable coalition. The honor usually goes to the head of the largest party, but not necessarily. Just as important is the number of lawmakers outside his own party who recommend him to the president.

Rivlins selection will then have up to six weeks to form a coalition. If he fails, the president can appoint an alternative candidate and give him up to four weeks for the task.

In an overnight video, Rivlin said he will do everything in his power to get an elected government in Israel as soon as possible and to avoid another election campaign.

Link:
Israelis vote in repeat election centered on PM Netanyahu. Alan Steinberg wants to know what Trump and Bibi are up to? - News Talk Florida

But Bidens gaffes, as The New Yorkers Eric Lach wrote earlier this spring, often center around the question of race. During the 2008 primary, he famously referred to his future boss as being clean and articulate. His 2020 campaign has been marked by a series of unforced errors when discussing racial issues, including an instance earlier this year when he said poor kids are just as bright and just as talented as white kids.

Many of Bidens slips point to a blindspot on race that has rightfully drawn significant attention over the last year. But his incoherence is not limited to speech that the political media labels as gaffes, but instead extends to much of what he says on basic questions about policy. The section in last Thursdays debate covering health care ended with a smirking Biden defending, in patriotic terms, a system that kills tens of thousands a year. His economic platform is that no one should be punisheda not-so-subtle message to billionaires that he isnt interested in wealth redistribution. The best case he can make on health care and the economy, the two biggest issues in the primary, is that he will improve systems that already exist, which barely qualifies as a platform. Bidens incoherence comes not from some charming Washington-esque inability to tell a lie, but from a lack of real ideas about how the government should work.

In his piece about how Biden can find a platform that extends beyond reminding people that he once worked for Obama, Klein pointed to Bidens political style as the thing that makes the former vice president different. Bidens approach to politicswhether its foreign leaders, congressional negotiations, or the Iowa State Fairis relational, Klein writes. Biden was often deployed to do the in-person work Obama dismissed. In a piece arguing that the Democratic primary has been a debacle, New Yorks Jonathan Chait made a similar point. It seems just as likely that many of Bidens supporters have a positive appreciation for compromise and pluralism, Chait wrote, designing policies that appeal to wide social and economic swaths of the country, rather than those that draw sharp cleavages between winners and losers.

The idea here is that Bidens appeal is as a dealmaker. This is something that Biden has run on himself, both in 1988, when he dropped out after being accused of plagiarism, and in 2008, when he quit the race after finishing fifth in Iowa. In the latter campaign, Bidens signature idea was to essentially make a new Sykes-Picot agreement, dividing Iraq into three semi-autonomous territories. (It was, and continues to be, a bad idea.) In fact, Bidens entire 2008 campaign was premised on a series of similar pragmatic-seeming compromises, on issues like Social Security (he promoted a plan that would involve bipartisan negotiations on a number of issues, including the retirement age and trumpeted his past work with Republican senators, including Bob Dole) and health care.

There is nothing wrong with making the case that being a back-slapping dealmaker is what America needs to cut through the Gordian knot at the center of our politics. (Theres also not much right about it.) But its not an idea and it certainly doesnt rise to the level of policy. This was, importantly, the basis of Bidens last, not-at-all successful campaign, when he ran as the candidate for those who wanted compromise and ended up getting crushed. But this approachof premising deal-making over ideascontinues to define Bidens approach to politics.

It also continues to undercut this presidential campaign. One reason why Biden was so incoherent in Thursdays debate is that he doesnt have an ideological foundation to rely on when pressed. His instinct is to cut deals, not to find the best policy or solution. But that also means that Biden has little of substance to offer on most big policy questions. And, while it may very well be true that what voters are looking for is someone willing to compromise, Biden has run on that idea before, with disastrous results.

Its not exactly surprising that Biden, as true a creature of the Senate as there ever was, would think about politics this way. And there is an argument to be made that it does have its place in the White House, given the foreign policy-heavy responsibilities of the executive branch. But that means that Bidens struggles to make sense do not stem from his inability to get out from under Barack Obamas shadow or from his age. Theyre grounded in a shallow approach to policy thats more rooted in backroom deals than in real world consequences.

Read more from the original source:
The Pragmatic Roots of Bidens Incoherence - The New Republic

In July 2001, Sarah Silverman appeared on NBC's Late Night with Conan O'Brien and used the racial slur "c---k" multiple times in a joke during the interview. Her remarks came under fire by the Japanese-American civil-rights activist Guy Aoki, who criticized her for casually using the epithet. The two publicly feuded on episodes of Politically Incorrect With Bill Maher and, in her 2005 stand-up special Jesus Is Magic, she said, There are only two Asian people I have a problem with. One is, uh, Guy Aoki. The other is my friend Steve, who actually went pee-pee in my Coke. Hes all, Me Chinese, me play joke!"

This is just one example of this type of remark from Silverman's often controversial career in which she's been publicly criticized for racism, including a 2007 sketch where she wore blackface as well as a 2010 tweet captioned "I'm having minstrel cramps" with a photo of her donning the same makeup.

With these incidents in mind, the comments she made Monday to the Los Angeles Times about the 2019 climate surrounding comedy didn't come as a huge shock. She told the publication, "I also think its interesting whats happened on the left. Its almost like theres a mutated McCarthy era, where any comic better watch anything they say." She brings up criticism of Dave Chappelle's latest special as an example of this mutated McCarthy era. (During the actual McCarthy era, hundreds were imprisoned and thousands lost their jobs as a result of investigations carried out by the House Un-American Activities Committee. Chappelle is a highly successful comedian with lucrative Netflix specials and sold-out tours, who is receiving the John F. Kennedy Center's Mark Twain Prize for American Humor in October.)

Silverman continues, "Ive said it before, theres this kind of 'righteousness porn' going on with canceling people over their past, a thing they said or a moment they had, with no earnest hope that they may be changed." (Silverman, who has been at the center of this kind of criticism multiple times throughout her career, has just received an Emmy nomination in the variety sketch category for her recent Hulu series I Love You, America.)

In a 2017 interview with Fast Company, Silverman looked back at her early career and stand-up specials. She said, "Its so from another time, and its interesting to have done comedy through such totally different times." She then goes on to add, "Theres so much in my first special that makes me cringe, but Im not ashamed of it. You have to be accountable. And if you dont look back at your old shit and cringe, youre not growing."

See the original post here:
Sarah Silverman, Who Did Blackface, Doesnt Think You Should Cancel People - VICE

Canada's Prime Minister Justin Trudeau speaks during an election campaign stop in Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada Sept. 19, 2019. SHANNON VANRAES / REUTERS

I was not surprised to read the letters dismissing Trudeaus blackface costumes. Trudeau has repeatedly shown that he is above right and wrong.

From harassing the attorney general to ignoring the law to protect SNC, to wearing blackface, Trudeau sees no bounds. He also dismissed his B.C. accusers memory. Only when he got caught, does he say his actions were racist.

Yet, his left-wing fans are in full support. This reminds me of Trumps fans. Same dismissal of bad behaviour, behaviour which makes them unfit to lead a country. But their fans dont care. Thats what makes them fans.

We need less fans and more thinking citizens. Otherwise we will continue to get these bad actors. We also need our local Liberal MPs to step up to condemn this behaviour. But, of course, that wont happen.

John Engleder, Sherwood Park

Sometimes we make major stories out of minor items. If you dress as an (old-time) British judge should you not wear a wig of bad macrame, or if you dress as Abe Lincoln should you not wear a beard and a tall hat? Are such things considered offensive to people with beards or hairpieces?

If you dress as Spock, should you not wear pointed ears? If you dress as Belafonte can you not wear brown makeup? Some things are just silly.

For Justin Trudeau, let the past go to the past and let the future speak for itself. Personally, I object to belittling other people and cultures, but overall I ask for common sense, whether it exists or not.

Peter Willott, Seba Beach

What a tragedy if Trudeau is given a pass on his blatant racist act. His apology, in terms of sincerity, is so superficial it ranks with the makeup he used in his racist act.

But in addition to being racially insensitive, this is one more piece in the growing list of indiscretions confirming that Trudeau has no morality. He is all about self-satisfaction and ego and will say or do anything, including repeatedly lying, to achieve what he perceives are in his best interests.

Wayne Smith, Edmonton

What a ridiculous kerfuffle; so a chap went to a fancy-dress party in full dress-up clothes and put on makeup to play the part, and Scheer has hysterics.

Makeup or behaviour used to caricature another person or culture is bad manners, rude and demeaning to the perpetrator, however using makeup to play a part in a theatrical event that is uplifting and fun is part of human culture worldwide.

Unfortunately, in the U.S., the racially intolerant have used parodies and caricaturing specifically against African American citizens to demean them. The attitude to this behaviour now seems to have spread across the continent to the extent that anyone using makeup to play a different role comes under suspicion.

Lets forget all these past events that are now considered politically incorrect but in those days were considered normal behaviour, and fun, and in no sense intended to be demeaning or hurtful.

We have more important countrywide issues to discuss and bringing up these very old items in the middle of an election is pure unadulterated crass opportunism and frankly demeans and discredits these mudslingers.

Adrian Jones, Edmonton

Seems the current leader of this country likes to play dress-up, much like little children do. That of itself is a terrific exercise to help the learning process and fire the imagination of our young ones.

Of course, most kids dont carry this into their adulthood, whether being a school teacher or representing their country in India.

Obviously some never learn about the consequences of insensitive actions or outgrow their childhood games. Shame.

Rick Nenn, Edmonton

I cannot imagine by what process of reasoning, it is necessary to become desperate photo-finders when political offerings are not doing it for you. I wonder how any of the other alleged leaders would have dressed at an Arabian Nights party 10 years ago.

Edna Lerl, Edmonton

We invite you to write letters to the editor. A maximum of 150 words is preferred. Letters must carry a first and last name, or two initials and a last name, and include an address and daytime telephone number. All letters are subject to editing. We dont publish letters addressed to others or sent to other publications. Email:letters@edmontonjournal.com

Read more:
Saturday's letters: Trudeau's fans dismiss his behaviour again - Edmonton Journal

Racial epithets have a space in the classroom

Mahad Olad

Paul Zwier is a law professor at Emory University. Last September, he got in trouble for uttering the word nigger while discussing the facts of a civil rights case. One of his students complained to the administration about feeling shocked and hurt by Zwiers usage of the N-word. After a year-long investigation, Emory will decide Oct. 4 whether or not to terminate Zwierfor racial insensitivity.

Do racial epithets have any place in the classroom? They certainly should. Classes are spaces where no controversial topic is off the table. When non-black professors refer to the N-word with a euphemism, a significant aspect of the words meaning is lost. I would feel a bit patronized if a professor thought I was emotionally incapable of hearing them merely quote iconic writers like James Baldwin who employ this slur in their writings.

How are students supposed to examine the historical facts and layered meanings of this loaded word if it cant be seen, heard or said? Moreover, theres a clear distinction between wielding this slur as a vehicle for racism and referencing it to discuss reading materials that deal with the systemic oppression of African-Americans.

In order for learning to occur, these distinctions need to be acknowledged and appreciated. Id go as far as to argue that professors, regardless of their race, should pronounce the full epithet. That way, students particularly black students can thoroughly absorb the rhetorical power and visceral force this repugnant slur commands. Nonetheless, Id urge instructors to not use nigger outside of academic contexts. That would seem a bit gratuitous and could empower others to negligently throw around this term. Ultimately, professors should teach the N-word in a respectful manner that furthers honest even painful conversations about its cruel history.

When I first heard a white professor say the N-word to discuss the word itself, I felt nauseous. My strategy for dealing with this nausea was to ask myself: What am I gaining from possibly destroying this professors life other than a brief catharsis for my racial trauma? Perhaps, is there more to learn from evoking this trauma than asking to be coddled from it?

I have a hard time wrapping my head around students feeling the need to always flock to the administration when they hear professors say something politically incorrect. Do they not realize that taking the bureaucratic route to address the concerns of marginalized students often ends up transferring more power to the administration? Are students, particularly those who are marginalized and underrepresented, okay with this transfer of power?

If this is what needs to happen so students of color can enjoy their lives on campus, then so be it. But then who is to stop the administration from weaponizing our grievances against us? Just like any other power structure, higher education can validate the experiences of underrepresented students and also suppress them especially if our concerns stand in the way of its economic mission.

Also, diversity bureaucrats cannot conceivably scrub the campus clean of racism and bigotry. Does this mean that colleges shouldnt respond to social justice demands? Of course not. However, this social justice work does not mean that administrators cave into every progressive tantrum particularly when those tantrums call for policing historically ubiquitous words.

Controversies surrounding professors using the N-word cant be reduced to free speech and academic freedom. Whats also at stake here is how black students navigate racial trauma within academic environments. Speaking for myself, I find exposure to triggering materials whether that be hearing the N-word or witnessing lynching photographs more effective in helping me cope with my emotional vulnerabilities and learn about racism in the United States. The enormous violence of racist words and images can only be conveyed through exposure, not censorship.

N-word has no place in academic settings

John Turner

Necro. Niger. Negro. Nigga. Black. The word nigger has never had a positive connotation. Although the spelling of the word has evolved, the feeling of the whip is still the same.

It is believed that the N-word is derived from the Latin word niger, meaning black. Niger became the noun negro in English, Spanish and Portuguese. In the last two, it means the color black. In English, it means black person.

If you look at early modern French, niger became negre and, later, negress: a word to describe a black woman. Some believe that nigger is a phonetic spelling of the Southern white mispronunciation of Negro or that it comes from the Greek prefix necro, meaning corpse or death.

No matter its origins, the N-word is never appropriate for a white person to say. It is not appropriate while in the privacy of your home, while teaching students in a classroom, while reading a novel or while singing along to a rap song. It is especially not appropriate for a professor to recount a personal experience and recite the words nigger-lover, even if he was the one called the epithet.

Recently, Emory College professor Paul Zwier did just this. Zwier, a white professor, was criticized for using the N-word in an educational context. In the wake of the controversy, he used the N-word more than once to describe his own experiences, such as being the subject of racial epithets from white racists. Despite his intention, he is still in the wrong.

Zwier allegedly used the racial slur as an example again when a student of color visited his office hours to discuss his use of the word in the classroom. He allegedly did this despite being warned.

One of the main reasons that racism and racist slurs exist to this day is the refusal of people to change once their racist behavior is brought to their attention.

This situation is the definition of white privilege. White individuals have the luxury of choosing what language is appropriate and what is not. Black individuals do not have this luxury. Historically, our voices have been continuously disregarded.

White privilege is not being affected by racial slurs in the same way people of color are. That is why the word cracker will never have the same implications as the N-word. White privilege is claiming ignorance of the N-words inappropriate nature because when I, as a black individual, am subjected to this word, I am not only subjected to the history of the word but also its racial implications that are still prevalent today. Black people cannot afford to be ignorant. As numerous news stories on police brutality have shown, ignorance at the hands of racist individuals can cost black people their lives.

With the implications of slavery still lasting today, black bodies being used for profit and black men and women getting murdered by those sworn to protect them, the use of the N-word will never be appropriate when said by a white person even if they are a professor in an academic setting.

As a child, I used to believe that it was acceptable for my teachers to say the word when reading a novel that had the word in it. But as I began to educate myself, I began to recognize the history of the word and that some of my ancestors would rather face death than be subjected to the captivity that would degrade them to being merely a nigger. I realized that the word should never be spoken by those whose ancestors were the perpetrators of this violence.

The usage of the N-word is especially problematic in the classroom because of the normalization of the word. Sometimes professors will not even ask students if they feel comfortable with the use of the word in an academic setting. For some, there is immense trauma attached to even hearing the word, and rightfully so. If the word is not appropriate in a casual setting, then it is especially not appropriate in an academic setting.

In response to my opinion of the word, I often hear, If the N-word is such a bad word, why do black people say it to each other?

If anyone has the right to assume the word, it is black people. Black people have been subjected to years of disenfranchisement and dehumanization, so they have the right to reclaim the language that was meant to defeat and degrade them. Do not mistake this reclamation as an invitation to use the word. If you are not black, the word is not for you. It never will be.

Think about the trauma that these words carry. Post-traumatic slave syndrome is very much real. Trauma within black communities has been passed on from generation to generation; so when I hear the N-word, I think of my father, his fathers father, his fathers wife and his fathers enslavement. I ask myself, How would they feel to know that their pain, their accomplishments, their love, their humanity, their fear and their trauma has been minimized by a word thats origins mean death?

When you have been described as three-fourths of a human, then you can say the N-word. But until then, it should never come out of your mouth.

See the rest here:
Point/Counterpoint: The N-word in educational settings - The Ithacan

Jewher Ilham, the daughter of jailed Uyghur academic Ilham Tohti, is a graduate from Indiana University who has spoken out in support of his peaceful promotion of equal rights and greater autonomy for the Turkic speaking Uyghur ethnic group in northwest Chinas Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region (XUAR). Tohti, currently serving a life jail term for "separatism," won the prestigious Martin Ennals Award 2016 for human rights, the Liberal International Prize for Freedom in 2017, and Freedom Houses Freedom Award in 2019. The jailed professor is also a nominee for the 2019 Sakharov Prize and the 2019 Nobel Peace Prize.

Ilham spoke to RFA about her fathers case and Beijings policies in the XUAR, where authorities are believed to have held more than 1.5 million Uyghurs and other Muslim minorities accused of harboring strong religious views and politically incorrect in a vast network of internment camps since April 2017. Ilham referred to the facilities as concentration campsa term also used by U.S. Assistant Secretary of Defense Randall G. Schriver and the Uyghur exile community.

RFA: How do you envision a path to your fathers release from prison?

Ilham: Unfortunately, I dont think its happening soon, based on the Chinese governments recent actions, such as the concentration camps and other Uyghur scholars like [jailed former head of Xinjiang University] Tashpolat Teyip. I havent seen good signs, especially since I havent heard anything about my father since 2017his condition, or if he has been transferred to another prison. We dont know anything about it. But Im always keeping hope and its very important to be positive. If you lose hope, then you lose everything.

RFA: After speaking with President Trump and other officials about your father and the situation in the XUAR, do you feel confident that the U.S. government will take meaningful action on the issues?

Ilham: Actually, I have to say that the U.S. is one of the countries that has taken the most action throughout the world. Unfortunately, I havent seen Muslim countries taking any action, so I really appreciate the U.S. for being willing to do so. We cant really say that any action is meaningful or productiveall of this depends on the Chinese government and how they react. Any action is meaningful, any action is considered useful and productive, to me at least.

No one wants to be treated like that

RFA: What would greater autonomy for the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region Look like according to what your father has argued for, and how would that solve tensions between Beijing and the Uyghur people?

Ilham: I think thats a question that my father should be answering. Im not him, so I cant speak for him. I would say that his suggestions and what he was trying to do was create better understanding between [people]. Someone once told me, when you dont understand each other, you will always think of the other person as evil. My father wanted to prevent this from happening.

Now what the Chinese government is doing to the Uyghur people is actually making people look more evil to each other. And no one wants to be treated like that[put] in a concentration camp. Im pretty sure no one in the Chinese government would want their family members to be thrown into a camp, even in an education camp, as they call it. They wouldnt want anyone to be in a labor camp. They wouldnt want any of their family members to not be able to go home, not be able to contact their relatives, and not even know if their relatives are alive or not. No one would want that, and if you dont want something to happen to you and your family, why would you do it to others?

For the past many years there have been enough TV shows, movies, even classes at school to educate Uyghurs about Han Chinese culture, but what about the opposite side? There hasnt been anything done for the Uyghurs. And now they are forcing the Uyghurs to adopt the Chinese culture, and this is not fair.

RFA: The plight of the Uyghurs has gotten unprecedented attention in the past two years, with exposures of the internment camp system. Has that meant anything for your father's case?

Ilham: This exactly proves what my father was saying that the Chinese government was doing wrong. Now they are doing the exact opposite of what my father suggested and look at what is happening. China has lost reputation based on their treatment of human rights and I dont see any benefits or good outcomes from its actions.

Original post:
Interview: They Are Doing The Exact Opposite of What my Father Suggested - Radio Free Asia

Joe Albi Stadium has been home to any number of spectacles and oddments in its lifetime of seven decades dirt track racing and Willie Nelson, rodeo and Billy Graham, soccer and marching band festivals. But lets be real: It was built for football mostly high school football and it was football that produced the biggest moments in the joints history. Here are our top 10.

July 9, 2011

The whole point of the Arena Football League was to take the game indoors. So what were the Spokane Shock doing playing Albi? Broadening the brand. A curious audience of 16,233 saw a 76-49 victory over the Utah Blaze, who trotted out 44-year-old geezer Todd Hammel at quarterback. Its kind of like melding a regular football game with the county fair, offered one first-time spectator. Its the same people.

and Rehkow Show

Oct. 18, 2012

Not even 1,000 people were there to see this wild bit of history. Shadle Park quarterback Brett Rypien broke Greater Spokane League records for single-game and season passing with a 577-yard performance. But Austin Rehkow of Central Valley blasted a record 67-yard field goal second longest in national high school history to send the game into overtime, and the Bears pulled out a 62-55 victory when Scott Hilpert intercepted Rypiens last pass.

Nov. 16, 2002

There were other significant steps Eastern Washingtons football program took during its two stays at Albi wins over Idaho in 1984 and 1997 come to mind. But the tenor of the rivalry with Montana was cemented with a 30-21 victory over the defending national champions that snapped a 24-game UM winning streak. Jovan Griffith skittered through the Griz for 199 yards to the delight of about half the EWU-record crowd of 17,142 the other half being Montanas well-traveled fans.

Oct. 29, 1954

Rogers quarterback Don Ellingsen had broken his collarbone in a game against Walla Walla, so backup Ken Eilmes made his first start on the biggest of stages in front of 22,500 Shrine Game fans against Gonzaga Prep. The Pirates accomplished nothing in the first half, but overcame a 10-0 deficit in the final 15 minutes for a 14-10 victory, a 71-yard pass connection between Eilmes and Jack Fanning the game-turning play.

Nov. 9, 1968

Ken Stabler had a Hall of Fame pro career ahead of him, but as an Oakland Raiders rookie he was shipped off to play two games with the Spokane Shockers of the Continental Football League. In a 28-13 loss to the Orange County Ramblers, Stabler completed just 10 of 29 passes for 71 yards with three interceptions, and collected the standard $150 game check. But though the game drew just 3,500, for the next 20 years five times that number of NFL barflies in Spokane insisted theyd seen the Snake light it up at Albi and make last call at every watering hole downtown.

Sept. 19, 1964

His team up a point and having caught a pass for the only first down needed to run out the clock, Stanfords Dick Ragsdale was dumbfounded when defensive back Clancy Williams wrested the ball from him and gave Washington State new life. Quarterback Tom Roth scored from a yard out with 17 seconds left for a 29-23 shocker that made new coach Bert Clark a winner in his debut after his gamble to go for two on a previous point-after-touchdown had failed.

Oct. 26, 1962

Gonzaga Prep quarterback Frank Etter dashed 14 yards to the end zone with 12 seconds remaining barely keeping a foot inbounds as he crossed to give the unbeaten Bullpups a 14-7 victory over Lewis and Clark. A Shrine game crowd of 19,000 peered through the fog to watch the Pups slug it out with Wally Gaskins, Butch Slaughter and the Tigers, whose only previous loss had also been to Prep.

Nov. 18, 1972

Politically incorrect? Depends on whether you vote Cougar or Husky. When Gary Larson performed a knees-pumping jig after a third-quarter sack, it was instantly labeled a war dance and an insult to Washington quarterback Sonny Sixkiller, a Native American. Larson has forever insisted it was mere celebration and the Cougars had much to celebrate, dropping Sixkiller six times and romping 27-10 in the battle between two Top 20 teams in front of 34,100.

Oct. 16, 1970

High school football attendance had already started to ebb as the calendar turned 1970, with TV and other amusements splintering the audience. But that didnt stop 22,000 from coming out to watch Ferris turn back G-Prep in a battle of unbeaten teams. Mike McLaughlin had a 71-yard TD burst and Archie Grant rushed for 115 yards and two scores for the Saxons, who beat Prep for the first time in their six-year history.

Oct. 17, 1970

The score was already 44-8 and a 27-year-old Vietnam vet and Washington State sophomore from Richland named Terry Smith had seen enough. So when Eric Cross swept left and headed toward another Stanford touchdown, Smith vaulted out of the stands in the southeast corner and met him at the 2-yard line, right shoulder lowered. Cross plowed into the end zone anyway just another insult in a 63-16 win and two cops corralled Smith before he could clamber back into the bleachers. But urban legend holds that a hat passed through the crowd of 30,400 raised more than $800 for bail, though it somehow disappeared after Smith forfeited a $50 bond.

Read more:
Joe Albi Top 10: From long kicks to long shots, the stadium has seen it all - The Spokesman-Review

ABC News Democratic debate on Sept. 12, 2019. Photo: Screenshot.

The gloves came off towards Joe Biden in the third Democratic debate, which featured a group of 10 candidates who qualified based on polling and unique donor numbers. Personally, I missed the antics of New Age guru Marianne Williamson and the rational former Congressman John Delaney for different reasons. But with Senator Kamala Harris of California seeming less like the tough prosecutor she did in the first two debates, and Bernie Sanders seeming more muppet-like than ever, I wasnt thoroughly bored.

That said, at moments such as when Beto ORourke blamed President Trump for the actions of a crazed mass murderer, saying the El Paso shooter was inspired to kill by the President, which the shooter himself did not claim, in fact stating in his manifesto that his beliefs pre-dated Trumps election, I found this debate hard to stomach. Ditto for Kamala Harris: He may not have pulled the trigger, but hes Tweetin the ammunition.

There was no mention that the recent Dayton shooter was an extreme leftist and Bernie Sanders/Elizabeth Warren supporter. Should Trump-supporters, or conservatives generally, start blaming him or her for the deaths and injuries of innocent people? No. But doing so would be the equivalent of what Harris and ORourke are doing. The irony is, by refusing to see that the climate of hate in this country is not unique to one side, and by engaging in demagoguery, they are helping to create what they purport to deplore.

In a society where rates of overdose, crime, and general dysfunction are rising, and where violence is normalized and even romanticized in mass media and entertainment, there is a lot of blame to go around. Do politicians truly care about the victims of mass shootings, and about our safety, or do they want to score cheap political points? If its the former, they should cease the knee jerk blaming of other public figures and call for a serious examination of the problem.

September 23, 2019 9:50 am

Despite being upset over ORourkes and Harris demagoguery (and since, as a conservative-leaning Independent, I dont have a dog in this fight), I tried to enjoy the debate as much as I could. It is, after all, a part of our democracy.

In an answer to a question about trade policy, Senator Harris concluded, The bottom line is this: Donald Trump, in office, on trade policy he reminds me of that guy in the Wizard of Oz. Yknow, when you pull back the curtain, its a really small dude. In response, moderator George Stephanopoulos grinned, Im not even going to take the bait, Senator Harris.

If this was a profane reference to the Presidents anatomy, its hypocritical coming from a candidate of the far left, whose members generally insisted the Presidents crude remarks about womens private parts should have disqualified him from winning the presidency.

Reflecting on Harris jab, it struck me that perhaps she, as well as Julian Castro, who later in the debate made repeated, apparently ageist, attacks against Biden, could be auditioning to be the Democrats Donald Trump an outrageous, outspoken figure who can offer a pugnacious antidote to the grasping, plastic, drone-like Hillary Clinton.

What I think theyre missing, though, is that Trump can actually be funny.

Another attempt to be politically incorrect was Andrew Yangs clunky statement: Im Asian, so I know a lot of doctors. Huh?

Trade policy discussion was not the last of Harris antics. Discussing the Constitutionality of trying to ban assault weapons (a subject that anyone on either side of the issue views as gravely serious), Harris, grinning, attempted eye contact with Biden and said in what sounded like a very flirtatious voice, Hey Joe! Instead of sayin No we cant, how bout sayin Yes we can?

A few additional points on the debates substance: Harris struck a moderate tone on trade, describing our relationship with China as complicated, and saying that while we need to sell them our goods, we also need to hold them accountable for stealing our products, including our intellectual property.

Biden came across on the whole as reasonable in contrast to the others.

Cory Booker, whose bridge-building efforts with the American Jewish community go way back, came across as earnest and intelligent. He was right to show up at this years AIPAC Policy Conference despite MoveOn.orgs attempt to urge a Democratic boycott. Its unfortunate that Bookers recent voting record regarding Israel has been a huge disappointment. Of particular note was his inexplicable failure to support the Taylor Force Act. Lets hope he soon returns to supporting the Jewish-American community in ways that are more concrete and vital than his occasional use of Hebrew.

Overall, I felt like I was watching the class flirt and various nerds try to imitate the class clown. It was only funny when at times they themselves became the joke.

Advice for the next debate: If it doesnt come naturally, dont force it.

Heather Robinson is a regular contributor to The New York Post. Twitter:@HE_Robinson.

See more here:
Democrats Imitate Donald Trump in Latest Debate - Algemeiner

Fame is a curious thing. In the social media age, we are all trying, in ways big and small, to be famous. Yet, those who are famous will tell you that its more brutal and brittle than it looks. I recently read an interview on vulture.com with American filmmaker Joel Schumacher (St Elmos Fire, Flatliners), in which he talked about working with Julia Roberts on a film called Dying Young. Pretty Woman had just been released and Roberts had become, overnight, one of the biggest stars in the world. She was sobbing in his car because someone had written a story about the boys she had gone out with in high school. She said: I never needed to be this famous.

Joel tells the interviewer that this was profound to him because, until then, he hadnt realised that you cant decide how much fame you get. Its not up to you. You now belong to them.

This belonging is magnified in Indian cinema. Were a movie-mad culture obsessed with stars. Pre-social media, the relationship was reverential, with actors placed on a pedestal. They were literally like gods I remember reading news reports about an Amitabh Bachchan temple in Kolkata.

Post-social media, theyve become intimate strangers (a term American film critic Richard Schickel coined in 1985). We know too much about them. Of course social media presents a highly curated and constructed identity, but it has irrevocably blurred the lines between private and public from Hrithik Roshans bonding vacations with his sons to Farhan Akhtars grand passion for partner Shibani Dandekar, its all out there for public consumption.

Stars are now on 24x7. Is the information overload fraying our relationship with them? I dont know. But the additional followers / subscribers / eyeballs have given them even more clout. Their hold on us is complete. So it becomes even more imperative that they use their power responsibly, which brings me to the Telugu actor Vijay Deverakonda.

The star, whose fans are called Rowdies, combines acting chops and charisma with a refreshingly unrehearsed manner. Hes politically incorrect and unpredictable. Hes also generous.

Last year, Vijay launched his own production house, King of the Hill. A few weeks ago, he announced his first production, Meeku Maathrame Chepta (Ill Tell Only You). He posted on Twitter that he would be putting most of his savings on the line. He said: While we were finding it painfully hard to break into the industry and make a film, I decided the day Ill make it, Ill start a production house... I realise how hard it is to do this and how risky, but whats life without a challenge?

At a screening in Mumbai of his latest film, Dear Comrade, Vijay promised that every film he produced would be an open house, that actors would be selected purely on auditions. He said: I promise no one will look at you like youve come to take a loan. Because thats how I was treated.

After the Q&A session, Vijay instructed the many viewers clamouring for photos to keep their phones on selfie mode. Then he went from aisle to aisle taking pictures, affectionately reprimanding the fans who werent ready. He was playing the star but there was no vanity in it he was just trying to keep them happy.

I wish more artists would use their fame like this to put smiles on peoples faces and to discover and empower new voices. Thats real success.

First Published:Sep 21, 2019 22:11 IST

Read more here:
What can stars do, beyond shine? Actually, quite a lot, says Anupama Chopra - Hindustan Times