Tell someone they’ll spend the next 20 years doing free trash service at the local recycling plant for 5 hours a week. I think some good comes of that. Edit: I hope we can do it to the billionaires.
Lihat kiriman asli pada platform media sosial terkait.
They aren’t going to make the movie they should.
Lihat kiriman asli pada platform media sosial terkait.
Vitale Federici, uno Sherlock Holmes di fine ‘700 – di Marcello Simoni @libri https://www.illibraio.it/news/dautore/marcello-simoni-vitale-federici-1500261/ Da Sherlock Holmes a Edgar Allan Poe, passando per il romanzo storico e d’avventura: lo scrittore Marcello Simoni riflette sulle influenze che hanno contribuito a creare Vitale Federici, protagonista della serie di gialli storici tornata ora in libreria con “Delitto di mezzanotte” Leggi l’articolo completo Vitale Federici, uno
My old shrink insists you take a walk, first thing in the AM, and it has to be a loop that goes around your home. The logic being, our primal brains register this as “checking the perimeter” and it eases our anxiety especially relating to PTSD and threat detection. IDK if it’s true or not, but I will say a walk in the morning makes me have a better, more energetic day.
Lihat kiriman asli pada platform media sosial terkait.
The Situation: I’m reaching out to the collective because I’m currently in a dangerous cycle with my hypoglycemia. As many of you know, this isn’t just about feeling “hungry”—it’s a constant battle to keep my blood sugar from crashing into a range that leads to seizures, loss of consciousness, or worse. The Struggle: Right now, I am out of the specialized supplies and high-glucose necessities I need to stay safe. Every time I feel that familiar shake, the cold sweat, and the brain fog, I’m reminded of how fragile my physical autonomy is right now. It is terrifying to feel your body shutting down and know exactly what you need to fix it, but simply not have the funds to get it. The Ask: I am looking to raise $100 to cover immediate medical supplies and glucose-stable nutrition. Goal: $100 Current: $0.00 Payment Info:cash app is $BaileyteaDee, PayPal is @KeralaDee95 A Note from the Heart: I hate having to ask. It’s hard to feel seen in this kind of struggle, but I’m trusting this community to help me bridge the gap so I can breathe again without the fear of a medical emergency looming over me. Anything helps—even $5 makes a massive difference in getting me through the day safely.
Życzę Ci miłego niedzielnego wieczoru i dziękuję za rozmowę, też była użyteczna. Petr
Lihat kiriman asli pada platform media sosial terkait.
Congresswoman Summer Lee renewed her call to abolish US Immigration and Customs Enforcement on Friday after the Allegheny County Office of the Medical Examiner ruled the death of Daphy Michel, a Haitian immigrant who died after being released from ICE custody, a homicide. “Michel died on March 2, four days after departing the Washington County Correctional Facility, where she spent six months awaiting a preliminary hearing on misdemeanor charges of terroristic threats and harassment, which were ultimately dismissed,” Pittsburgh’s Public Source reported in April. “She was turned over to Immigration and Customs Enforcement, which fitted her with an ankle bracelet and released her under the agency’s Alternatives to Detention Program.” The 31-year-old Charleroi resident then “spent around 24 hours across the last two days of her life in sub-freezing weather in a bus shelter on the South Shore,” according to the the outlet, which cited visual records released by Pittsburgh Regional Transit. The medical examiner’s office said in a Friday statement that she died of hypothermia, and “the opinion of the forensic pathologist in this case is that Ms. Michel was a vulnerable adult, suffering from untreated severe mental health issues, and a significant language barrier when she was released from federal custody.” “Based on all available information during the investigation, the pathologist ruled Ms. Michel’s death a homicide,” the office said. The finding means “the death was caused by the actions of another individual,” but is “not to be interpreted as a declaration of criminal guilt.” Emma Federkeil, a spokesperson for Allegheny County District Attorney Stephen A. Zappala Jr., told the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette that the office hasn’t yet seen a copy of the report and opinion. “As such,” she Federkeil, “we must obtain a copy of the official report and opinion and any and all records relied on by the report, in order to determine the basis for the finding of homicide as the manner of death which requires a finding the death occurred ‘at the hand of another.’” “As we gather the necessary investigation documentation and reports,” she added, “we cannot comment further.” ICE is part of the US Department of Homeland Security. In response to the newspaper’s request for comment, DHS acting Assistant Secretary Lauren Bis reiterated the text of a March statement and added that “all illegal aliens who are processed have access to phones to call family, friends, and attorneys.” Regardless of any criminal charges, Joseph Murphy, an attorney who has represented Michel’s family since her death, told Public Source that he expects a civil lawsuit in the weeks ahead. Lee (D-Pa.), who has joined other progressives in calling for an end to ICE throughout President Donald Trump’s deadly crackdowns on immigrants across the United States, stressed in a Friday statement that “Daphy Michel was a human being. She happened to be born on the other side of a border, but she was no less worthy of care, safety, and dignity. That should not have been a death sentence. Daphy’s death was preventable and is the result of a violent system that cages people, surveils them, abandons them, dehumanizes them in life, and smears them in death to escape accountability.” “She deserved care, shelter, language access, and medical support. ICE and every agency that failed her must answer for this,” Lee continued. “And now, as more people die in and around ICE custody, their answer is not transparency, accountability, or care, but to stop reporting the deaths of recently released detainees altogether. We may never know how many more stories like Daphy’s have been hidden by a system built to disappear people. Rather than pour billions more into the agency that murdered her, we must abolish ICE and build systems rooted in equity and basic human dignity.” Daphy Michel was a human being who happened to be born on the other side of a border. That did not mean she was any less worthy of care, safety, and dignity. Her death was preventable. We must abolish ICE.www.publicsource.org/haitian-immi… [image or embed] — Rep. Summer Lee (@repsummerlee.bsky.social) June 12, 2026 at 5:49 PM As Trump has pursued his mass deportation agenda since returning to office last year, at least dozens of people have died in ICE custody or shortly after being released. Earlier this month, ICE announced that it was rescinding a 2021 Biden administration policy requiring a report to Congress and an investigation any time a detainee died within 30 days of their release. Following that announcement, the Republican-controlled Congress sent a bill with nearly $70 billion in new DHS funding to Trump’s desk. The legislation, which the president signed on Wednesday, includes $38 billion for ICE and $26 billion for US Customs and Border Protection (CBP). “House Republicans handed ICE and CBP billions more while families struggle to afford rent, groceries, childcare, and healthcare,” Lee said on social media after the chamber’s vote. “Congress shouldn’t be writing blank checks for cruelty while everyday people are being crushed by rising costs.” From Common Dreams via This RSS Feed.
After threatening on Thursday, June 11, to launch more destructive strikes against Iran, seize Kharg Island, and confiscate Iranian oil, Donald Trump once again suspended his colonial ultimatum that evening, before announcing that a memorandum was on the verge of being approved by Iran. According to Axios, clauses include the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz without tolls, sanctions relief, and a 60-day ceasefire on all fronts, paving the way for a new round of nuclear negotiations. According to the Iranian media outlet Mehr, it also includes the withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iran’s immediate periphery, the lifting of the blockade, the unfreezing of certain assets, and the end of all sanctions against its oil and petrochemical exports. While Trump announced that the agreement would likely be signed in Europe in the coming days, Iranian leaders have yet to confirm his statements. Regardless of the outcome of the negotiations, the terms of the memorandum represent a diplomatic manifestation of the United States’ strategic failure in Iran: a return to the pre-war status quo, which began on February 28, would be accompanied by the lifting of some of the sanctions that have crippled the country for 47 years. In recent weeks, the neoconservative camp has railed against such an agreement, which could grant Iran new room for maneuver in the region, particularly at the expense of Israel. Trump’s announcement comes after a week of high tension. The anxiety of U.S. imperialism is palpable, and several narratives are beginning to emerge regarding the negotiations. For Hassan Ahmadian, a professor at the University of Tehran: The initial Iranian terms — previously agreed upon in principle — had left Trump no room to claim a clear victory. So, after that preliminary agreement, he backtracked, sending his own amendments back to Tehran through mediators. But Iran did not respond. Instead, it left him in a state of wait-and-see for days, while signaling its readiness to resume the war — by striking Israel first and the ‘incident’ in Hormuz second….In response, Trump attempted military pressure…Yet Iran answered on both nights of escalation…At that point, he seems to have lost any hope of forcing Tehran into acceptance. The announcement of an agreement actually constitutes the announcement of a retreat — a return to what had already been agreed upon previously. For other analysts, Trump’s maneuvers were less about securing more favorable terms than about creating the illusion of a U.S victory over the regime, achieved through a new series of strikes, thus offering Trump a way out of his strategic impasse. This, at any rate, was the line of communication adopted by the White House throughout yesterday evening after the suspension of Trump’s latest ultimatum: speaking to reporters, Trump declared it a “very solid memorandum” and that there had “really been regime change,” with the new Iranian leaders, in his view, being more “reasonable.” This rhetorical posturing comes at a time when the United States has failed to achieve any of its strategic objectives, and this agreement acknowledges Iran’s new position of strength. Symptomatically, the tone of the Israeli statement reveals Israel’s unease with the text: Although Israel is not a party to the memorandum of understanding, the Prime Minister expressed his appreciation for President Trump’s commitment that the final agreement resulting from the negotiations will include the removal of enriched nuclear material, the dismantling of enrichment infrastructure, limits on missile production, and an end to Iran’s support for its terrorist proxies in the region. Using a certain degree of doublespeak, the statement reaffirms Israel’s maximalist demands, which are not contained in the text. It simultaneously distances itself from the text without directly confronting Trump. Indeed, an agreement with Iran would represent a slap in the face for Netanyahu, especially as Iran attempts to impose a new “strategic equation” and no longer hesitates to interpose itself between Israel and Lebanon, which has been under attack. While it remains to be seen how long the Iranian bourgeoisie will follow this line, it is a clear sign that Israel’s room for maneuver is now more limited, particularly in Lebanon, where Israel has failed to achieve its strategic objectives despite the extreme violence of its genocidal methods. Meanwhile, the relationship between the United States and Israel continues to deteriorate. While Netanyahu has jeopardized the negotiations by crossing the red line established by Washington and Tehran and bombing Beirut last Sunday, Trump merely called for calm after the Iranian response. On Wednesday, J.D. Vance spoke about the relationship between the United States and Israel, noting that “sometimes we have interests that are perfectly aligned and sometimes we have interests that are misaligned.” Netanyahu “aggressively asserts the interests of his country. Sometimes that means we’re on the same page, and sometimes we’re not,” Vance explained. The situation remains open in any case, as Iranian negotiators have not responded to Trump’s announcements, and Tehran might be tempted to wait even longer in order to gain more, as Hamidreza Azizi points out: Apart from the horizontal structure of decision-making in the Islamic Republic post-Ali Khamenei, which requires time for consensus-building, another consideration is how to frame any agreement in a way that would be acceptable to the hardline constituency. On the other hand, Trump himself, faced with the contradictions revealed by the U.S. failure, already seems to want to revisit certain points of the agreement, accusing Iran of having published terms different from his own. In a message on Truth Social this Friday, Trump indicated that “the terms that Iran leaked… have absolutely NOTHING to do with the terms that were agreed to, in writing.…What they said, including their weak and pathetic statement on having a deal, bears no relation to the truth. They are a very dishonorable people to deal with.” A potential last-minute reversal, in an attempt to find another way out that would allow him to conceal his failure, is therefore not impossible, given that Trump has no viable option for ending the war. And even if the agreement were signed, this new round of 60-day negotiations on Iran’s nuclear program — which excludes the missile issue and support for Tehran’s various allies in the region, which Trump had placed at the heart of his war aims — demonstrates both the retreat of the United States and the possibility that it could end like the previous rounds: that is, with a resumption of hostilities. While Washington seems to have resigned itself to backing down on some demands in the face of the war’s strategic failure, there’s no guarantee that Israel won’t try to disrupt these high-stakes negotiations to avoid a major setback. Already, Israel launched airstrikes against the Palestinian people in Gaza on Thursday night, threatening to reignite a high-intensity genocidal war, seemingly to avenge its defeat against Iran and Lebanon. In any case, while the effects of the U.S. defeat are already being felt and Washington is trying to restore its credibility by threatening to invade Cuba and increasing pressure on Bolivia, where the pro-Trump government of Rodrigo Paz is facing a powerful workers’ and popular rebellion, there is more urgency than ever to build a mass anti-imperialist movement that calls for the defeat of the United States and Israel in Iran and throughout the region, completely independent from the Iranian regime and the leaderships allied with it, and that fights for the end of the genocide of the Palestinian people. Originally Published in Révolution Permanente on June 12 The post Trump’s Latest Proposal to End the With Iran Marks a Major Retreat for the United States appeared first on Left Voice. From Left Voice via This RSS Feed.
Life is full of things that are special, but cruel reality ensures that you won’t realize it at the time. Like the fireflies dancing over the meadow at dusk leaving their trails of curves and loops in the air that last a just a second or two each, thousands of them, glimmers that form a whole that can only truly exist in memory. Long summer days spent with friends, when the world was still full of wonders and anything might still have been possible. New adventures, new experiences, new horizons to explore. And, perhaps, a new knife in your pocket. You can never go back to that time, and to someone without the right kind of mind you may never be able to explain it. That’s how it works; some things are only clear afterwards, when any curious thing may take you right back to that fond memory. Youth is wasted on the young. It’s been easily twenty years since I last bought a Benchmade balisong knife. It’s been twenty two, I think, since I bought my first. I didn’t note the date. You don’t think of that at the time, because you won’t realize that it’s one of those moments. It was my Model 32, which was not my first balisong and truth be told it wasn’t my first Benchmade either, but it was my first balisong that was actually any good. Truly, a revelation after a whole procession of ghastly flea market rattletraps. It immediately became my daily companion for many years, and to this day is a treasured old friend living in prominent position in my knife rack. It’s the knife I wore to my wedding, and one of the very few in my collection of a couple of hundred to meaningfully appreciate in value since I bought it. I pedaled my bicycle to the local gun store to pay $199 for it, an incredible amount of money hard earned from my dinky part-time job to pay for a mere pocketknife, but being pleased as pie the whole time to finally be 100% of the unimpeachable legal age to do so and thus there’s wasn’t a damn thing anyone could do to stop me. Maybe in some small way I already knew this was one of those pivotal moments, the otherwise unforeseeable kind that firmly sets somebody on one of life’s inevitable paths. I’ve bought a couple of Benchmade balis since. A Model 53. A Mayhem. Oodles of clones of the 42 of various stripes from appealing to awful, some of which I may some day write about here. But never again have I quite managed to recapture that magic of the first time. It’s said that sort of thing is actually impossible. But we can damn well give it a good try. When I was given an opportunity recently to pick up a Model 82 “Laro” in person new in the box for slightly less than MSRP and well below the current going rate, I might have felt that little spark, that lift, the wind beneath my wings one more time. I knew I couldn’t pass it up. The thing about angels, you see, is that most people only get one. If you can get your hands on an 82 — a prospect that is as usual getting increasingly unlikely, although some of the lesser known retailers purport to still have a couple — you will pay the thick end of $650 for it. With that type of price tag, the Model 82 absolutely must be something special, because otherwise its entire existence would be moot. This immediately delineates the world into two types of people: those who get it, and those who don’t. In order to explain, let’s talk about Harley Davidson for a moment. Like them or hate them, the one inalienable truth about a Harley is that it is the one motorcycle in the world that anyone, even non-motorcycle people, can name. Harley Davidson did not invent the motorcycle. They did not, if we are going to be completely truthful, even meaningfully innovate or iterate on motorcycles as a whole in a mechanical sense. There are manufacturers in the world who make motorcycles that are cheaper, motorcycles that are faster, motorcycles that are more reliable, motorcycles that drip less oil in your driveway, and in fact in some cases all of the above. But none of that is the point. What Harley Davidson has is the quintessential essence of the motorcycle. The shape, the outline, rumble in the seat, the wind all around you, the chrome flashing in the noonday sun, the zeitgeist and indeed the very image of the motorcycle is Harley’s stock and trade. Tires, engines, handlebars, spark plugs, tanks, and paint; All of those are mere details afterwards. When you sit on a Harley, regardless of all else, there is the ineffable sense of occasion. Nothing else is a motorcycle, only this. It is James Dean and Hunter Thompson and Evel Knievel and Danny Trejo and even Clark Gable, and nothing can change that. Not management missteps, not the coddling with kid gloves by the Reagan administration, not even being owned by a bowling pin company; love them or hate them, it’s unlikely anything is going to diminish the legacy of Harley Davidson any time soon. And so it is, winding our way circuitously back topic, with Benchmade and as it follows the Model 82. Benchmade certainly didn’t invent the balisong knife — far from it. But a balisong knife is literally where Benchmade began, a fact which they celebrate to this day on the 82’s box and indeed even its blade with their now iconic bali-song logo. With it comes that same sense of occasion, a certain gravitas that’s impossible to quantify but somehow doesn’t come with a balisong from any other maker. But before you accuse me of being the brochure for this thing, let it not be said that I haven’t been hard on the big B many times myself in the past. Often have I decried the ludicrous list prices on their mainstream models while they stolidly cling to an apparently static lineup while their competitors in many regards cruise right past. Finally being in a position to see things from the other side of the counter myself, so to speak, now I understand. It’s expensive because what goes into it is expensive and getting moreso all the time, especially if you’re still going to make it in America. So I get it, but that doesn’t mean I have to like it. But some part of that is by the opposite side of the same token something that makes the Model 82, yes, that little bit special. Objectively, perhaps, there is no call in the world just yet for a $650 general purpose pocketknife. But if we were going to be purely objective all the time there would be no call whatsoever for any high end knives at all. The 82’s drop pointed, stylized, and ventilated blade is made from Magnacut. That’s Larin Thomas’ home grown supersteel and the current state of the art and darling of high end knife steels. This marks another first for me as well as it’s my first Magnacut knife. That is to say my first that’s actually made from Magnacut, and not just one that says it is. (That “CLA” there is, I’m very sorry to report, fake as a snake. If the lack of a choil didn’t tip you off already. It’s mechanically impeccable and very interesting, but still fake. Perhaps we’ll discuss it later.) I have no experience with Magnacut other than what I read. It’s supposed to be the all-singing, all-dancing, does-everything perfectly balanced wunderstooff of, if not the future, certainly this very minute. I’m sure I’ll find out about all that at least a little bit. But probably only a little, because it’s unlikely I’ll use this heavily. But does it keeeeeel? Probably. The Model 82 scores respectably for a factory edge out of the box. It’s an unfair comparison as usual, because the Bugout I use as my control has had its edge fanatically hand-polished by yours truly and then used for no purpose whatsoever other than producing these chart figures. The Model 82 has a tumbled stonewashed finish on its blade surface which no doubt introduces a tiny amount of drag, and at 0.104" or 2.64mm in cross section it’s also 20% thicker than the Bugout’s blade. All of these will negatively impact it on my dinkum paper cutting test by its very nature. For whatever it’s worth I used it to open a pack of Gummi Bears last night and it went through the plastic packaging like it wasn’t even there. The 82 is a compact number for a balisong, measuring up at 4-3/4" (120.65mm) closed and a whisker under 8-1/4" (209.55mm) open. The blade is 3-5/8" long (92.08mm) from the tips of the handles, but the usable edge starts before a large choil and is about 3-5/16" (84.14mm). The styling is of course reminiscent of the Model 87 and/or the 85, or perhaps vise-versa, although the 82 is much closer to EDC sized. It has the same channel milled solid billet titanium handles, glaive headed screws, and even the same pattern of slots and holes milled in for lightening. It’s 125.3 grams or 4.42 ounces. With that plus the size, in reality maybe the more obvious comparison is my beloved Model 32 instead. The 82 would be eminently EDC capable except I’ll bet you wouldn’t actually do it, you chicken. It also lacks a pocket clip, although in its stead you get what is, for lack of a better description, a holster. You may have spotted it nestled in the box above. It’s either made from Kydex or something moulded very much to look like Kydex. I can’t tell if it’s an injection moulding or simply pressed with some manner of hideously complicated jig. It’s certainly not pressed around your individual knife, as it has distinct clearance and relief areas built into it to facilitate a clean draw without, presumably, scratching up the knife. It’s got a clip on the back picked out with the Benchmade butterfly logo, and which is obviously intended for a belt and is not a pocket clip per se. It’s hooked over on the end and very highly sprung. There’s a grab tab on the tip of it but flexing it to snap onto your belt while you’re already wearing it is kind of a three handed job. Threading your belt through it is a better bet. The clip seems extremely robust and is just wide enough to clear a 2" pistol belt and even has adjustable retention, which is the sort of thing that’ll surely get any old whacker to pitch his tent. The clip is folded over the top of the holster and screwed in through the back, which seems like it ought to be a tailor made recipe for scraping and damaging the finish on the handles. …Except there are a pair of wings formed into the edges of the holster that space it out so it doesn’t touch. You have to be very ham-fisted indeed to shove the 82 into its holster such that it runs the risk of getting scratched. Which is just as well, because it is an absolute thing of beauty. The Torx and glaive headed hardware create a cohesive style throughout the entire ensemble. It’s a kicker pin design, so there are no Zen pins to be found in the handles here. But the pins and even the latch head carry the theme. Squeeze the handles and the latch springs open of its own accord. Spring is the wrong word, though. This puppy is actually magnetic, with a trio of opposed doughnut shaped magnets tucked under the screw heads and on the shank of the latch. When the handles are squeezed far enough for the crosspin in the latch to clear its keyhole shaped home, it’s silently pushed out by magnetic repulsion and kept there proud of the handles and blade so it can’t clash. The action is faultless. The 82 is a ball bearing pivoter and it’s also extremely rigid. There’s nary a wiggle, no tap, not a rattle to be found anywhere within it. It’s quiet, too, producing only a single understated click with each rebound. It is the polite, distinguished cough of the professional butler, nothing more. Just as you say, sir. Very good, sir. Originally I was going to take this apart to show you, but I found that the screws were highly threadlockered and mine came from the factory in a perfect state of tune. The screw heads are matted just like the handles, and pristine. Do I really want to sully all of that? I don’t think I do. The Inevitable Conclusion I went out to breakfast with my wife the other day and the bill came to just over $50. It wasn’t anything fancy, just diner fare with a menu modification or two. Maybe that puts it all into perspective, these days. Maybe we really are all headed to hell in a handbasket. Maybe it really was better back when and it’s not just that we remember it so. Cherish the special moments as we find them, then, and recognize them for what they are. They’ll never come around quite the same way again. So maybe six hundred bucks is a bargain after all. Mere nothing, for the opportunity to hold perfection.
“The government is aggressively utilising Te Tiriti to secure elite global market access, while actively dismantling the domestic legal architecture that is required to give the text any real meaning,” writes Nicola Hoobin about NZ trade agreements such as the one signed with India this year. (Photo: RNZ Marika Khabazi) Aotearoa is facing its sharpest constitutional crisis in modern history, as the government professes adherence to Te Tiriti abroad while dismantling it at home, writes international legal practitioner Nicola Hoobin. The coalition government appears to have overlooked a profound legal contradiction as it methodically advances its legislative programme to review, alter, or strip Te Tiriti clauses across 19 separate acts of parliament. While the government is busy dismissing Te Tiriti at home as a flexible, non-binding political instrument that can be unilaterally dismantled by a simple parliamentary majority, it seems to have forgotten that in international trade agreements, it continues to treat the document as a rigid, foundational constitutional pillar. In other words, the government is attempting to maintain an impossible double standard. The smoking gun of this constitutional duplicity sits directly within New Zealand’s premier international trade instruments. These are Article 20.2.1 of the European Union-New Zealand Free Trade Agreement (signed in July 2023) and Article 26.2.1 of the United Kingdom-New Zealand Free Trade Agreement (signed in February 2022). To secure unprecedented market access to the European single market and post-Brexit Britain, the Crown formally executed binding international texts. In doing so, it explicitly, deliberately, and repeatedly assured our global trading partners that: “te Tiriti o Waitangi / the Treaty of Waitangi is a foundational document of constitutional importance to Aotearoa New Zealand.” Far more than empty diplomatic prose, this is an enacted, state-sanctioned admission within international treaties. Under international law, the doctrine of pacta sunt servanda (agreements must be kept) dictates that treaties must be performed in good faith. The Crown can’t, in good faith, represent Te Tiriti to the international community as a permanent document of “constitutional importance” to secure lucrative market access, and then turn around domestically to claim it has a democratic mandate to systematically strip that very same constitutional fabric from our statutory architecture. In public international law, this triggers a principle akin to “estoppel”, which means that a sovereign state can’t blow hot and cold on its foundational legal obligations to suit its immediate economic or political convenience. Te Tiriti in trade agreements The EU and UK agreements represent a radical, modern departure in New Zealand’s trade agreement architecture. In these two agreements, the Crown has shifted from using the Treaty as a passive domestic shield to using it as an active diplomatic marketing asset. Compare the language of “constitutional importance”, for example, with New Zealand’s foundational 1983 Closer Economic Relations agreement with Australia, which contains absolutely no mention of Te Tiriti o Waitangi. By explicitly elevating Te Tiriti to a “foundational document of constitutional importance” in modern texts to secure premium global market access, the executive drew a clear, contemporary line in the sand — one that it can’t now legally or logically erase. Potential for diplomatic friction The legal mechanics of how these international commitments interact with dispute resolution are also revealing. In the UK-NZ FTA, Chapter 26, which relates to Māori trade and economic cooperation, is explicitly carved out from the agreement’s formal, binding state-to-state dispute settlement mechanism. This structural separation means that a failure to cooperate under the terms of the Māori trade chapter can’t trigger formal international trade sanctions or panel arbitrations. By contrast, the EU-NZ FTA approaches compliance through a highly tailored, progressive framework. While the broader interpretation of the Treaty of Waitangi itself remains shielded from standard commercial arbitration panels, the commitments embedded within Chapter 20 (Māori Trade and Economic Cooperation) are subject to specialised bilateral consultation mechanisms. The EU agreement establishes a dedicated institutional dialogue where compliance with the spirit of the Indigenous chapter is under continuous review. This creates an active international forum. If domestic rollbacks undermine Māori economic interests, data sovereignty, or environmental guardianship, it invites direct diplomatic friction and specialised dispute-consultation mechanisms with Brussels. Lest anyone think this international double standard is a relic of previous administrations, the government’s actions in New Delhi show the pattern is alive and well. In signing the landmark New Zealand-India Free Trade Agreement in April this year, the current coalition government exported the Treaty yet again, embedding a dedicated “Cultural, Traditional Knowledge and Economic Cooperation Chapter” that requires all actions to be executed in a “manner consistent with the Treaty of Waitangi”. The Crown continues to play a calculated game. Although, once again, the chapter is safely insulated from formal international dispute penalties, the contradiction it presents to domestic strategy creates a fatal blind spot. In New Zealand public law, courts frequently look to international treaties signed by the executive as extrinsic evidence to interpret the scope of the Crown’s fiduciary obligations. So, for example, if iwi launch judicial reviews against the rollbacks of the 19 targeted statutes — which cover critical resource management, biosecurity, and primary industries — the FTA texts become powerful legal levers. The Crown cannot easily look a High Court judge in the eye and argue that statutory Treaty obligations are vague, unworkable, or a threat to democratic certainty when the executive branch has formally executed international documents telling the UK and EU the exact opposite. The explicit acknowledgments in the EU and UK agreements effectively block the Crown from downplaying the constitutional status of Te Tiriti in a domestic courtroom. This inescapable double standard shifts the ultimate burden of accountability from global panels directly onto our domestic judiciary. Will the New Zealand courts now hold the Crown strictly accountable for its own international admissions, enforcing the principle that a sovereign government can’t legally define Te Tiriti as a cornerstone of our constitution to the rest of the world while treating it as entirely disposable at home? Indefensible urgency With a general election approaching in November, the government is operating within a rapidly shrinking legislative window. As constitutional conventions require a shift towards a caretaker government framework in the coming months, the use of urgency motions to fast-track these 19 statutory rollbacks becomes increasingly indefensible. The international community is watching. If the Crown continues to treat its constitutional partnership with Māori as a disposable asset at home, it risks compromising New Zealand’s standing as a trustworthy partner in global trade, diplomacy, and international law. Nicola Hoobin is an international lawyer specialising in public and private international law, cross-border wealth, international rights, and the protection of art and cultural heritage. She has offices in Auckland and Melbourne, and holds a Bachelor of Laws from the University of Auckland, a Master of International Laws (LLM) from the Australian National University, and postgraduate qualifications in the Laws of the European Union from the European University Institute in Florence, Italy. E-Tangata, 2026 The post Te Tiriti duplicity: honoured abroad but dismissed at home appeared first on E-Tangata. From E-Tangata via This RSS Feed.
New defence secretary Dan Jarvis has previously received around half a million pounds in donations from corporate lobbyists. So, as mainstream media outlets say the Labour right-winger “once looked like the future” and “is a fine choice“, let’s look into the dark money that’s been fuelling his political career. Jarvis and his local Labour Party in Barnsley have done such an awful job at countering Tory damage to the town in recent decades that it turned to Reform in the 2026 local elections. And when you look at where Jarvis’s funds come from, you can understand why the people of Barnsley might not exactly be his top political priority. 1 — Labour Together millionaires One major source of donations to Jarvis has been key Labour Together donor Martin Taylor. Taylor runs a hedge fund that invests in private healthcare. Fellow Labour Together donor and proud pro-Israel lobbyist Trevor Chinn also gave thousands of pounds to Jarvis. It seems likely that such support was at least in part because Jarvis was a parliamentary supporter of Labour Friends of Israel who even received money from the lobby group. Labour Together was a prominent vehicle for undermining Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership of the Labour Party and forcing vacuous corporate lackey Keir Starmer onto the country. Other beneficiaries of money from Labour Together or its donors have included high-profile cronies such as Yvette Cooper, Wes Streeting, David Lammy, Shabana Mahmood, and Rachel Reeves. 2 — The “multimillionaire recruitment tycoon” with interests in private healthcare EveryDoctor explains that “multimillionaire recruitment tycoon Peter Hearn“: made his fortune through recruitment firms PSD and Odgers Berndtson Odgers Group Limited, where he resigned as a director in 2025, has offered: headhunting services to the NHS as well as the private healthcare sector. The firm has faced criticism for some of the senior executives it has helped recruit to the NHS. Former TalkTalk executive Dido Harding was headhunted by Odgers Berndtson to lead the NHS Test and Trace programme during the pandemic, which was later deemed to be ineffective by MPs. A fellow director at Odgers was Tory peer Virginia Bottomley. While Hearn clearly has a massive soft spot for Labour right-wingers Wes Streeting and Yvette Cooper, Dan Jarvis has been the other key recipient of Hearn’s money. They’ve all received money from Hearn’s OPD Group and MPM Connect Ltd. Labour campaign group Momentum once called MPM “dark money“, and Sky reported that: The company has no staff or website and is registered at an office in Hertfordshire where the secretary says she has never heard of them. EveryDoctor says Hearn’s OPD Group also “provides services to the NHS“. With Dan Jarvis, the lobby’s grip on government continues In 2016, Blairite strategist John McTernan said Jarvis: so clearly wants to be Leader of the Labour Party. Many on the right of the party mentioned his name “as a potential challenger to Jeremy Corbyn” early into Corbyn’s time as leader, with some of them even seeing him as “the party’s greatest hope“. Jarvis also reportedly had links to Blue Labour, whose whole argument is basically that Labour should be ‘more conservative‘. Jarvis has largely remained quiet in the last ten years, just accumulating corporate money and doing little of note for people in his constituency. But his move into the role of defence secretary may be a sign that his star on the Labour right is rising yet again. Considering that lobbyists’ empty vessel Keir Starmer has pushed Labour far to the right as leader, it’s unsurprising that Dan Jarvis fits neatly into the project. The question now is, exactly how much will Jarvis’s deep links to the corporate lobby influence Ministry of Defence policy at a time of already increasing military spending? Featured image via Carl Court/Getty Images By Ed Sykes From Canary via This RSS Feed.
Here’s the recording for the nineteenth session of our Substack philosophy class for paid subscribers. We finally finished Ch. 7 of Nozick’s Anarchy, State, and Utopia. We’ll be reading the first two chunks of Ch. 8 (“Equality” and “Equality of Opportunity”) for Tuesday. Also, remember that this and all the previous class recordings so far can be found here. Read more From Philosophy for the People w/Ben Burgis via This RSS Feed.
Lihat kiriman asli pada platform media sosial terkait.
Not to mention that we have no way of contacting “the right buyer”. Clothes is one thing, but furniture, instruments, art, pottery, games, electronics, and everything else? Yeah you can make a living finding stuff like that and reselling it, but WE ARE A THRIFT STORE WE DO NOT HAVE THE CONTACTS NECESSARY TO DO THAT SO YOURE JUST WAITING AND HOPING FOR SOME RANDO TO WALK IN THE DOOR WILLING TO PAY 200$ FOR A COUCH BECAUSE GOOGLE TOLD YOU IT RETAILS FOR 1000$ I HAVE THROWN OUT 17 COUCHES TODAY FUCK OFF
Lihat kiriman asli pada platform media sosial terkait.
I heard a rumor that they actually didn’t release them because they’d be too costly to run, so I think if they’d release those models, they’d go bankrupt.
FMHY refugee
I think we will start to see him come in to it now. It was the same with Fornaroli, once he “got it” he was fairly unstoppable. Maybe not in the ultimate form like Piastri was but probably more comfortably dominant than eg Pourchaire or Drugovich were. Drugo had the 1 good engine in his winning season as well, I would argue. Also nice to see Herta in the mix. Huge risk for him joining f2, given the consequences if he drowns in it (for Indy as well!)
Lihat kiriman asli pada platform media sosial terkait.
Once the guardian of the bipartisan pro-Israel consensus, it is now a polarizing force in the party. June 12, 2026, 5:01 a.m. ET When Brad Lander opened his Democratic primary bid for New York’s 10th Congressional District late last year, he made a promise that would once have meant political suicide: He would not do “AIPAC’s bidding” in Washington. Now the June 23 primary is almost here, and AIPAC has been a recurring theme throughout the campaign. A progressive Jew and self-described liberal Zionist, Lander challenged his opponent, the pro-Israel incumbent Dan Goldman, to take a “people’s pledge” to limit money from super PACs. He has sent a steady stream of text and email blasts comparing AIPAC with Wall Street and crypto — a new, unholy trinity of corrupting influences in democratic politics.
No gods, no queens, no masters.
Lihat kiriman asli pada platform media sosial terkait.
It probably varies by region but the resellers at my local goodwill are all like young moms and fresh immigrants who spend hours sifting through piles of garbage to make the smallest profit ever. I’ve never really understood why I’m supposed to hate these people when they engage in the mildest form of arbitrage around. Like 95% of it is going to end up in a landfill anyway, who cares?
Lihat kiriman asli pada platform media sosial terkait.
Can you enable DDC/CI in the monitors on-screen menus? If so, and if there aren’t drivers available (I can’t find drivers when searching MF2208-A), then if you can enable DDC/CI you can use 3rd party tools to control the brightness. Display Dimmer and ClickMonitorDDC are 2 I found on a quick google. If Linux can control the monitor, then it sounds like a lack of drivers for Windows but the display should still support DDC/CI; 3rd party tools do sometimes still work in this scenario for DDC/CI in Windows.
Lihat kiriman asli pada platform media sosial terkait.