text:
     I slowly drift off into space, blackness, nothing. The sweet embrace of nothingness, it hugs me ever so gently, caresses my skin ever so softly. The comfort of the feeling is unmatched by anything, more passionate than a lovers embrace, but yet more gentle than a mother holding her new born baby. I am clear; it is an escape from the hustle and bustle of the everyday, the ups and downs, ins and outs, the busy that we all deal with every day. I am floating on a cloud of joy.
     White and fluffy, I float through the sky with the greatest of ease. It dances and prances through the endless blue, no destination in sight no nothing around.  The soft cotton form of the cloud brushes me lulling me into a state of relaxation, the feeling of a warm towel on a cold winter’s day. The dew drops drip down draining away all my daily dilemmas as I slip from consciousness to the world of the unknown where anything is possible and everything is alright.
      Still I am on my cloud, floating free through the sky. But I begin to sink towards the earth away from the warmth of the sun. As I descend the dew drops that dripped away my problems grow cold. The warm towel is gone and along with it the relaxation has disappeared. I am cold. As the cloud deepens in its descent the dew drops drip more and more and they turn into rain. The cloud I am on is no longer alone. Grey ominous clouds surround me on all sides, up, down, left, right, front, back all around.  There is no seeing where I am going. What lies ahead? My soft white cloud begins to shrink and fade into the background of the grey storm clouds. It grows smaller and smaller and I am no longer caressed by its beauty, but frightened by its disappearance as I continue to fall into the grey abyss.
      My cloud is gone, but I am not falling. I am standing. It’s solid ground.  Green grass grows around my bare feet. It is unkempt, filled with weeds and gravel that scratch the bare bottoms of my feet. I am compelled to walk; up a gently sloping hill and with no destination in sight. The storm clouds that surround me open up and the heavens rain down. Still I continue up this hill as my tattered clothes become saturated.  The grass is dying, dying, dead.  Only the weeds remain, through the mud and the gravel that cut my now bloody feet. I continue up the hill as my feet bleed and are rubbed raw.
     All around me are tombstones and I continue up the hill.  First one, two, three, four, five. I loose count. They are all around me on this hill, tombstones for no one. No names, no faces, dates, empty.  They belong to the masses, the nondescript, unoriginal people, who have all died their own individually common horrible death. And I continue on my march.
      I fall to my hands and knees and they both begin to bleed as the gravel rubs them to a state of ground beef, but still I march. My destination is close, although I still do not know what it is. The tombstones grow, what was once small headstones no higher than my knee grow to tower over me like skyscrapers. They look down upon me with their blank nameless faces. Watching me struggle up the hill as my clothes become more tattered and my shirt soaks with blood and rain. Death is watching.
     I find him, my father near the top of the hill, but not quite at the peak. He is not an old man, but not young either. He is how I know him to be, of good health and middle aged. The sides of his hair are white, but on top there remain some black remnants of his youth. He is laying down holding his stomach. Grasping, clutching, pulling at his stomach. I want to run to him, but can’t.  I continue slowly up the hill. Falling, scraping my forearms, then my elbows and up my arms until I finally fall on my face only to arise a bloody mess at my father’s side.
       I see now what he is holding. He looks worse than I. His hands, feet, knees, face, everything is filthy; covered in a combination of both mud and blood. The filth washes down his body until it reaches his hands. His mangled hands that have seen the work of a thousand men. Bent, shaking, cold.  His hands hold, grasp, clutch at his stomach. His black shirt torn open below the navel. His hands cover something and I move closer to see. He is not holding his stomach, but holding it in.  Where am cut with tiny scratches that bleed with the rain he has one stretching from side to side and through pour his entrails. Green, purple, orange, red with blood they pour out as he tries to hold them in. I cradle my father. His head in my right arm as my left hand works with his to keep his intestines inside, but they pour out. And I see my hand it is just as mangled as his. Cut, twisted warped into all shapes; broken one thousand times over; it shivers too much to hold anything and they slip out through our mangled fingers.
     Slowly and painfully through the hands of my father and I they slip out. Pouring onto the filth that now surrounds us they slip out. My father does not make a sound. He is staring straight into my eyes, looking up at me, his only son, holding him as he approaches death in this graveyard of nameless men. There are no words, only the sound of my father taking his last dying breath.
      And I wake up, just like every night, crying, alone in the dark.

title: The first story I've written

question: Why is the narrator crying at the end of the story?

answer: Because his father is dead.

question: Why might the narrator have chosen not to provide the name of the father?

answer: Because in the dream he becomes apart of the graveyard of nameless men.

question: Is the narrator married?

answer: Probably not.

question: Has the narrator had this dream before?

answer: It is implied that they have this dream every night.


split: train

text:
She sat on the bench just as the sun went. There were footsteps and a shadow and suddenly the alien killed her and then the alien got in the spaceship flew to his planet and crash landed in the desert

i don't know if he'll survive but i'm thinking about doing a sequel or prequel. thoughts?

title: "Twilight at the park"

question: Why does the alien kill the woman?

answer: This information is not given in the story.

question: Why does the alien crash land in the desert?

answer: He got in his spaceship after killing the woman and was on his way to his planet when he crashed. The author doesn't know is the alien survives.

question: Explain everything that happens to the alien.

answer: The alien approaches a woman on a bench watching the sun set. The alien kills her and gets into his spaceship. He flies away to his planet, but crash lands in the desert. The author is uncertain if the alien should survive and asks for the readers' thoughts on the matter.

question: What is the significance of this event?

answer: A woman was murdered by an alien. Its motive is unknown. There is also a spaceship with an alien currently in the desert.

question: Write a ~3 sentence summary.

answer: A woman is murdered by an alien while watching the sun set. The alien flies back to his planet, but crashes in the desert. The author is uncertain if the alien survives.


text:
[A modern reproduction of the Catalan Atlas depicting the eastern Mediterranean region.] [Detail of the Catalan Atlas, the first compass rose depicted on a map.] The CATALAN ATLAS (, ) is a mediaeval world map, or mappamundi, created in 1375 that has been described as the most important map of the Middle Ages in the Catalan language,[1][2] and as “the zenith of medieval map-work”.[3] Despite its name, it is not an atlas.

It was produced by the Majorcan cartographic school, possibly by Cresques Abraham, a Jewish book illuminator who was described by a contemporary as a master of _mappae mundi_ as well as of compasses.[4] It was in the royal library of France (now the Bibliothèque nationale de France) by 1380, in the time of King Charles V. The Catalan Atlas originally consisted of six vellum leaves (each circa ) folded vertically, painted in various colours including gold and silver.[5] They were later mounted on the front and back of five wooden panels, with the ends enclosed in a leather binding by Simon Vostre c.1515, restored most recently in 1991. Wear has split each leaf into two.[6]

Description

The first two leaves contain texts in Catalan covering cosmography, astronomy, and astrology. These texts are accompanied by illustrations. The texts and illustration emphasise the Earth's spherical shape and the state of the known world. They also provide information to sailors on tides and how to tell time at night.[7]

The four remaining leaves make up the actual map, with Jerusalem located close to the centre; two depict the Orient; the remaining two show Europe, along with North and West Africa. The map is around in size. It shows illustrations of many cities—Christian cities with a cross, other cities with a dome—and with each city's political allegiance indicated by a flag. Wavy blue vertical lines are used to symbolise oceans. Place names of important ports are transcribed in red, while others are indicated in black. The illustrations and most of the text are oriented towards the edges of the map, suggesting it was intended to be used by laying it flat and walking around it.[8]

The oriental portion of the Catalan Atlas illustrates numerous religious references as well as a synthesis of medieval _mappae mundi_ and the travel literature of the time, especially Marco Polo's _Book of Marvels_ and Mandeville's _Travels and Voyage of Sir John Mandeville_. Many Indian and Chinese cities can be identified.[9] The explanatory texts report customs described by Polo and catalogue local economic resources, real or supposed.

The Western portion is similar to contemporary portolan charts, but contains the first compass rose known to have been used on such a chart.[10]

Gallery

File:Atles català (full 1, ca000003).jpg|Reproduction of the first leaf File:Atles català (full 2, ca000001).jpg|Reproduction of the second leaf File:1375 Atlas Catalan Abraham Cresques.jpg|Montage of 8 pages (the third to sixth leaves) of the original 1375 Catalan Atlas File:El mar Mediterráneo en el Atlas catalán de Cresques Abraham.jpg|Modern copy of western half

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10]

title: Catalan Atlas

question: What does the markings of the map say about the intended audience of the Catalan Map?

answer: Like most maps, the navigation and tidal guides are meant for seafarers. But more specifically, the way that the map icons are designed means that the users will primarily be Christians. The demarcation of towns uses religious iconography to identify which locations follow Christianity and which ones do not. However, there are no specifications for the non-Christian locales. This means that the readers would only care to know if a town or city has the same religious beliefs or not.


text:
ASHRAE Moves to New Global Headquarters

Focusing on the Society’s 2020-21 theme, “_The ASHRAE Digital Lighthouse and Industry 4.0_, the headquarters incorporates several digitally connected solutions. The building will be fully net-zero energy by March 2021 upon the completion of the photovoltaic (PV) system installation.

_“In addition to showing our commitment to building occupant health and comfort, our new headquarters building will enable us to provide industry-leading support and service to our global volunteers, while driving innovation that will push our goal of sustainability in action forward.” – Jeff Littleton, ASHRAE Executive Vice President_

Learn More

question: Who wrote this piece?

answer: Unclear

question: When does the piece take place?

answer: Around the turn of the year, from 2020 to 2021.

question: What's one digitally connected solution being employed at the ASHRAE Digital Lighthouse headquarters?

answer: A photovoltaic system.

question: What are ASHRAE's goals?

answer: Providing building occupant health and comfort, providing industry-leading support and service to global volunteers, and driving innovation for sustainability in action.

question: Write a ~2 sentence summary.

answer: The ASHRAE Digital Lighthouse headquarters will be incorporating several digitally connected solutions, including a photovoltaic system installation. They are committed to providing building occupant health and comfort, providing industry-leading support and service to global volunteers, and driving innovation for sustainability in action.


text:
[]

by MSA on Apr 28, 2018

[]

WE HAVE THE FULL SPOILERS FOR THE MAY 2018 LOOK FANTASTIC BEAUTY BOX!

For a limited time, USE COUPON CODE SERUMBB TO GET A FREE AURELIA PROBIOTIC SKINCARE REVITALISE & GLOW SERUM WITH YOUR FIRST MONTH OF LOOK FANTASTIC BEAUTY BOX! ($19 a month, or as low as $16 a month if you commit to a year up front, but you don’t have to pay for the whole year up front.)

Each box will include:

[]

Source: Plush Koala

-   Spotlight Teeth White Strips – 4 pieces
-   AVANT RNA Radical Firmness Anti Aging Serum – 5 ml
-   This Works In Transit Camera Closeup – 20 ml
-   Sleek Contour Palette Medium
-   SkinRepublic Bubble Purifying + Charcoal Face Sheet Mask
-   EYEKO Eye Do Liquid Eyeliner – 10ml

WHAT DO YOU THINK OF THE SPOILER?

Look Fantastic is $19.00 a month, or $16 a month with an annual subscription (you don’t need to pay the full cost up front, either!)

This box ships worldwide. Check out all of our Look Fantastic Beauty Box reviews to learn more about this subscription box!

Posted in Look Fantastic Beauty Box Spoilers, Subscription Box Spoilers| Tags: look fantastic | look fantastic beauty box | 34 comments

Comments (34)

1.

2.

3.

    -

        -

4.

    -

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

    -

10.

11.

12.

13.

    -

    -

        -

14.

    -

15.

    -

    -

16.

17.

    -

    -

        -

        -

18.

19.

    -

question: What is in the May 2018 Look Fantastic Beauty Box?

answer: Spotlight Teeth White Strips, AVANT RNA Radical Firmness Anti Aging Serum, This Works In Transit Camera Closeup, Sleek Contour Palette Medium, SkinRepublic Bubble Purifying + Charcoal Face Sheet Mask, and EYEKO Eye Do Liquid Eyeliner.

question: How much does the box cost?

answer: $19 per month, or $16 per month with an annual subscription.

question: How many comments have been made on the post?

answer: 34

question: Summarize everything relating to coupon codes.

answer: The coupon code "SERUMBB" entitles the consumer to a free Aurelia Probiotic Skincare Revitalise & Glow Serum with their first monthly purchase of a Look Fantastic Beauty Box.

question: Write a ~1 sentence summary.

answer: The post lists the contents of the May 2018 Look Fantastic Beauty Box and lists the price  as $19 per month, or $16 per month with an annual subscription.


text:
[Africa Proconsularis (125)] __NOTOC__ GAGUARI () is a former diocese of North Africa and since 1933 a titular bishopric. The location of the former diocese is for the moment unknown.[1][2][3] [4] Under Roman hegemony, the bishop belonged to the province of Byzacène. This province was located in North Africa. The exact location of Gaguari can not be determined for the current state of research. However, everything leads us to believe that the bishopric site localizes to the current Sahel of Tunisia.

History

In the early years of the fourth century, the emperor Diocletian undertook a great persecution against Christians. In North Africa, the governors of the provinces of proconsular Africa and Numidia ordained as priests and bishops engaged texts and objects of worship. Those who had not opposed the abuses were called _lapsi_ (“the lapsed”) and those who supplied texts and objects, _traditores_ (“deliverers”).

Since the administration and the sacraments of the persons guilty of this weakness were held to be invalid, the accusation, whether true or not, became a means of undermining the authority and ambition of certain men. It is in this context of suspicion that originated and developed the Donatism. After the election of Cecilian as bishop of Carthage in 311, a group of Numidian bishops under the direction of their primate Secundus of Tigisis decreed the ordination invalid. One of the electoral bishops, Felix of Aptunga, would have been a traitor. They then elected Majorinus bishop of Carthage. This is the beginning of the Donatist schism which owes its name is the successor of Majorinus, Donatus, an influential priest of the movement.

Several reasons are attributed to the rise of Donatism, political, religious and social. However, it would appear to be a clash of strong personalities that brought rapid development of schism.

Under the reign of Constantine I, several measures of repression to Donatism were applied in vain. This is why, in 321, Constantine published an edict to authorize Donatism.

After 25 years of existence, the Donatist Church had its own network of bishops, organized its own councils, gathered its own renamed faithful since the sacraments of the other bishops were not valid from the Donatist point of view. The “Counter-Church” then had 270 bishops and subsisted by itself. However, the Emperor Constantius II ordered the merger of rival churches in 347. This measure led to an outburst of violence against the imperial order in Numidia. In 361 or 362, the Emperor Julian decided to grant an edict of tolerance to all Christian sects banned by Constance, which gave him new momentum to Donatism. His successor, Theodosius I, also failed to solve the Donatist schism.

The conflict took a decisive turn after the appointment of the bishop Aurelius in 391. He decided to join Augustine of Hippo, in order to stem Donatism. Thus a Council of Carthage (411), brought together bishops from both sides. It is at this point that Rogatus, Bishop of Gaguari, renounced Donatism for Catholicism. The schism ended gradually from 413 under the action of Augustine and the repression of Honorius.

Historical records

Gaguari seems to have been forgotten, but it is nevertheless listed in many books.

Various parameters in the ancient may explain the disappearance of a bishop (or traces of this diocese) to Gaguari. First, there was a large number of bishoprics in ancient North Africa, especially during the Donatist schism. The organization of the African provinces left a certain autonomy to the cities. Subsequently, these cities will require more religious freedoms: they wanted to have their own bishop. This explains the large number of bishops at the time, . Unfortunately, only half of them have been identified as Gaguari.

Second, from 645, the councils that previously met all the bishops of North Africa will now meet more than the provincial level. Details of these meetings are today largely unknown, only a synodal letters were retained. Third, the seats of bishops (and therefore Gaguari) at the time of Donatism can be of different types: a city or town more or less large, a big farm or a community of families. Fourth, recurrent Berber revolts in the southern province of Byzacène did reduce the number of bishop from 115 to 43, between 484 and 646 also observed a decrease in community size.

Bishops

Ancient diocese

-   Rogatus (), abandoned the Donatists in favor of the Catholics at the Council of Carthage
-   Victor (), bishop during a persecution by the Vandals

Titular diocese

-   Mario Roberto Emmett Anglim (1922–1973): Born March 4, 1922 the United States. He was a member of the “Congregation of the Most Holy Redeemer” in 1942. He was ordained priest in the same congregation in 1948. In 1964 he became bishop of Coari in Brazil. It is March 23, 1966 he received the bishopric holder Gaguari by Paul VI. He died on 13 April 1973.
-   Diego Gutiérrez Pedraza (1926–1990): Born September 26, 1926 in Spain. In 1951 he was ordained a priest in “The Order of Saint Augustine”. In 1973, he became bishop of Cafayate in Argentina and titular bishop of Gaguari. On 3 November 1977, he renounced the title of titular bishop of Gaguari. He died on 23 November 1990.
-   Jose Sixto Parzinger Foidl (1931): Born December 21, 1931 in Austria, he was ordained priest of the “Order of Friars Minor Capuchin” in 1960. He became Apostolic Vicar in December 1977 in Araucania, in Chile, and titular bishop of Gaguari. In 2001, he renounced the diocese and was the holder of Villarrica in Chile. He was discharged from this position in 2009.
-   Francisco Moreno Barron (1954): Born October 3, 1954 in Spain, he was ordained a priest in the Archdiocese of Morelia in Mexico in 1979. In 2002 he became auxiliary bishop of Morelia and titular bishop of Gaguari. In 2008 he ceased his previous positions to become bishop of Tlaxcala in Mexico.
-   Manuel Cruz Aurelio (1953) : Born December 2, 1953 in Cuba, he was ordained priest in 1980 in the Archdiocese of Newark to the United States. He became auxiliary bishop of Newark in 2008 as well as titular bishop of Gaguari. Currently he is still in office.

[1] Dominique Arnauld, _History of Christianity in Africa_. The first seven centuries, Paris, France, Karthala, 2001

[2] Aubert R. (eds), geographic history Dictionary & Church, Volume XIX, Paris, and Letouzey Ané 1981

[3] Cuoq Joseph, _The North African Church II to the twelfth century_, Paris, Editions du centurion 1984.

[4] Henri Teissier (eds), _History of Christians in North Africa_, Libya-Tunisia-Algeria-Morocco, co-publishing, Paris, 1991.

title: Gaguari

question: Who took a great persecution against Christians?

answer: Emperor Diocletian, in the early years of the fourth century, took a great persecution against Christians.

question: What was the largest contributing factor of the rise of Donatism, according to the article.

answer: The clash of strong personalities was the largest contributing factor that brought upon the rise of Donatism.

question: Where is the exact location of Gaguari speculated to be?

answer: The exact location of Gaguari has not been determined by the site is believed to be localized to the current Sahel of Tunisia.

question: Which bishop abandoned the Donatists in favor of the Catholics at the Council of Carthage?

answer: Bishop Rogatus

question: Write a ~1 sentence summary.

answer: This article describes the historic site, Gaguari, and explains why its location is unknown (due to its history).


text:
AUGUSTA AMÉLIE MAXIMILIENNE JACQUELINE BONAPARTE (9 November 1836 – 29 March 1900) was a French-Italian Napoleonic princess.

Biography

Augusta was born at Villa Bonaparte in Rome, the daughter of Charles Lucien Bonaparte, 2nd prince of Canino and Musignano, and Zénaïde Bonaparte, who had been Infanta of Spain as the daughter of Joseph Bonaparte.

She was privately educated. In 1855, on the occasion of her engagement to her cousin , prince of Prossedi, her father, the famed ornithologist, named the emerald dove of the Nicobar Islands in her honour. The _Chalcophaps indica augusta_ (Bonaparte, 1855) is also known as _Princess Gabrielli's dove_.[1] A few months later, on 1 February 1856, Augusta and Placido (himself the son of princess Charlotte Bonaparte Gabrielli) celebrated their marriage in the Chapelle Impériale of the Palais des Tuileries in Paris. Napoleon III and empress Eugénie attended the ceremony.[2]

Placido and Augusta were included in the _Famille civile_ of the emperor and in the civil list, receiving a yearly allowance of 6,250 francs from the French Government.[3] They resided in Paris at 142, Rue de Grenelle and frequently attended events hosted by the Imperial family. Augusta was particularly attached to the Prince Impérial and upon his death in 1879 received several of his personal belongings from empress Eugénie.

After 1870, Placido and Augusta, who had no children, moved to Rome. In the newly-proclaimed Italian capital Augusta was renown for her dedication to the poor and for the charity fairs she organized at her residence at Palazzo di Monte Giordano.[4] She also helped the rural populations of her husband's fiefs in southern Latium (Prossedi, Roccasecca and Pisterzo). Nowadays, Prossedi's main road is dedicated to her as _via Principessa Augusta Gabrielli_. She also worked at the catalogue of her husband's family painting collections and decorated several rooms of her Roman residence: when a new tower was added to the palace, Placido dedicated it to her as _Torre Augusta_. She also hosted her brother, cardinal Lucien Bonaparte at Palazzo Gabrielli, where he died in 1895. When the building was sold in 1888, most furnishings were donated to the couple's cousin Giuseppe Primoli and are now included in the collections of the Museo Napoleonico in Rome. The donations included her mother-in-law's portrait by Jean-Baptiste Wicar (_Carlotta Bonaparte Gabrielli as a young peasant woman_).[5]

Augusta's last years were affected by poor health and she died in Rome aged 63. She was buried in Prossedi in a chapel decorated by her nephew count Napoleone Parisani.

[1] Bo Beolens, Michael Watkins and Michael Grayson. The eponym dictionary of birds. Bloomsbury Publishing, London, 2014

[2] L'ami de la religion. Journal et revue écclésiastique politique et litteraire. Tome 171. Paris, De Soye et Bouchet imprimeurs, 1856

[3] Ernest Alfred Vizetelly. The court of the Tuileries, 1852–1870: its organization, chief personages, splendour, frivolity, and downfall. Chatto & Windus, 1907

[4] Gabriele d'Annunzio. Le cronache de “La Tribuna”. R. Puletti (editor), Bologna, Massimiliano Boni Editore, 1992–1993

[5] Museo Napoleonico, Rome. Room XI. http://en.museonapoleonico.it/collezioni/percorsi_per_sale/sala_xi_carlo_luciano_e_zenaide_bonaparte

title: Augusta Bonaparte Gabrielli

question: What name did Charles Lucien Bonaparte give the emerald dove of the Nicobar Islands in honour of his daughter?

answer: Chalcophaps indica Augusta (Bonaparte, 1855), also known as Princess Gabrielli's dove.

question: What is the Famille civil?

answer: It is not stated.

question: Write a ~4 sentence summary.

answer: This is a biography of Augusta Bonaparte, who married her cousin, the prince of Prossedi. The couple were included in the Famille civile of the emperor and the civil list, receiving a yearly allowance of 6,250 francs from the French Government. The couple moved to Rome later on in life, and Augusta was well known for her dedication to the poor and the charity fairs she organised at her residence. She had no children with her spouse, and she spent her last years in poor health, which eventually claimed her life at the age of 63.


text:
ANTHONY MICHAEL PERCIVAL SMITH (called Michael; 5 September 192427 September 2013) was Archdeacon of Maidstone from 1979 until 30 September 1989.[1]

Percival Smith was educated at Shrewsbury and then served in the Rifle Brigade from 1942 to 1946. When peace returned he continued his education at Gonville and Caius College, Cambridge and Westcott House, Cambridge. He was ordained deacon in 1950, and priest in 1951.[2] After a curacy at Holy Trinity, Leamington he was Domestic Chaplain to the Archbishop of Canterbury from 1953 to 1957. He held incumbencies at Upper Norwood (1957–1966), Yeovil (1966–1972) and Addiscombe (1972–1979).[3]

[1] _Church news._ The Times (London, England), Tuesday, May 02, 1989; pg. 19; Issue 63383

[2] _Crockford's Clerical Directory 1975-76_ London: OUP, 1976

[3] ‘PERCIVAL SMITH, Ven. (Anthony) Michael’, Who Was Who, A & C Black, an imprint of Bloomsbury Publishing plc, 1920–2016; online edn, Oxford University Press, 2016 ; online edn, April 2016 [http://www.ukwhoswho.com/view/article/oupww/whowaswho/U30556, accessed 25 Dec 2016]

title: Michael Percival Smith

question: Who was Anthony Michael Percival Smith?

answer: Archdeacon of Maidstone from 1979 until 30 September 1989

question: What is an Archdeacon?

answer: the article does not answer this question

question: Where was Anthony Michael Percival Smith educated?

answer: Shresbury

question: What is a Domestic Chaplain?

answer: the article does not answer this question

question: Write a ~1 sentence summary.

answer: Anthony Michael Percival Smith was Archdeacon of Maidstone from 1979 until 30 September 1989.


text: The Creator’s creator creation created a creator of their own. The Creator’s creator was outraged to find out that the creation they created was not praising a Creator they created but a Creator of who the creation created. The creation created a Creator instead of praising the Creator of their creator created because the creation wanted to create a Creator where their creator did not create and create a creator who is able to create more than their creator’s Creator. The creator of the creation decided they should destroy the creation with their Creator to recreate a creation where they will Praise a Creator they created.

title: The Creator

question: Whos is the narrator?

answer: Unclear

question: Where does the story take place?

answer: Unclear

question: Who is the Creator?

answer: Purposefully made confusing, unclear.

question: Did the creator create the Creator?

answer: Apparently.

question: Write a ~2 sentence summary.

answer: The creator of creation was unhappy that they created a creation that didn't praise the Creator, but rather a creator they created. They decided to destroy creation and create a creation that praises the creator that created creation.


text:
"They're made out of meat."
"Meat?"
"Meat. They're made out of meat."
"Meat?"
"There's no doubt about it. We picked up several from different parts of the planet, took them aboard our recon vessels, and probed them all the way through. They're completely meat."
"That's impossible. What about the radio signals? The messages to the stars?"
"They use the radio waves to talk, but the signals don't come from them. The signals come from machines."
"So who made the machines? That's who we want to contact."
"They made the machines. That's what I'm trying to tell you. Meat made the machines."
"That's ridiculous. How can meat make a machine? You're asking me to believe in sentient meat."
"I'm not asking you, I'm telling you. These creatures are the only sentient race in that sector and they're made out of meat."
"Maybe they're like the orfolei. You know, a carbon-based intelligence that goes through a meat stage."
"Nope. They're born meat and they die meat. We studied them for several of their life spans, which didn't take long. Do you have any idea what's the life span of meat?"
"Spare me. Okay, maybe they're only part meat. You know, like the weddilei. A meat head with an electron plasma brain inside."
"Nope. We thought of that, since they do have meat heads, like the weddilei. But I told you, we probed them. They're meat all the way through."
"No brain?"
"Oh, there's a brain all right. It's just that the brain is made out of meat! That's what I've been trying to tell you."
"So ... what does the thinking?"
"You're not understanding, are you? You're refusing to deal with what I'm telling you. The brain does the thinking. The meat."
"Thinking meat! You're asking me to believe in thinking meat!"
"Yes, thinking meat! Conscious meat! Loving meat. Dreaming meat. The meat is the whole deal! Are you beginning to get the picture or do I have to start all over?"
"Omigod. You're serious then. They're made out of meat."
"Thank you. Finally. Yes. They are indeed made out of meat. And they've been trying to get in touch with us for almost a hundred of their years."
"Omigod. So what does this meat have in mind?"
"First it wants to talk to us. Then I imagine it wants to explore the Universe, contact other sentiences, swap ideas and information. The usual."
"We're supposed to talk to meat."
"That's the idea. That's the message they're sending out by radio. 'Hello. Anyone out there. Anybody home.' That sort of thing."
"They actually do talk, then. They use words, ideas, concepts?" "Oh, yes. Except they do it with meat."
"I thought you just told me they used radio."
"They do, but what do you think is on the radio? Meat sounds. You know how when you slap or flap meat, it makes a noise? They talk by flapping their meat at each other. They can even sing by squirting air through their meat."
"Omigod. Singing meat. This is altogether too much. So what do you advise?"
"Officially or unofficially?"
"Both."
"Officially, we are required to contact, welcome and log in any and all sentient races or multibeings in this quadrant of the Universe, without prejudice, fear or favor. Unofficially, I advise that we erase the records and forget the whole thing."
"I was hoping you would say that."
"It seems harsh, but there is a limit. Do we really want to make contact with meat?"
"I agree one hundred percent. What's there to say? 'Hello, meat. How's it going?' But will this work? How many planets are we dealing with here?"
"Just one. They can travel to other planets in special meat containers, but they can't live on them. And being meat, they can only travel through C space. Which limits them to the speed of light and makes the possibility of their ever making contact pretty slim. Infinitesimal, in fact."
"So we just pretend there's no one home in the Universe."
"That's it."
"Cruel. But you said it yourself, who wants to meet meat? And the ones who have been aboard our vessels, the ones you probed? You're sure they won't remember?"
"They'll be considered crackpots if they do. We went into their heads and smoothed out their meat so that we're just a dream to them."
"A dream to meat! How strangely appropriate, that we should be meat's dream."
"And we marked the entire sector unoccupied."
"Good. Agreed, officially and unofficially. Case closed. Any others? Anyone interesting on that side of the galaxy?"
"Yes, a rather shy but sweet hydrogen core cluster intelligence in a class nine star in G445 zone. Was in contact two galactic rotations ago, wants to be friendly again."
"They always come around."
"And why not? Imagine how unbearably, how unutterably cold the Universe would be if one were all alone ..."

title: Not my story. Can't remember where I found it.

question: Summarize the plot twist in the story.

answer: After extensively probing the human beings, they decide to leave earth alone in the universe. Humans have been trying to make contact with beings in outer space for 100 years. This places the main characters under the official requirement to log in the sentient race found on earth, but they decide not to and leave earth alone while they know that it will be unbearably cold to be alone in the universe.

question: What does the story say about life on other planets?

answer: The main character is delivering a report on presumably the human race on earth that they abducted and probed to determine their biological makeup. They mention other species: The orfolei with a carbon-based intelligence that goes through a meat stage; the weddilei that has a meat head with an electron plasma brain inside; A shy but sweet hydrogen core cluster intelligence that wants to be friendly again. Earth sends messages out trying to contact any other being in space. Officially, the main characters are required to make contact, welcome and log in any and all sentient races or multibeings in this quadrant of the universe without prejudice, fear or favor. But they make the decision to unofficially erase the records and forget the whole thing, leaving earth in the dark.

question: Summarize the meat race described in the story.

answer: The characters on board located earth and abducted and probed humans to determine their biological makeup. After abduction they smoothed the memories from their brains, making it seem like dreams. Their conclusion is that humans are made of sentient meat with a brain made of meat and who makes sounds by slapping meat. Their lifetimes are bound by that of meat and they can only travel to other planets in special meat containers through C space limited by the speed of light. This makes their chances of reaching any other sentient species pretty slim where humans have been trying to communicate with outer space for a hundred years.

question: Summarize the species discussing humans.


text:
_KATISSA_ is a genus of anyphaenid sac spiders first described by Antônio Brescovit in 1997.[1]

Species

it contains ten species:[2]

-   _Katissa delicatula_ (Banks, 1909) – Costa Rica
-   _Katissa elegans_ (Banks, 1909) – Costa Rica
-   _Katissa guyasamini_ Dupérré & Tapia, 2016 – Ecuador
-   _Katissa kurusiki_ Dupérré & Tapia, 2016 – Ecuador
-   _Katissa lycosoides_ (Chickering, 1937) – Panama
-   _Katissa puyu_ Dupérré & Tapia, 2016 – Ecuador
-   _Katissa simplicipalpis_ (Simon, 1898) – Lesser Antilles, Panama, Peru
-   _Katissa tamya_ Dupérré & Tapia, 2016 – Ecuador
-   _Katissa yaya_ Dupérré & Tapia, 2016 – Ecuador
-   _Katissa zimarae_ (Reimoser, 1939) – Costa Rica

[1]

[2]

title: Katissa

question: What is Katissa?

answer: It is a genus of anyphaenid sac spiders.

question: Who first described the spider?

answer: Antônio Brescovit

question: Which species are found in Costa Rica?

answer: Katissa delicatula, Katissa elegans, and Katissa zamrae.

question: Which species are found in Panama?

answer: Katissa lycosoides and Katissa simplicipalpis.

question: Write a ~3 sentence summary.

answer: Katissa is a genus of anyphaenid sac spiders. They were first described by Antônio Brescovit in 1997. The genus contains ten species.


text: I awoke to a slight peculiarity; a bluebird rat tap tapping on my window. My eyes graced the light and I found myself in a haze as I stared at the creature and greeted it with my yawn. “Hello bluebird.” The bed was warm and I was comforted by a recurrent dream before waking. Every night I would see the blue streams behind my childhood home grace the red Georgia banks and meander into the orange sunlight. I would follow the current for as long as it would take me. It’s a funny thing, dreams. They give you no collateral and yet you feel your world surely busting at its seams; life, in its most primitive light. I would run and get winded and the foliage would blow with the cardinal winds and I was happy. And then, like today, I awaken to find myself alone. My legs sent dust roaring into the air as they swung into the side of the bed. I was up and it was a new day.  I walked downstairs to see my caretaker, Susanne, making me coffee and grits. I was hungry. So hungry. My house is far too big and I am beginning to regret accepting this large inheritance. It has been five years since she’s been gone; it has been five long years and I still haven’t collected myself. I remember watching the sun go down with her in my arms; we would sit in my grandmother’s rickety swinging bench in the back woods. The sun would set and we would swing the chair with gentle nudges. Crick. Crick. Crick. The small pond would illuminate and we were happy. Her father was a bloodhound from the locomotive business; although, she had detached herself completely from her family. They were old money and she somehow squeezed enough money out of that old prick to last us a lifetime. At the wedding he walked up to me and said, “Don’t fuck this up.” His smile was gleaming as he turned around and reassured everybody that he was a good and noble man. The entire family blamed me when she died. “Darin, Darin!” Susanne had to yell because I had no hearing out of my right ear. I had seen the bluebird again; it had brought a plump worm to feed its children outside the window sill. “Eat your grits hon, Dr. Chung will be here soon.” I slurped up the grits and walked into the living room and lied down. My head fucking killed. I left my fifth upstairs. I have become accustomed with leaving a bottle close to my bed in case my past meets me in my nightmares.

title: Critique the beginning of my story? (short)

question: What is the narrator's relation to Susanne?

answer: Susanne is the narrator's caretaker.

question: Whose wedding is the narrator attending?

answer: It is her own wedding.

question: Whose inheritance did the narrator inherit?

answer: The narrator inherits their grandmother's fortune, presumably.

question: Which industry was the narrator's father in?

answer: The locomotive business.

question: Write a ~4 sentence summary.

answer: Darin, the narrator, inherits a large sum of money. However she was completely detached from her family. She finds herself alone with her caretaker, Susanne, living in a large house. She is beginning to regret accepting the inheritance.


text:
QIHE STATION () is a station of Line 2, Suzhou Rail Transit. The station is located in Xiangcheng District of Suzhou. It started service in September 24, 2016, when Line 2 extension started service.[1]

[1]

title: Qihe station

question: What line is Qihe Station on?

answer: Qihe Station is on Line 2.

question: When did Qihe Station begin service?

answer: Qihe Station begun service on September 24, 2016.

question: Where is Qihe Station located?

answer: Qihe Station is loacted in Xiangcheng District of Suzhou.

question: What rail service is Qihe Station a part of?

answer: Qihe Station is a part of Suzhou Rail Transit.

question: Write a ~2 sentence summary.

answer: Qihe Station is a part of Suzhou Rail Transit. It is located in the Xiangcheng District and has been operating since 2016.


text:
[Francesco Compagna] FRANCESCO COMPAGNA (Naples, 31 July 31 1921 – Capri, 24 July 24 1982) was an Italian politician, journalist and academic.

He founded the magazine “Nord e Sud” in 1954 and also collaborated with Il Mondo directed by Mario Pannunzio.

Former member of the Italian Liberal Party and the Radical Party, Compagna was elected MP with the Italian Republican Party in the fifth (1968–1972), sixth (1972–1976), seventh (1976–1979) and eighth (1979–1983) legislature.

He served as Minister of Public Works in the Andreotti V (1979) and in the Cossiga II (1980) governments and as Minister of Merchant Navy in the Forlani government (1980–1981).

He also held the position of Undersecretary of State for Extraordinary Interventions in Southern Italy in the Moro IV government (1974–1976) and of Secretary of the Council of Ministers in the Spadolini I government (1981–1982).

He died on Capri in 1982 due to a heart attack.

Publications

A principally political writer, he published the following volumes:

-   _Labirinto meridionale_, Edizioni Neri Pozza
-   _I terroni in città_, Edizioni Laterza
-   _L'Europa delle regioni_, ESI-Edizioni Scientifiche Italiane
-   _La politica delle città_, Laterza
-   _Le regioni più deboli_, Etas-Kompass
-   _Meridionalismo liberale_, Riccardo Ricciardi editore
-   _Il Mezzogiorno nella crisi_, Edizioni della Voce.
-   _Mezzogiorno in salita_, Editoriale Nuova

title: Francesco Compagna

question: Who is Francesco Compagna?

answer: He founded 'Nord e Sud' magazine in 1954 and was a former member of the Italian Liberal and Radical parties. Principally he's considered a political writer.

question: How long was his political career?

answer: 1968 - 1982 (14 years). It ended because he died of a heart attack.

question: Write a ~1 sentence summary.

answer: A page for Italian writer and politician Francesco Compagna.


text:
UNITED NATIONS SECURITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION 2334 was adopted on 23 December 2016. It concerns the Israeli settlements in “Palestinian territories occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem”. The resolution passed in a 14–0 vote by members of the U.N. Security Council (UNSC). Four members with United Nations Security Council veto power, China, France, Russia, and the United Kingdom, voted for the resolution, but the United States abstained.[1]

The resolution states that Israel's settlement activity constitutes a “flagrant violation” of international law and has “no legal validity”. It demands that Israel stop such activity and fulfill its obligations as an occupying power under the Fourth Geneva Convention.[2][3]

It was the first UNSC resolution to pass regarding Israel and the Palestine territories since Resolution 1860 in 2009,[4] and the first to address the issue of Israeli settlements with such specificity since Resolution 465 in 1980.[5][6] While the resolution did not include any sanction or coercive measure and was adopted under the non-binding Chapter VI of the United Nations Charter, Israeli newspaper _Haaretz_ stated it “may have serious ramifications for Israel in general and specifically for the settlement enterprise” in the medium-to-long term.[7]

The text was welcomed by much of the international community in the following days. According to Murray McCully, former Minister of Foreign Affairs for New Zealand, Resolution 2334 reinforces the international community's commitment to a negotiated outcome [8] while former Canadian ambassador Paul Heinbecker noted that, Israeli and Palestinian narratives notwithstanding, resolution 2334 “reflects what the world thinks. It does not constitute a minority view or even a very divided view. If this resolution of the 15-member UN Security Council were put to a vote in the 193-member General Assembly, the outcome would scarcely be different.”[9] In response, the government of Israel retaliated with a series of diplomatic actions against some members of the Security Council[10][11] and accused the administration of U.S. President Barack Obama of having secretly orchestrated the passage of the resolution. Palestine's representatives stated this was an opportunity to end the occupation and establish a Palestinian state to live side by side with the state of Israel on the 1967 line.[12]

Background

[Parts of the West Bank allocated to the settlements, as of January 2012 (in pink and purple color).] Israeli settlements are Jewish[13][14] Israeli civilian communities built on Palestinian lands occupied by Israel since the 1967 Six-Day War.[15] Resolution 2334 concerns such settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem.The Fourth Geneva Convention makes it illegal for nations to move populations and establish settlements in territories acquired in a war, and an overwhelming number of countries consider the Israeli settlements to be illegal on that basis.[16][17] Israel states that these are not “occupied” but “disputed” territories because “there were no established sovereigns in the West Bank or Gaza Strip prior to the Six Day War”.[18] This argument was rejected by the International Court of Justice in 2004.[19]

The UN Security Council previously addressed Israeli settlements in UN Security Council Resolution 446 and Resolution 465. The Council also endorsed the Road map for peace, which required a freeze to settlement expansion in Resolution 1515.

In February 2011, during Barack Obama's first administration, the US used its veto power to block a similar UN Security Council resolution[20][21] and settlement activity has grown substantially. At least 100,000 settlers have been added since Obama took office,[22] and The Quartet report in July 2016 said that 570,000 Israelis lived in the settlements.[23] Prior to voting on the resolution, diplomats predicted that US frustration with the growth of settlements, as well as the poor relationship between President Obama and the Israeli Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu, might cause the US to abstain, rather than veto the resolution.[24] Netanyahu was confident that Israel's diplomatic standing was on the rise, and that the world was no longer very interested in the Palestinian issue.[25] Until the U.S. abstention led to the passage of UNSCR 2334, Obama had been unique among American Presidents for not allowing any resolution critical of Israel to pass through the Security Council.[26]

Content

[Resolution text] The resolution states that all measures aimed at changing the demographic composition and status of Palestinian territories occupied by Israel, including construction and expansion of settlements, transfer of Israeli settlers, confiscation of land, demolition of homes and displacement of Palestinian civilians are in violation of international humanitarian law, Israel's obligation as the occupying Power according to the Fourth Geneva Convention, and previous resolutions.[27]

The resolution also condemns all acts of violence against civilians, including terrorism, provocation and destruction.[28] According to the _New York Times_, this is “aimed at Palestinian leaders, whom Israel accuses of encouraging attacks on Israeli civilians”.[29] It reiterates support for the two-state solution and noted that settlement activities are “imperilling” its viability.[30]

The document also “_underlines_” that the UN Security Council “will not recognize any changes to 4 June 1967 lines, including with regard to Jerusalem, other than those agreed by the parties through negotiations”; and "_calls"_ upon all states “to distinguish, in their relevant dealings, between the territory of the State of Israel and the territories occupied since 1967.”[31]

Passage

The draft was originally presented by Egypt on the basis of a document prepared by British legal and diplomatic figures working together with the Palestinians,[32] with Britain regarded as the key player in formulating the resolution and pressing for a vote.[33]

High pressures were exerted to avoid the vote. On 22 December, United States President-elect Donald Trump called on Egyptian president Abdel Fattah el-Sisi to withdraw the proposal,[34] and Egypt withdrew the nomination after what its ambassador called an “intense pressure”.[35] Then on 23 December, the draft was taken up and proposed again by Malaysia, New Zealand, Senegal and Venezuela.[36] Israel unsuccessfully pressured New Zealand to withdraw its support, with Netanyahu telling Foreign Minister Murray McCully that support for the proposal would be considered by Israel as a “declaration of war”.[37] Britain encouraged New Zealand to keep pushing for a vote. Following a telephone conversation between Netanyahu and Vladimir Putin, the Russian ambassador to the UN Vitaly Churkin requested that the vote be postponed until after Christmas. His proposal failed to gain any support.[38]

The resolution was passed 14 to 0; all members voted for the resolution except for the United States, which abstained.[39] The United States Ambassador Samantha Power explained the abstention by saying that on one hand the United Nations often unfairly targets Israel, that there are important issues unaddressed by the resolution, and that the US did not agree with every word in the text; while on the other hand the resolution reflects facts on the ground, that it reaffirms the consensus that the settlement activity is not legal, and that the settlement activity has gotten “so much worse” as to endanger the viability of the two-state solution.[40][41][42]

Media and observers contrasted the US decision to abstain with its long-standing tradition of vetoing resolutions targeting Israel over the issues of settlements.[43]

Reactions

By Israel

The resolution was particularly controversial in Israel, given its criticism of the Israeli government. The Israeli government recalled its ambassadors from New Zealand and Senegal (Israel does not have diplomatic relations with Venezuela or Malaysia).[44] Netanyahu declared that nations acting against Israel's interests will pay a diplomatic and economic price, and instructed the Foreign Ministry to cancel all aid programs to Senegal, some involving programmes to alleviate poverty, in response to the resolution's passage.[45][46] Israel also cancelled the planned visits of the Senegalese Foreign Minister to Israel, and other visits of non-resident ambassadors of Senegal and New Zealand.[47] A planned visit of the Ukrainian prime minister was also cancelled by Israel.[48][49] Israel also summoned and reprimanded the ambassadors of the United States, which abstained on the resolution, and ten countries which voted in favor of it.[50]

Netanyahu also declared that: 'The resolution that was passed by the U.N. yesterday is part of the swan song of the old world that is biased against Israel' and questioned the Security Council's priorities given the mounting fatalities in the wars in Syria, the Sudan, and elsewhere in the Middle East.[51] Israeli opposition leader Isaac Herzog responded that Netanyahu had 'declared war this evening on the world, on the United States, on Europe, and is trying to calm us with conceit',[52] although Herzog also condemned the UN resolution.[53]

During the meeting over the resolution, the Israeli ambassador Danny Danon denounced members who had approved it, comparing it to banning the French from “building in Paris”.[54] David Keyes, a spokesperson for Netanyahu, said President Barack Obama was behind the resolution and helped with both “formulating and pushing” it.[55] However, Gerard van Bohemen, New Zealand's ambassador to the United Nations disputed this notion by saying that “we did not discuss the substance of the resolution at any time with the United States”, and further noting that none of the other Security Council members were aware that the United States was planning to abstain.[56]

Shortly after the resolution's passage, the Israeli government announced it will not comply with its terms.[57] The office of the Israeli Prime Minister stated that “the Obama administration not only failed to protect Israel against this gang-up at the UN, it colluded with it behind the scenes”, adding: “Israel looks forward to working with President-elect Trump and with all our friends in Congress, Republicans and Democrats alike, to negate the harmful effects of this absurd resolution.”[58]

The Israeli government also fears that the resolution's call to distinguish between the territories of Israel and the occupied territories will encourage the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement.[59] Netanyahu said that Israel has to reevaluate its ties with the UN following the adaptation by the Security Council.[60]

Days after the UN resolution, Avigdor Lieberman, Israel's defense minister urged Jews to leave France and move to Israel.[61][62][63]

On 6 January 2017, due to the passing of the UN Resolution, the Israeli government withdrew its annual dues from the organization, which totaled $6 million in United States dollars.[64]

By Palestine

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas said, “The voting in favour of the resolution has not resolved the Palestinian cause, but defined it.” He added, “The world said its word that settlement in the Palestinian territories occupied in 1967, including East Jerusalem, is illegal”.[65]

He asked Israel “to sit together on the negotiation table to discuss all the outstanding issues between us and resolve it with good intentions”, adding: “We are neighbors on this holy land and we want peace.”

Including a reference to the Arab Peace Initiative, he stated: “You (Israel) have your state, and we can have our state, and then we can live side-by-side in peace and security.” He added, “If you accept, then there are 57 Arab and Islamic countries will be ready to recognize you.”[66]

Chief Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat said: “this is a day of victory for international law, a victory for civilised language and negotiation and a total rejection of extremist forces in Israel. The international community has told the people of Israel that the way to security and peace is not going to be done through occupation, but rather through peace, ending the occupation and establishing a Palestinian state to live side by side with the state of Israel on the 1967 line.”[67]

Reactions by Security Council states

-

        The Chinese Deputy Permanent Representative to the UN, Ambassador Wu Haitao, welcomed the resolution and said it reflects the common aspiration of the international community.[68]

-

        The French Ambassador to the UN, François Delattre, said the resolution's adoption is “an important and historic event” and noted it was the first time that the Security Council had clearly stated the obvious, that settlement activities undermined a two-state solution.[69]

-

        Prime Minister Najib Razak described the vote as “a victory to the people of Palestine”.[70]

-

        Foreign Minister Murray McCully stated that “we have been very open about our view that the [UN Security Council] should be doing more to support the Middle East peace process and the position we adopted today is totally in line with our long established policy on the Palestinian question” and that “the vote today should not come as a surprise to anyone and we look forward to continuing to engage constructively with all parties on this issue”.[71][72]

-

        The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Russia issued a statement which said that “the Russian Federation voted for it because the resolution is based on tested formulas reflecting the general view of the international community, which have been reaffirmed many times, on the illegality of Israeli settlement plans in the Palestinian territory. (...) Our experience shows convincingly that a two-state solution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict is only possible through direct talks between Palestinians and Israelis without any preconditions.”[73][74]

-

        After several retribution measures were announced by Israel, Senegal Ministry of Foreign Affairs stated that his country “steadily supported the research of a fair and equitable solution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.”[75]

-

        The Spanish Ambassador to the UN and incumbent President of the UN Security Council, Román Oyarzun Marchesi, welcomed the resolution; he noted that Spain had always affirmed the illegality of the settlements and said the resolution was consistent with Spain's position.[76]

-

        The British Ambassador to the UN, Matthew Rycroft, welcomed the resolution and said it was a “clear reinforcement” of international belief in a two-state solution, that Israel's settlement expansion was “corroding the possibility” of a lasting peace in the Middle East and that “the settlement expansion is illegal.”[77][78] In reaction to John Kerry's speech, a spokesperson for the Prime Minister rebuked Kerry for focusing on the single issue of Israeli settlements and not the whole conflict, and said: “We do not... believe that the way to negotiate peace is by focusing on only one issue, in this case the construction of settlements, when clearly the conflict between the Israelis and Palestinians is so deeply complex.”[79] The spokesperson continued, in reaction to Kerry's statement about the makeup of the Netanyahu government, that “...we do not believe that it is appropriate to attack the composition of the democratically-elected government of an ally.”[80]

-

        United States Secretary of State John Kerry said the United States could not “stand in the way of a resolution at the United Nations that makes clear that both sides must act now to preserve the possibility of peace” and said the resolution “rightly condemns violence and incitement and settlement activity.”[81] In a later speech he said that the Israeli Netanyahu government's agenda is driven by “extreme elements,” that its policies are leading “towards one state” and that "if the choice is one state, Israel can either be Jewish or Democratic – it cannot be both.[82][83] Kerry also said a peace agreement must be based on the 1967 lines, that all citizens must enjoy equal rights, that occupation must end, that the Palestinian refugee issue must be resolved, and that Jerusalem must be the capital of both states. He also said that the Security Council resolution “reiterates what has long been the overwhelming consensus international view on settlements” and that “if we had vetoed this resolution, the United States would have been giving license to further unfettered settlement construction that we fundamentally oppose.”[84]

-

        The Venezuelan Ambassador to the UN called the resolution's passage historic.[85]

-

        Ukraine's ambassador to the United Nations Volodymyr Yelchenko compared Israel's settlement of the West Bank to the Russian occupation of Crimea.[86] The Ukrainian Foreign Ministry stated that the Resolution's text was balanced: Israel was to desist from settlements, and Palestinians were to adopt measures to counter terrorism.[87]

Reactions by other states

-

        Australia was one of the few countries to support the position of the Israeli government, implying that had they been on the UN Security Council they most likely would have voted against the resolution. Foreign Minister Julie Bishop stated that, “In voting at the UN, the Coalition Government has consistently not supported one-sided resolutions targeting Israel”. Bishop also distanced the Australian government from remarks made by US Secretary of State John Kerry and President Barack Obama.[88]

-

        Foreign Minister and Deputy Prime Minister Didier Reynders welcomed the resolution, stating that “Belgium fully shares the position of the international community expressed in this resolution” and that “the settlement policy of the territories occupied by Israel is illegal, and its continuation seriously jeopardizes the possibility of a two-state solution.”[89]

-

        Foreign Minister and Chairman-in-Office of the OSCE Frank-Walter Steinmeier welcomed the resolution and said it confirms what has long been the position of the German government, stating that the Israeli settlement of occupied territory is an obstacle to peace and a two-state solution.[90] He further said that “a democratic Israel is only achievable through a two-state-solution.”[91] Steinmeier later praised the speech by John Kerry which outlined the United States' position on the Israeli–Palestinian conflict and endorsed Kerry's principles for a solution to the conflict.[92]

-

        Iranian Foreign Ministry Spokesman Bahram Qassemi welcomed the resolution and asked “the international community, particularly the United Nations,” to take “effective and fundamental steps in this regard after more than seven decades.”[93]

-

        Foreign Minister Børge Brende welcomed the resolution and said it must be the basis for a solution to the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. He said that “it is important that Israel complies with it, because the settlements are in violation of international law”.[94]

-

        Foreign Minister and Deputy Prime Minister Margot Wallström welcomed the resolution and said it confirms the position of both the EU and Sweden on the continued Israeli settlement of the occupied West Bank.[95]

-

        The Foreign Ministry welcomed the vote in a statement and urged Israel to abide by the Security Council decision and to halt all settlement activities in the Palestinian areas.[96]

By non-state parties

International human rights organizations

Amnesty International said the “decision to finally pass a resolution condemning illegal Israeli settlements is a welcome step,” that “the resolution includes a crucial demand that the Israeli authorities immediately halt all settlement activities in the Occupied Palestinian Territories. Such activities constitute a flagrant violation of international humanitarian law and, according to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, constitute a war crime. We also welcome the resolution’s recognition of the illegality of Israeli settlements” and that the “Security Council must now ensure this resolution is respected.”[97]

Human Rights Watch stated that the resolution rebuked those looking to reverse the illegality of Israeli settlements in the West Bank and commended the countries who pushed the resolution forward. It advised the international community to remain resolute in its condemnation of illegal Israeli actions in the Occupied Territories and called for the dismantling of the settlements.[98][99]

Debate in the United States

Shortly after the resolution passed, U.S. President-elect Donald Trump tweeted, “as to the UN, things will be different after 20 Jan..”[100] Later he added: “We cannot continue to let Israel be treated with such total disdain and disrespect. They used to have a great friend in the U.S., but not anymore. The beginning of the end was the horrible Iran deal, and now this (U.N.)! Stay strong Israel, 20 January is fast approaching!”.[101] The passage, and the United States' decision to abstain rather than veto it, is controversial in the United States, which has used its veto power 42 times to protect Israel, including with respect to a very similar resolution in 2011.[102] In reaction to the United States' abstention, Speaker of the House Paul Ryan stated that the abstention was “absolutely shameful” and a “blow to peace”.[103] Incoming Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer said it was “extremely frustrating, disappointing and confounding” that the Obama administration failed to veto the UN's vote.[104] The American organization J Street said “the resolution is consistent with long-standing bipartisan American policy, which includes strong support for the two-state solution, and clear opposition to irresponsible and damaging actions, including Palestinian incitement and terror and Israeli settlement expansion and home demolitions.”[105] The United States House of Representatives, on the other hand, voted 342–80 to condemn the UN Resolution on 5 January 2017.[106][107]

Ramifications

For the settlements

According to the Israeli newspaper _Haaretz_, there are no short-term practical ramifications for Israel with regards to the settlement activities. The Fourth Geneva Convention already makes it illegal for nations to move populations and establish settlements in territories acquired in a war, and an overwhelming number of countries already consider the Israeli settlements to be illegal on that basis.[108] In addition, the resolution does not include any sanctions or coercive measures against those who violated it.[109] However, in the medium or long term, the resolution might influence how the International Criminal Court in The Hague treats lawsuits filed against Israel, and may create a justification for countries and individual organizations to impose sanctions on the settlements.[110] According to Ynet, the resolution makes it possible to file lawsuits against Israel and Israeli officials as well as Israeli citizens involved in settlement activity at the International Criminal Court and for sanctions to be imposed on Israel both by the UN and by individual countries.[111]

Diplomacy

The Israeli government was said to be mulling retaliation, by a number of diplomatic and financial moves, against a number of nations which had sponsored or supported the resolution. The proposed measures consist of cutting funding to five UN institutions; blocking work visas for employees of the said agencies; expelling Chris Gunness, the spokesman for UNRWA; cancelling Israeli aid to Senegal directed at alleviating poverty; and cancelling a scheduled visit to Israel by Ukraine's Prime Minister Volodymyr Groysman. In addition, the Israeli Government also recalled their Ambassadors from Senegal and New Zealand.[112]

UN Resolution 2334 had significant repercussions for Israel–New Zealand relations. Besides withdrawing its Ambassador, Israel permanently downgraded relations with New Zealand, leaving a charge d'affairs in charge of the Israeli Embassy in Wellington.[113] Relations between New Zealand and Israel were subsequently restored in June 2017 after prolonged back-channel communications between the two governments. Prime Minister Bill English also penned a letter expressing regret at the damage caused to bilateral relations as a result of New Zealand proposing UN Resolution 2334.[114][115]

Quarterly reports

The resolution “Requests the Secretary-General to report to the Council every three months on the implementation of the provisions of the present resolution;”[116][117] In the first,[118] delivered verbally at a security council meeting on 24 March 2017, United Nations Special Coordinator for the Middle East Peace Process, Nickolay Mladenov, noted that Resolution 2334 called on Israel to take steps to cease all settlement activity in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, that “no such steps have been taken during the reporting period” and that instead, there had been a marked increase in statements, announcements and decisions related to construction and expansion.[119][120][121]

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6] Ravid, Barak. “Analysis Understanding the UN Resolution on Israeli Settlements: What Are the Immediate Ramifications?”, _Haaretz_ (24 December 2016): “But it is the first to deal so specifically with the settlements in over 35 years. The previous such resolution, Resolution 465, was adopted by the Security Council in March 1980 (you can read it in full here). That being said, since 1980, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has undergone dramatic changes, the extent of the Israeli settlement enterprise has grown dramatically, and international community's focus on the settlements as a threat to the viability of the two-state solution has also increased markedly.”

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10]

[11]

[12]

[13] Oded Haklai, 'The Decisive Path of State Indecisiveness: Israeli Settlers in the West Bank in Comparative Perspective,' in Oded Haklai, Neophytos Loizide (eds.), _Settlers in Contested Lands: Territorial Disputes and Ethnic Conflicts_, Stanford University Press 2015 pp. 17–38 p. 19: “the Israel settlers reside almost solely in exclusively Jewish communities (one exception is a small enclave within the city of Hebron).”

[14] Michael Dumper, _Jerusalem Unbound: Geography, History, and the Future of the Holy City_, Columbia University Press 2014 p. 85. “This is despite huge efforts by successive governments to fragment and encircle Palestinian residential areas with exclusively Jewish zones of residence – the settlements.”

[15]

[16]

[17]

[18] Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs, _DISPUTED TERRITORIES- Forgotten Facts About the West Bank and Gaza Strip_, February 2003.

[19] 'Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory,' 9 July 2004.'Secondly, with regard to the Fourth Geneva Convention, the Court takes note that differing views have been expressed by the participants in these proceedings. Israel, contrary to the great majority of the participants, disputes the applicability de jure of the Convention to the Occupied Palestinian Territory. The Court recalls that the Fourth Geneva Convention was ratified by Israel on 6 July 1951 and that Israel is a party to that Convention; that Jordan has also been a party thereto since 29 May 1951; and that neither of the two States has made any reservation that would be pertinent to the present proceedings. The Court observes that the Israeli authorities have indicated on a number of occasions that in fact they generally apply the humanitarian provisions of the Fourth Geneva Convention within the occupied territories. However, according to Israel’s position, that Convention is not applicable de jure within those territories because, under Article 2, paragraph 2, it applies only in the case of occupation of territories falling under the sovereignty of a High Contracting Party involved in an armed conflict. Israel explains that the territories occupied by Israel subsequent to the 1967 conflict had not previously fallen under Jordanian sovereignty. The Court notes that, according to the first paragraph of Article 2 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, when two conditions are fulfilled, namely that there exists an armed conflict (whether or not a state of war has been recognized), and that the conflict has arisen between two contracting parties, then the Convention applies, in particular, in any territory occupied in the course of the conflict by one of the contracting parties. The object of the second paragraph of Article 2, which refers to “occupation of the territory of a High Contracting Party”, is not to restrict the scope of application of the Convention, as defined by the first paragraph, by excluding therefrom territories not falling under the sovereignty of one of the contracting parties, but simply to making it clear that, even if occupation effected during the conflict met no armed resistance, the Convention is still applicable.

[20]

[21]

[22]

[23]

[24]

[25]

[26] Natan Sachs 'What’s new and what’s not in the U.N. resolution on Israeli settlements,' Brookings Institution 26 December 2016:'The U.S. abstention—the focus of a great deal of personal rage against Obama by Netanyahu and others—was not new either. In 1987, the Reagan administration abstained and allowed the passage of UNSCR 605, 14 to 0, which reaffirmed the application of the Geneva Convention (via previous resolutions) and included “Jerusalem” in the “Palestinian and Arab Territories, occupied by Israel since 1967”. Sixteen years later, the George W. Bush administration voted in favor of UNSCR 1515, which called—by endorsing the Roadmap for Peace—for a full settlement freeze, including natural growth. In fact, until this latest resolution, Obama had been the only president not to let a resolution critical of Israeli policy pass in the Security Council.

[27]

[28]

[29]

[30]

[31]

[32]

[33] Barak Ravid,'Britain Criticizes Kerry’s Speech: Settlements Are Not the Only Issue Haaretz 29 December 2016

[34]

[35]

[36]

[37] Barak Ravid, _Britain Pulled the Strings and Netanyahu Warned New Zealand It Was Declaring War: New Details on Israel's Battle Against the UN Vote_, Haaretz, 28 December 2016

[38]

[39]

[40]

[41]

[42]

[43]

[44]

[45] Itamar Eichner and Tova Tzimuki, Israel retaliates for UNSC resolution with series of countermoves Ynet 25 December 2016

[46]

[47] Israeli ambassador recalled from New Zealand after UN resolution, NZ Herald

[48]

[49]

[50]

[51] Netanyahu: It may take time, but resolution will be rescinded _Jerusalem Post_, 25 December 2016.

[52] Peter Baker, 'U.S. Transition Puts Israeli Focus Back on Palestinians,' _The New York Times_, 24 December 2016.

[53]

[54]

[55]

[56]

[57]

[58]

[59]

[60]

[61]

[62]

[63]

[64]

[65]

[66]

[67]

[68]

[69]

[70]

[71]

[72]

[73] Foreign Ministry statement on the adoption of UN Security Council Resolution 2334 regarding Palestinian-Israeli settlement, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Russia

[74] Hana Levi Julian, _Russia: 2-State Solution Only Possible Through Direct Talks_, Jewish Press, 28 December 2016.

[75]

[76]

[77]

[78]

[79] https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-38464800 BBC Downing Street criticises US comments on Israel, 30 December 2016

[80]

[81]

[82]

[83]

[84]

[85]

[86] Sam Sokol, 'Political backlash in Ukraine over vote against Israel at UN,' _The Jewish Chronicle_, 28 December 2016

[87] 'US pressured Ukraine to support the UN Security Council resolution on settlements,' Euro-Asian Jewish Congress, 28 December 2016.

[88]

[89]

[90]

[91]

[92]

[93]

[94]

[95]

[96]

[97]

[98]

[99]

[100]

[101] _[reel.nouvelobs.com/en-direct/a-chaud/31737-israel-trump-donald-trump-israel-tenir-jusqu.html Donald Trump dit à Israël de “tenir bon” jusqu'à son investiture]_, NouvelObs, 28 December 2016.

[102]  Meetings Coverage and Press Releases|url=https://www.un.org/press/en/2011/sc10178.doc.htm%7Cwebsite=www.un.org%7Caccessdate=23 December 2016|date=February 2011}}

[103]

[104]

[105]

[106]

[107]

[108]

[109]

[110]

[111] Itamar Eichner,,'Ramifications of UNSC resolution: Sanctions, boycotts and ICC lawsuits,' Ynet, 24 December 2016.

[112]

[113]

[114]

[115]

[116]

[117]

[118] these reports

[119]

[120]

[121]

question: What is United Nations Security Council Resolution 2334 about?

answer: United Nations Security Council Resolution 2334 is about Israeli settlements in Palestinian territories occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem.

question: How did the United States vote?

answer: The United States abstained.

question: Summarize the content of United Nations Security Council Resolution 2334.

answer: The resolution condemns all acts of violence against civilians and states that all measures aimed at changing the demographic composition and status of Palestinian territories occupied by Israel are in violation of international humanitarian law.

question: Why did not the US vote?

answer: It is not stated but the media say the US has a long-standing tradition of vetoing resolutions targeting Israel over the issues of settlements.

question: Write a ~3 sentence summary.

answer: United Nations Security Council Resolution 2334 was adopted in 2016. It condemns all acts of violence against civilians and states that all measures aimed at changing the demographic composition and status of Palestinian territories occupied by Israel violate international humanitarian law. The US abstained, and the other members of the United Nations Security Council voted for the resolution.


text:
_HANDKEA_ is a genus of puffball mushrooms in the family Agaricaceae. In 1989, German mycologist Hanns Kreisel described the genus _Handkea_ to include species of _Calvatia_ with distinct microscopic features, including a unique type of capillitium (coarse thick-walled hyphae in the gleba), with curvy slits instead of the usual pores.[1] Although accepted by some authors,[2] the genus concept has been rejected by others.[3][4]

Phylogenetic analyses published in 2008 shows that _Handkea_ may be grouped in a clade along with species from several other genera, including _Lycoperdon_, _Vascellum_, _Morganella_, _Bovistella_, and _Calvatia_.[5]

Species

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4] Demoulin V. (1971). “Le genre _Lycoperdon_ en Europe et en Amérique du Nord. Etude taxonomique et phytogéographique”. PhD. thesis, Université de Liège.

[5]

title: Handkea

question: What is Handkea?

answer: A genus of mushrooms.

question: Where is it found?

answer: Germany is presumed but not outright stated.

question: Who first described this genus?

answer: Hanns Kreisel.

question: What year did he describe it?

answer: 1989.

question: Write a ~1 sentence summary.

answer: Handkea is a genus of puffball mushrooms first described by the German mycologist Hanns Kreisel.


text:
FERDINAND DAVID (May 30, 1824 – July 16, 1883) was a building contractor and political figure in Quebec. He represented Montréal-Est in the Legislative Assembly of Quebec from 1871 to 1875 as a Conservative member.

He was born FERDINAND-CONON DAVID in Sault-au-Récollet, Lower Canada, the son of David-Fleury David and Cécile Poitras. He was educated locally, also learning the trade of carpentry, and later worked as a painter and coach-builder in Montreal. David then worked as a building contractor before joining a firm with Sévère Rivard, lawyer Gustave-Adolphe Drolet and architect Michel Laurent which specialized in real estate and house construction. He served on Montreal city council from 1861 to 1877; David served as chairman of the roads committee and ran unsuccessfully for the post of mayor. He was married twice: to Olive Boyer, dit Quintal in 1844 and to Sophie Homier, the widow of Joseph Papin, in 1868. David was involved in the temperance movement of the time. He also was vice-president of the Saint-Jean-Baptiste Society at Montreal, president of the Société de l’Union Saint-Joseph de Montréal and the Société de Colonisation de Montréal, and a director of the Montreal Northern Colonization Railway. He died in Montreal at the age of 59 and was buried in the Notre Dame des Neiges Cemetery.[1]

[1]

title: Ferdinand David (politician)

question: Summarize all the information relating to Ferdinand David's early years and education.

answer: David was born in Lower Canada. He was educated locally. He learnt carpentry, painting and coach-building in Montreal.

question: Summarize all the information relating to Ferdinand David's career in the construction industry.

answer: David worked as a building contractor and then joined a firm that specialized in real estate and house construction. David was a director of the Montreal Northern Colonization Railway.

question: Summarize all the information relating to Ferdinand David's political career.

answer: David served on the Montreal city council from 1861 to 1877. He was chairman of the roads committee and ran unsuccessfully for mayor. He was involved in the temperance movement. David was vice-president of the Saint-Jean-Baptiste Society, president of the Société de l’Union Saint-Joseph de Montréal and the Société de Colonisation de Montréal.

question: In what field did Ferdinand David work?

answer: He worked in the construction industry and he had a political career.

question: What is the temperance movement?

answer: A movement to encourage abstinence from alcoholic drink, probably for social reasons.

question: Write a ~1 sentence summary.

answer: Ferdinand David was a building contractor and political figure in Quebec in the late 1800's.


text:
I used to watch this cute girl from my cubicle workstation. Leaning backwards in my chair taking short sneak peaks at her as she was standing by the coffee machine. She was about the same age as me, around her mid 20‘s. It took a long time before I managed to gather enough courage to actually walk up to her and once I did, I realized that I had no idea what to say. All the thoughts of walking up to her had made me forgot to think of what I should say to break the ice. I was a pretty shy guy back then and didn’t really have any conversation starters up my sleeve. I had been watching her from a distance in almost a year and in this moment when I was finally standing in front of her, I was numb. My mind was blank but still I opened my mouth to say something. I thought I asked her if she likes coffee, but now, when I think back to that moment it must have sounded something like ”you.. l-l-like.. coffee”. I’m quite aware that was probably not the best thing to say, considering it was the first time I actually talked to her. Even though she didn’t say something back, she smiled at me, giggled and then walked back to her own cubicle. I stayed by the coffee machine for moment to catch my breathe and I’m pretty sure I must have seemed like a complete fool to her. But I didn’t really care, for me that was a great success. The woman I had been secretly interested in for a long time had just smiled at me.

Some time passed and now I walked up to her almost every day when she came to refill her coffee mug outside my cubicle. Sometimes it almost seemed as she was waiting for me. There were days when I was too busy to constantly take quick peaks down the hall to see if she was there, those days I would usually hear her clearing her throat or humming just outside my workstation. I wasn’t completely sure but I always thought that it was her way to catch my attention, and every time time I walked out of my cubicle she gave me a heart warming smile. Even though we had long and pleasant conversations I could tell that she sometimes was very nervous. Whenever her hands started trembling too much she would reach for her pocket and pick up a bracelet made out of brown wooden pearls. She would hold it in a firm grip and I came to understand that it was her way of dealing with nervousness. That bracelet made her calm again and it obviously had a personal value to her.

These small meetings kept occurring for a couple of weeks and one day I finally asked her out, and to my surprise she said yes. I had never been happier in my whole life and the thought of her made my smile uncontrollably. I literally woke up happy every morning.

I was supposed to meet her at a nice Italian restaurant not far from where we worked. It took me hours to prepare and I even went out shopping new clothes to make the best impression. I left home exactly 6:17 PM, and I had enough time to pick up a bouquet of flowers on my way to the restaurant. I had never bought flowers to someone before, and when I think about it now I have no idea why I did it that night.

I arrived to the restaurant around 6:45 PM. We were supposed  to meet 7 PM but I preferred to show up earlier. I was very nervous and when the clock hit 7 PM I had already drank two glasses of wine. I watched the door and expected her two walk in to restaurant just any second now. 7:15 PM. I was still staring at the door and I felt that my forehead was sweating. 7:30 PM. She was probably just stuck in traffic. I ordered another glass of wine and tried to make time pass faster. 8 PM. Where is she?? If she was this late she should at least have given me a call to let me know she’s on her way. 9 PM. It all made sense now. Her heart warming smile, her kind words and her longing eyes were just bullshit. She was just another bitch that played with people’s feelings, and I was just another fool that fell for it. How could I have been so stupid?? What was I thinking?

I left my table. My chair fell loudly to the floor and people stared at me as I stormed out of the restaurant. I wasn’t sad. I wasn’t going to let that bitch win. I was angry. Not at her, but at myself for being so easily fooled. I chucked the flowers in the first garbage bin I passed and kept walking down the street. Further down the street something had happened. Two police cars and an ambulance was blocking the sidewalk and at first I didn’t care. I just wanted to go home. But when I passed the scene of the accident I saw something. There was a body lying in middle of the sidewalk. The face was covered with a blanket but an arm was sticking out. I could tell that the arm belonged to a woman in her mid 20‘s and in her hand she was holding something. It was a bracelet.. made of  brown wooden pearls.

I didn’t stop. I kept walking. I didn’t look back. I didn’t cry. I just went straight back home. I went to bed, and I never woke up happy ever again.

title: Office love story (I have never written a short story in english before. Feedback is much appreciated.)

question: What does the story say about how to talk to women?

question: What does the story say about the girl the narrator was interested in?

answer: The girl was cute and worked in the same office as the narrator. She was about the same age as the narrator, around her mid-20s. She seems to like coffee. The girl was sometimes nervous and dealt with it by holding a bracelet made of brown wooden pearls.

question: What does the story say about the relationship between the girl and the narrator?

answer: They're officemates who obviously like each other. The narrator has been watching her from afar for a long time, and it took a while for him to talk to her. Now that they're talking, the girl would often wait for the narrator to join her for a coffee refill. The narrator finally asked the girl out on a date and she said yes. Her saying yes made him wake up happy every morning.

question: Summarize what happened to their dinner date at the Italian restaurant?

answer: They were supposed to meet at 7 pm but the narrator showed up earlier. He bought new clothes for the date and flowers for the girl. The girl was running late and the narrator had a few glasses of wine while waiting, thinking she was stuck in traffic. When the clock hit 9 pm, the narrator figured she stood him up and left the restaurant in anger. However, the girl was in an accident and died on the way to the restaurant. The narrator saw the scene on his way home and recognized her arm and wooden pearl bracelet.


text:
[Schumer: Courts should block Trump's census citizenship question]

© Greg Nash

The Commerce Department announced the decision on Monday evening over strong objections of Democrats, marking the first time it will be included in the census since 1950.

Democratic attorneys general in several states as well as progressive outside groups have pledged to bring legal action against the decision.

And Democratic lawmakers in Congress have condemned the decision as politically motivated and warned it will alienate immigrant communities after Trump's hardline rhetoric during the champaign.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi[]Nancy PelosiObama chief economist says Democrats should accept smaller coronavirus relief package if necessary The five biggest challenges facing President-elect Biden Democrats were united on top issues this Congress — but will it hold? MORE (D-Calif.) called it a "a dog-whistle tactic." Meanwhile, Sen. Dianne Feinstein[]Dianne Emiel FeinsteinThe Hill's Morning Report - Presented by the UAE Embassy in Washington, DC - COVID-19 fears surround Thanksgiving holiday Feinstein departure from top post sets stage for Judiciary fight Whitehouse says Democratic caucus will decide future of Judiciary Committee MORE (D-Calif.) said the administration was turning the census into a "political football."

"Adding a question designed to depress participation in certain communities is an assault on the foundations of this country. Given President Trump’s toxic rhetoric and aggressive policies toward immigrants, it’s clear his administration wants to include this question to discourage participation in immigrant communities," she said.

Feinstein added that she would "work with California’s leaders to have this citizenship question removed from the census.”

A group of Senate Democrats introduced legislation last week that would prohibit questions on citizenship or immigration status from being included on the census. House Democrats announced on Tuesday that they would file similar legislation.

Sen. Dick Durbin[]Dick DurbinThe Hill's Morning Report - Presented by the UAE Embassy in Washington, DC - COVID-19 fears surround Thanksgiving holiday Feinstein departure from top post sets stage for Judiciary fight Whitehouse says Democratic caucus will decide future of Judiciary Committee MORE (D-Ill.) added that "politics has no place in the census, but this administration will stop at nothing to push its anti-immigrant agenda."

But with Republicans in control of Congress, including over what gets a vote in both chambers, Democrats have limited options if they want to undo Trump's actions through legislation. A mammoth government funding bill, which would have been one of their best legislative leverage points, passed last week.

[TheHill.com]

The Hill 1625 K Street, NW Suite 900 Washington DC 20006 | 202-628-8500 tel | 202-628-8503 fax

The contents of this site are ©2020 Capitol Hill Publishing Corp., a subsidiary of News Communications, Inc.

question: When was the citizenship question last included in United States' census?

answer: 1950.

question: What was Senator Diane Feinstein's concern about the citizenship question?

answer: She is concerned the citizenship question would discourage immigrant communities from participating in the census exercise.

question: What has been one of Democrats' tactics in taking the citizenship question off the upcoming census question list?

answer: They are planning to introduce legislation that would prohibit the question.

question: What kind of chances do Democrats have in removing the citizenship question?

answer: They have little chance and limited options.

question: Write a ~5 sentence summary.

answer:
The Republicans, alongside President Trump, have decided to include the citizenship question in the 2020 census. This question has not been included since 1950.

Democrats aren't happy with this development and have sworn to fight until the question is removed. Leading Democrat claimed this question is aimed at discouraging immigrant communities from participating in the census.

Experts say Democrats have limited options and little chance of getting the citizenship question off the list.


text:
FENERBAHÇE is the name of a neighbourhood in Kadıköy district, Istanbul, Turkey, located on the Asian side at the shore of the Sea of Marmara. The name means “lighthouse garden” in Turkish (from _fener_, meaning “lighthouse”, and _bahçe_, meaning “garden”), deriving from an ancient lighthouse located at Fenerbahçe Cape ().

FENERBAHÇE can further refer to:

-   Fenerbahçe S.K., a major Turkish multi-sport club based in Istanbul
-   Fenerbahçe S.K. (football), the professional football team of the multi-sport club.
-   Fenerbahçe A2, U-20 squad of Fenerbahçe S.K. (football).
-   Fenerbahçe Academy, youth and junior squads of Fenerbahçe S.K. (football).
-   Fenerbahçe Men's Basketball, men's basketball section of Fenerbahçe S.K.
-   Fenerbahçe Women's Basketball, women's basketball section of Fenerbahçe S.K.
-   Fenerbahçe Men's Volleyball, men's volleyball section of Fenerbahçe S.K.
-   Fenerbahçe Women's Volleyball, women's volleyball section of Fenerbahçe S.K.
-   Fenerbahçe Athletics, athletic section of Fenerbahçe S.K.
-   Fenerbahçe Boxing, boxing section of Fenerbahçe S.K.
-   Fenerbahçe Rowing, rowing section of Fenerbahçe S.K.
-   Fenerbahçe Table Tennis, table tennis section of Fenerbahçe S.K.
-   Fenerbahçe SW, sailing and windsurfing section of Fenerbahçe S.K.
-   Fenerbahçe Swimming, swimming section of Fenerbahçe S.K.

Other clubs

-   SKV Fenerbahçe Wien, Austrian semi-professional football club
-   FC Fenerbahçe Zürich, Swiss semi-professional football club

Biology

-   _Fenerbahce_ (fish), a genus of African fish named in honor of Fenerbahçe S.K.

title: Fenerbahçe (disambiguation)

question: What does Fenerbahce?

answer: A neighnorhood.

question: Where is it located?

answer: The Kadikoy district.

question: Where is the Kadikoy district?

answer: Istanbul.

question: Where is Istanbul?

answer: Turkey.

question: Write a ~2 sentence summary.

answer: Fenerbahçe is a neighbourhood in Kadıköy district, Istanbul, Turkey, located on the Asian side at the shore of the Sea of Marmara. The name means “lighthouse garden” in Turkish, as it was named for an ancient lighthouse.


text:
_BOIGA ANGULATA_, commonly known as the LEYTE CAT SNAKE or PHILIPPINE BLUNT-HEADED TREE SNAKE, is a species rear-fanged of snake in the family Colubridae. The species is endemic to the Philippines. It is considered mildly venomous.

Geographic range

The snake is found in the Philippines. [Distribution of boiga angulata.]

title: Boiga angulata

question: Where does the Leyte Cat Snake live?

answer: The Philippines.

question: What is the scientific name of the Leyte Cat Snake?

answer: Boiga Angulata.

question: What family does the species Leyte Cat Snake belong to?

answer: Colubridae.

question: How dangerous is the Leyte Cat Snake?

answer: They are mildly venomous.

question: Write a ~3 sentence summary.

answer: Boiga Angulata, commonly known as the Leyte Cat Snake or Philippine Blunt-Headed Tree Snake, is a rear-fanged snake species. They belong to the family Colubridae. They are endemic to the Philippines and are mildly venomous.


text: I was utterly lone and 12,000 miles from home. I sat in my tiny room in the dirty Tokyo hostel and sucked down the flask bottle of whiskey. Kentucky bourbon made me feel closer to home than anything else. I contemplated the mysteries of the white wall a few feet from my face, and it must have spoken to me in some fashion for I felt a sudden compulsion to walk the dark streets and find companionship in the lonely city. I walked across one of the Asakusa bridges with that half drunken gait where you feel pushed along, rather than pushing yourself. I found myself pushed to the local foreigner bar and happily entered. Warm light came into the misty night as I opened the door and I was greeted with the sounds of music and laughter, the smell of beer and bourbon, and the touch of inebriated white hands clapping my back. There is a camaraderie among foreigners abroad unlike anything else. You truly are strangers in a strange land, and you wander alone all day through concrete tunnels lined with strange symbols and never talking, yet surrounded by bustling conversation always, and then at night you find each other and talk boisterously and smile always, and you ask "What country?" and tell how much you love Spain, or France, or England, and they tell you about how they love America so. You talk about where you've been, and where you'll be tomorrow. People filter in and out, and every night new people and old friends departing, for they must catch a plane tomorrow. Then at midnight is last call and everyone spills into the streets. Whiskey at the 7-11 and then a trip to the river where you lay about and speak of life and home and the glory of the journey. As I lay on my back I realize I feel closer to these strangers than anyone I know, and it is a comforting realization that you can find companionship in the loneliest of places, and that tomorrow there will be new friends and new liquor and that you will never be truly alone.

title: Tokyo, Japan

question: Where is the story set?

answer: Tokyo, Japan.

question: Where is the narrator from?

answer: America.

question: Where does the narrator go?

answer: To a foreigners' [ex-pat] bar, where he finds friendship among fellow foreigners.

question: What is the narrator drinking?

answer: He finishes a bottle of whiskey in his hostel room.

question: Write a ~2 sentence summary.

answer: An American is staying in a hostel in Tokyo, Japan, finishing off a bottle of whiskey and feeling lonely and homesick. The American wanders the city and finds a bar for foreigners, where white people experience camaraderie with each other; strangers in a strange land.