#should be outlawed under the geneva convention!!!!

[willowcrowned]

i think at the end of group projects you should have the option to kill anyone in your group who made your life actively worse. this would increase murder rates by five thousand percent but it would also increase me being happy rates by ten million percent

[ceescedasticity]

Silmarillion war crimes

(Finally motivated to make this because someone said the Silmarillion elves committed 'all the war crimes', and while I know, I know they were just exaggerating for comic effect it still drives me up the wall.)

First piece of housekeeping: Technically speaking war crimes are war crimes because they were defined as such in various treaties. You aren't technically violating the Geneva Conventions if you aren't signatory to them. But, they do often get talked about more like universally applicable rules.

Second piece of housekeeping: I think no one is actually accusing the Fëanorians of, like, cutting undersea communications cables or impersonating the Red Cross. There are some war crimes which are obviously not applicable and I'm not going to discuss them.

Third piece of housekeeping: There are a lot of provisions in the Geneva Conventions. Someone else can go through all of them if they like. So, I'm going to go with this list gleaned from the section of the Wikipedia page on war crimes about the international criminal court:

Willful killing, or causing great suffering or serious injury to body or health

Torture or inhumane treatment

Unlawful wanton destruction or appropriation of property

Forcing a prisoner of war to serve in the forces of a hostile power

Depriving a prisoner of war of a fair trial

Unlawful deportation, confinement or transfer

Taking hostages

Directing attacks against civilians

Killing a surrendered combatant

Misusing a flag of truce, a flag or uniform of the enemy

Settlement of occupied territory

Deportation of inhabitants of occupied territory

Using poison weapons

Using civilians as shields

Using child soldiers

Firing upon a Combat Medic with clear insignia.

Summary execution

Rape, sexual slavery, forced prostitution or forced pregnancy

Fourth piece of housekeeping: I'm not just going to look at the Fëanorians. That's not fair. There's elves vs. other elves, elves vs. dwarves, dwarves vs. elves, Angband vs. everyone, everyone vs. Angband, etc. I should probably define some of these groups starting out but I'm not going to.

So. This will be long.

1. Willful killing, or causing great suffering or serious injury to body or health

I'm a little puzzled about this one, actually. I thought that was just… assumed to be part of war???

Killing as more than a means to some non-killing-related end???

At any rate I'm inclined to say everyone conducting war in the Silmarillion did this. I don't think anyone was trying to minimize military casualties.

Edit: Have been informed it's meant to be killing of people protected under the conventions. In which case it's a lot more questionable. For some people.

2. Torture or inhumane treatment

Angband did this, obviously.

A lot.

Really a lot.

We don't have any record of any elves doing it, or dwarves, or Edain.

…Except Túrin's outlaws but they're kind of a weird circumstance.

3. Unlawful wanton destruction or appropriation of property

(Seems like there might be a lot of wiggle room in 'unlawful'…)

Well, anyway, Angband also did this, obviously, a lot.

The dwarven sack of Menegroth counts as this.

Seizure of the swan-ships arguably counts as this one, though I'd actually hesitate on that one. I think that wasn't a war crime, that was a crime crime, because they weren't at war.

If the Fëanorians scavenged from Menegroth before leaving that probably counts, but that's speculation.

The Host of the West did destroy Angband, if you want to count that.

Edit: And the Fëanorians destroyed the Havens of Sirion.

4. Forcing a prisoner of war to serve in the forces of a hostile power

Angband, yet again. It's a little less obvious here since it's not like they put prisoners in the regular army unless you count orcs, but brainwashing prisoners and sending them out as agents probably counts.

Also their treatment of prisoners of war generally violates a lot of stuff in the Third Geneva Convention.

I do not think we have grounds to say anyone else did this, partially because I'm not sure we have grounds to say anyone else ever took any prisoners.

Elrond and Elros are a gray area, but if they ended up fighting with the Fëanorians there's no reason to believe it was against anyone but Angband.

Oh, and I suppose the Host of the West took prisoners, but I'm sure they didn't do this.

5. Depriving a prisoner of war of a fair trial

I mean, you could say that prisoners of war in Angband got the same kind of trial that anyone else in Angband got?

But otherwise Angband again, yeah.

The Host of the West… I'm not sure. Do you count the judgments of Ëonwë as a fair trial?

Everyone else: No prisoners, not an issue.

…Look I don't know what to say about Túrin and Mîm. I'm inclined to say a lot of the outlaws' bad behavior was crime crime not war crime. I don't know.

6. Unlawful deportation, confinement or transfer

Angband back in the definitely column here.

I don't think anyone else is. Sure, Menegroth and Sirion were abandoned, but it wasn't because the Fëanorians stuck around chasing people away.

7. Taking hostages

Angband, explicitly with Maedhros and I think implicitly elsewhere.

The Easterlings serving Angband also explicitly took hostages.

The Fëanorians took Elrond and Elros. It doesn't seem to have been terribly effective, but it was hostage-taking.

Celegorm and Curufin holding Lúthien could be this if you consider the Fëanorians to have been at war with Doriath at that point, but that's sort of dubious? Maybe a war crime, maybe a crime crime.

8. Directing attacks against civilians

Angband.

The Fëanorians attacked the entire communities of Menegroth and the Havens of Sirion. They may or may not have made any attempt to avoid deliberately killing noncombatants in one or both cases, but they were unavoidably attacks on civilians.

The dwarven attack on Menegroth is similarly an attack on civilians.

If you consider any orcs, trolls, balrogs, vampires, werewolves, etc. to be civilians, then the Host of the West almost certainly did this. You can argue that none of them counted as civilians; you can also argue that the Host of the West managed not to attack e.g. orc children, but I don't think that's very likely.

The Easterlings serving Angband did have civilians, but I think it's more likely the Host of the West avoided attacking those.

9. Killing a surrendered combatant

I don't think anyone is directly attested as doing this?

The overall impression one gets of the First Age is a general deficit of surrender.

But: if anyone surrendered to Angband's forces rather than trying to fight or escape until they physically couldn't, I'm sure some of them were killed (and some weren't, because Angband wanted slaves).

If any orcs/werewolves/vampires/trolls/dragons/balrogs dared to surrender rather than fight to the death or escape, I'm sure some to most of them were killed.

If any dwarves of Nogrod tried to surrender to Beren and the Ents, they were killed.

We don't know about the dwarven sack of Menegroth or any of the Kinslayings (on either side).

The Host of the West accepted at least some surrenders, but we don't know if it was all of them.

10. Misusing a flag of truce, a flag or uniform of the enemy

Angband doesn't get much of an opportunity for this because no one trusts their truces and it's not like switching flags or uniforms would help, insofar as there are uniforms.

But they did propose a negotiation under false pretenses.

Of course the Fëanorians also agreed to it under false pretenses.

The Silmaril Quest is absolutely full of people disguising themselves as Angband's forces. If you want to get pedantic about it uniforms and flags were not the key part of those disguises, but I think it's the same idea?

Edit: Unless you want to count them as spies, not soldiers. There are different rules for spies, which is to say I don't think there are any rules about spies, either what they can do or what can be done to them. I think that may be a better frame for this.

I feel like the Easterlings who announced their allegiance change mid-battle may also count as this?

11. Settlement of occupied territory

Angband generally prefers the scorched-earth approach, but they do settle their Easterlings in occupied territory.

No one else does this.

Like the Fëanorians had enough people left to 'occupy' anything.

(Or I guess arguably the Host of the West occupies Angband but not for very long and they definitely don't settle there.)

12. Deportation of inhabitants of occupied territory

Angband does some of this in the form of enslaving them back in, uh, Angband, but it's true that mostly it depopulates by slaughter and most of the survives flee with no deportation as such. It doesn't deport the Edain.

Again, most others have no occupied territory.

Though everyone does have to leave Beleriand. :( Should that be attributed to the Host of the West?

13. Using poison weapons

Angband: yes.

Everyone else: No evidence of this. I wouldn't necessarily rule out them trying it against Angband if they thought it would work.

Although I suppose you could argue that weapons inimical to Angband by nature could count as poison…? Naahhh.

(Edit: Eöl used poisoned weapons, but that was murder not combat.)

14. Using civilians as shields

I don't think Angband did this one, actually?

Edain civilians as hostages, yeah, but Angband didn't have much in the way of its own civilians and didn't expect anyone to try to avoid hitting them.

Angband's Easterlings most likely tried to keep their civilians out of the way like sensible people.

15. Using child soldiers

Whether it was possible for Angband to do this with orcs depends on your interpretation.

Everyone else…

Not child soldiers in the 'take them from their families, indoctrinate them, send them out for shock value' sense.

But child soldiers in the sense of 'people we would consider children are considered adults and treated as such', yeah.

And I expect also in the sense of 'people who are not considered adults and who no one really wants fighting, but there is no true place of safety and no one wants them helpless, either, so'.

16. Firing upon a Combat Medic with clear insignia

Existence of combat medics with clear insignia is uncertain.

If they existed I'm sure Angband fired on them and tbh I wouldn't bet against anyone else doing so.

17. Summary execution

Okay, this can mean killing combatants who surrendered again, but to avoid double-counting let's say we mean non-combatants.

Well, Angband, regardless.

It would not surprise me if the Fëanorians did this in Menegroth, considering that Celegorm's servants expected to get away with murdering children, but that's not definite.

18. Rape, sexual slavery, forced prostitution or forced pregnancy

Angband's Easterlings did this in Dor-lómin.

The rest of Angband…

It seems likely? In one context or another. But I don't think there are direct statements on it.

—Or actually I guess they made promises to Maeglin about Idril! Not sure if that should count when they didn't actually do anything and I'm not sure they ever meant to.

Eöl and Aredhel in the worst interpretation was not part of a war. It was a crime crime and a diplomatic disaster.

Celegorm and Curufin's behavior towards Lúthien was only questionably part of a war and I'm not sure whether it qualifies here, so I'm going to say no.

Eighteen in the somewhat arbitrary list…

Fëanorians: Definitely five four (1, 3, 7, 8, 10), possibly/arguably as many as nine (1, 3, 7, 8, 9, 10, 15, 16, 17).

Non-Fëanorian Exiles: Definitely two (1, 10), possibly/arguably as many as five (1, 9, 10, 15, 16).

Iathrim+Lúthien&Beren: Definitely two (1, 10), possibly/arguably as many as five (1, 9, 10, 15, 16).

Dwarves of Nogrod: Definitely three two (1, 3, 8), possibly/arguably as many as five (1, 3, 8, 9, 16).

Host of the West: Definitely one (1), possibly/arguably as many as seven (1, 3, 5, 8, 9, 12, 16) (that's what you get for winning).

Angband and associates: Definitely thirteen (1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12, 13, 17, 18), possibly/arguably seventeen (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15, 16, 17, 18).

Admittedly it's silly to look at Angband at all when it was in a constant state of total war against basically everybody…

[azurdlywisterious]

Look I love “How I Saved Roosevelt” but in the context of my Fallout 3 playlist I’m just reminded of the time I was marching around the left most edges of the map instead of progressing the main story as I tried and failed to find the Paradise Falls slavers in order to raise my karma to neutral and had only the Enclave radio to listen to because I was too far away from GNR which just led to me realize that the Enclave should be outlawed under the Geneva convention because I felt like I was being tourtured

Wait wasn’t I supposed to be filling out a job application?

[madamepestilence]

“In the early 32nd century, humanity had not been dealing well with the prospect of still not finding life in the universe other than themselves besides hints of potential microbes across the solar system as they expanded. Consequently, particle physics became one of the primary studies of interest anew, despite the nuclear tensions that spanned centuries prior.

The discovery of a previously unknown subatomic particle outside of the known range of quarks, leptons, bosons, and their anti-matter equivalents not only revolutionized the field of particle physics with its dissolution of the prior standard model, but also made the prospect of a, ‘darklight,’ or, ‘darkbulb,’ seem plausible.

This new particle, dubbed the abscondon, after its hidden nature, was unfortunately understood to not be the still-elusive dark matter, but had the peculiar effect of causing electron-photon mutual annihilation when focused into a beam. Under the prior standard model, only the photons should be annihilated, which rebirthed the search for a, ‘theory of everything,’ as it outmoded the previous understanding of virtual particles.

As particle physicists discovered how to focus and intensify abscondon beams, biologists and nuclear physicists alike immediately became concerned about high-penetrating radiation, and particle physicists at the Venus Organization for Nuclear Research [VONR] confirmed its radioactivity.

Unfortunately, the reformed New United States of North America had rebirthed its fascism for a third time, and public knowledge of VONR’s discoveries about abscondons led to quick developments on Earth, and the NUSNA finalized the creation of the previously unfathomable darkbulb.

Darkbulbs generated highly concentrated beams of abscondons that not only rendered entire regions completely blind from a lack of photons, but would also cause rapid atomic dissolution as electrons were removed, sending out large swaths of lone protons that led to rapid nuclear fission as the vacuum left behind drew in increasing amounts of electrons.

Unlike prior concepts in 20th-22nd century Earth cartoons, darkbulbs were unfortunately powerful nuclear weaponry that cascaded destruction from electromagnetic dissonance, vacuuming, nuclear fission, and finally, a massive explosion that converted all atoms in a radius dependent upon beam length and time used, into lead, and gradually lighter elements outwards.

Fortunately, with the resignation of the NUSNA in 3314 after internal conflicts with the American Communist Association of Bureaucracy and losing numerous battles to the Kuiper Union and Jupiter Orbital Union, all New American darkbulbs were safely disassembled, and were outlawed across the solar system at the Geneva Convention of 3315.”

Interplanetary Health Organization 4301, A Brief History of Darkbulbs, The United Planets, accessed 14 October 4301, <http://ipw.iho.inp/topics/darkbulbs/en>.

[dumbassinsomniac]

Making people go to school between thanksgiving and Christmas break should have been outlawed under the Geneva convention.

[phinniastuff]

i have opinions

The Gaza Strip is 325 km long. That's 201 miles. That's about Toronto to Windsor, or Nashville to Louisville, distance-wise. That's not very far.

Now imagine two million people crammed into that tiny space.

There have been six thousand bombs dropped on that space in six days.

I'm just pro-not-killing-any-civilians. It is not POSSIBLE that they could not have killed even one civilian with six thousand bombs over six days.

Quit using white phosphorus. One spark of phosphine with water creates very harmful gas to breathe and that shit should have been outlawed years ago (along with mustard gas, chlorine gas, and its other horrifying brothers); look those up and see why those are outlawed under the Geneva Convention. (You can also look up a copy of the Geneva Convention.)

Seriously, don't kill people. Killing people - not good karma. Also hard to get bloodstains out of your wardrobe.

The end.

[meowmaids]

Breaking this down:

While white phosphorus is not officially banned under Geneva conventions nor the chemical weapons convention in war. Israel is not a signatory of the chemical weapons conventions which 'its use in proximity to civilians is restricted under the United Nations CWC'. In the past year Human Rights Watch condemned its use against Palestinians

Injuries of white phosphorus create crater like wounds. Unlike other explosives white phosphorus continues to burn and smoke for extended periods after deployment. This includes when it makes contact with human skin. This property means wounds will progressively get deeper and continue to burn without proper treatment. Patients have second and third degree burns.

A rock collector who mistakenly found and came into prolonged contact with white phosphorus by keeping it in their pocket required skin grafts. * Graphic images contained in this link https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/dog-walker-beach-burns-white-17212580

Knowing that white phosphorus can can cause these horrific injuries consider the statements made:

Signaling to UNIFIL . Israel has the ability to contact UNIFIL. Why would you explode a weapon at a peace keeping mission unless with the express purpose to cause injury? Or destroy buildings, cars, and general area? Or to cause panic? Deploying white phosphorus in a populated area has the potential for anyone in the area to become severely burned.

2. Target. The target was a peace keeping mission's base in a populated area. Israel is targeting innocent people and an innocent peace keeping group under the pretense that they are near an alleged "enemy". Why would you deploy a weapon that harms indiscriminately in a densely populated area? Unless the such an action is made with the choice to allow civilian casualties and death.

In reality Israel is doing this to stop peace keepers from reporting the crimes against humanity and war crimes they are witnessing.

3. Smoke capability. Not only is bombing civilians and UNIFIL unlawful, and the injuries inflicted are horrendous this would be a tactical advantage to.... target more civilians and UNIFIL. So you need cover to do more damage, ambiguity, or deniability of the IDF deploying incendiary weapons against innocent people.

4. Legitimate use in combat operations. Bears repeating civilians and UNIFIL peace keepers were the target. So acceptable and legitimate target to the US are include non combatants

White phosphorus causes serious wounds it should be outlawed for use in war. Clear targeting of UNIFIL is meant to deter observation and accurate reporting on the ground. While terrifying the civilians in their homes! Israels kills civilians with 2,000 pound bombs and JDAMS, . White phosphorus may not function as other bombs but the brutal injuries and inhalation and ingestion is know to be lethal.

Call it what it is! The U.S. is giving the IDF carte blanche to commit war crimes. The U.S. does not stand still as Israel bombs, starves, shoots, sieges, and blockades millions of innocent Palestinians. No the U.S. is providing the weapons used to kill Palestinians. Active participation in genocide

And when confronted with the U.S.'s role in war crimes and genocide someone at the podium proudly if stumbling to assures us it is legitimate use.

Transcribing the clip below

Reporter: We have a story today showing 15 UNIFIL Peacekeepers were injured when the IDF apparently deployed white phosphorus by their base in Southern Lebanon this month. Can I ask what is the DoD's view of the use of white phosphorus in war? And would the Pentagon have any concerns with it used by or near UNIFIL bases

Response: So as far as Israel operations go Tom, I'd have to refer you to them to talk about that. And broadly speaking white phosphorus is used essentially as a signalling you know capability that you can use to hone in on targets. Or to provide smoke capability. Ugh but yea. So it does have a legitimate use in combat operations

[winterwidowtickles]

“Those ribs look tasty. Nomnomnomnom!”

Beard and scruff make this so much worse for me. Can Bucky get Nat with his scruff . It doesn’t have to be the ribs that was just in the sentence.

"Jesus, you need to shave!" Natasha said trying to squirm away from her boyfriend as he tried to kiss her neck.

Bucky for his part seemed amused by this, and held her tighter.

"Oh, do I?"

"Yes! That five o'clock shadow of yours should be outlawed by the Geneva Convention." He laughed at that, pinning the squirming Widow under him, by sitting on her hips.

Natasha stated up at him, warily.

"You know what? I'm hungry, and those ribs look tasty." Natasha instantly began to struggle as Bucky bent down and began nibbling on Natasha's ribs, down one side, and up the other. The moment his lips made contact the redhead was a giggling mess.

The tickling was made only worse by the 'noming' noises Bucky made as he nibbled and the scrape of his stubble across her skin.

"James! St-stop, I can't take it!" Natasha managed to get out between laughs. Squeals filling the bedroom as the nibbling turned into raspberries down her ribcage.

"But you're having so much fun, and I'm still hungry." Bucky cooed as Natasha struggled to throw him off her.

Without warning he attacked Natasha's belly next, sending the widow into hysterics as he rubbed his scruff covered cheeks over the expanse of skin.

Natasha tried to push his head away only for the raspberries to return, making her scream with surprise.

"Jahahahamse, please!" Natasha begged still laughing from the raspberries.

"Okay, okay, I'm done." He said smoothing a hand through Natasha's hair. Smiling down at the widow's flushed face, he stole a proper kiss from her lips.

"I love you, Natasha."

"I love you too," Natasha said regaining her breath.

"Now, get off me and go shave."

[lady-byleth]

Meet the kittens

Cleo, the only girl and a real cuddle bug. She really likes licking noses, nibbling fingers and sitting on shoulders. Also apparently my cleavage is delicious.

Casey - named after a certain Abraham DeLacey Giuseppe Casey Thomas O'Malley - who screamed so hard he fell asleep sitting up

And the aptly named Fussel (German for fuzz or fluff) who can't meow but tries really hard and has a fart that should be outlawed under the Geneva convention

We rescued them from a farm that would've..."disposed" of them so they're a little young and need a lot of love but they're lively and healthy

[ianenjoyer]

discussion boards should be outlawed under the geneva convention 

[kaiba-fangirl]

Fill in the questions/statement as if you are being interviewed for an article and you were your muse

Tag 10 people to do this meme, (repost, don’t reblog)

TAGGED BY: not @rogueprinceconsort =P & I know I’m not a RP blog, but I am a fanfic author so I still do the same kind of stuff, just everyone at once with chapters, so I’m sure ya won’t mind... idk itching to write Seto but his mind is all over the place in Ch7 of And You? (AO3/FFN), & I know I’ve missed a bunch of personal tags in the past, so, well, I’m here now. TAGGING: anyone 1. WHAT IS YOUR NAME?

“Seto Kaiba.”  (海馬 瀬人 Kaiba, Seto)

2. WHAT IS YOUR REAL NAME?

He narrows his eyes, already suspicious. “Legally, that IS my real name.”

3. DO YOU KNOW WHY YOU WERE CALLED THAT?

“I was born Seto,” he answers flatly, then smirks. “The Kaiba family name I earned for myself and my little brother at the age of 10, when Gozaburo agreed to adopt us thanks to my, superior negotiating skills.” [Seto after Egyptian Pharaoh Seth. Kaiba for, apparently, hippocampus/seahorse.]

4. ARE YOU SINGLE OR TAKEN? “Taken. Happily married to the number 1 female duelist, Mai Valentine. She’s now heading the new Fashion Tech and Merchandise Department at Kaiba Corp.” [but he’s also still looking >.>]

5. HAVE ANY ABILITIES OR POWERS? “Just bleeding edge technology development and superior dueling skills,” he shrugs smugly. [and hacking.] [You also accidentally activate latent magical powers every so often, dumbass. Sure he’s a genius. A genius that weaves techno-sorcery into everything & commands gods without even knowing it.] “Anything else you may have heard about magic or spirits or real monsters, is all just nonsense hocus pocus. It’s sensationalists trying to make our amazingly life-like holographic projections seem dangerous.”

6. STOP BEING A MARY SUE/GARY STU. “Heh, doesn’t that just mean born talented? You should be so lucky.”

7. WHAT’S YOUR EYE COLOR? “Blue,” he chuckles childishly. “It was probably what first drew me to, you know, Blue-Eyes, when I was young.” [It’s not. The Blue-Eyes White Dragon was his magical monster of light ‘girlfriend’ in Ancient Egypt in a past life of his 3000 years ago.]

8. HOW ABOUT YOUR HAIR COLOR? “Chestnut.”

9. HAVE YOU ANY FAMILY MEMBERS? “Living, my little brother, Mokuba, and now my lovely wife.”

10. OH? WHAT ABOUT PETS? “No pets. I barely have time for having two people in my life now it seems, and that’s even with Mokuba off travelling.” [any pet energy is expended on more Blue-Eyes White Dragon themed everything]

11. THAT’S COOL I GUESS, NOW TELL ME ABOUT SOMETHING YOU DON’T LIKE. “You wanna see a REAL Gary Stu?! As in, there is no reason he should have made it this far?! Joey fuckin Wheeler. This loser stole his way into my tournament, then has the nerve to even challenge me for 3rd place as if that meant anything, and he still ends up 4th even?! How! He operates on pure luck, and leeching off his ‘friends!’ His deck is a mess, I mean have you even seen his lineup?!?!” [Well that would all be redacted. Now, since this is for an interviewer for a published article...] He calmly and thoughtfully looks off at a spot on the far wall behind the interviewer. He purses his lips and furrows his brow, genuinely distraught, drawing from a direct encounter. “I’m actually more concerned than ever about the state of refugees- whether they have that official label or not. Around the world. Especially the children. These children don’t know what’s going on, and people say they care about children, but they really don’t. They’re not thinking of those kids- of refugee kids. Of poor kids. Of orphans or abused kids. And the way these refugees are being treated, those kids are getting hit with all those things at once. Ya know, I- I was fortunate enough to have that opportunity to be adopted, in a strong first-world nation, but I know what it’s like, to know that the grown ups are just using you, not listening to you. You’re nothing to them; maybe pawns. Now, I’m doing all I can, as president of Kaiba Corp, but there is still only so much we can do. We’re not making tanks or any weapons at all anymore-” He chokes at the thought of a tank staring him down specifically, compared to the latest news. He clears his throat to manage. “Not since the day I took over. We may not be contributing to that military industrial complex anymore, but the state of refugees today is still just as bad if not worse. Now they’re using weapons outlawed by the Geneva Conventions, and in countries that pride themselves on freedom and opportunity. Pteh. It’s madness. It’s evil.” [...aaand that just became the cover story] [We’ll be back after after a short break.]

12. DO YOU HAVE ANY HOBBIES/ACTIVITIES YOU LIKE DOING? “Besides dueling, uh, tinkering. Reading. Hacking into random databases I shouldn’t be in.”

13. EVER HURT ANYONE BEFORE? “Next question. Don’t even print that, or you’ll be hearing from my lawyers. And they don’t play so nice.” [By ‘lawyers’ I’m pretty sure he just means goons.]

14. EVER… KILLED ANYONE BEFORE? "No.” [Gozaburo.]

15. WHAT KIND OF ANIMAL ARE YOU? "Dragon.”

16. NAME YOUR WORST HABITS. "Tch, I wouldn’t have gotten to be president of a multi-billion-dollar corporation if I had bad habits.”  [That is literally his worst habit. Also how he got there is because of all his bad habits.] He chuckles at what he’s about to make fun of. “Then again, some people think that working too much is a bad habit.”

17. DO YOU LOOK UP TO ANYONE AT ALL? "How could I when I’m already on top?”

18. GAY, STRAIGHT, OR BISEXUAL? "Irrelevant.” He smiles menacingly. “Card games are more important anyway.” [Bi and trying to figure out how to tell his wife. Then again once he does that, the press will be easy. Possibly also grey ace or demi, since he does enjoy the physical aspects of being married & his crush.]

19. DO YOU GO TO SCHOOL? “Graduated high school early and then went right back to work as CEO, at the time. I don’t have time to waste getting a piece of paper to validate my knowledge that I’m already putting to use at Kaiba Corp everyday. --but I certainly support everyone staying in school as long as they can. Kaiba Corp offers a free college tuition program for any employee, paid ahead of time, and schedules can be worked around class and homework time as needed.”

20. DO YOU EVER WANT TO MARRY AND HAVE KIDS ONE DAY? “I never thought I would want to marry, but I have always assumed I would want to adopt. Now I am married, and we both want to adopt. Someday. It needs to be when I can have time for them...” [and he’s wondering why you are supposed to only marry one person...]

21. DO YOU HAVE ANY FANBOYS/FANGIRLS? “Yeah,” he laughs, genuinely embarrassed at this level of pure idolization, “I find it endearing to see people dress up as Yugi and I at events.”

22. WHAT ARE YOU MOST AFRAID OF? “Losing my little brother.”

23. WHAT DO YOU USUALLY WEAR? “Full-length pants, tight fitting turtlenecks, boots, and a trenchcoat. More leather and straps and buckles, the better.”

24. DO YOU LOVE SOMEONE? “Of course. My little brother and my wife.” [and Joey]

25. WHEN WAS THE LAST TIME YOU WET YOURSELF? [he just makes this face:]

[but possibly the last time he did hard drugs]

26. WHAT CLASS ARE YOU? (HIGH CLASS, MIDDLE CLASS, LOW CLASS) “Highest class.” He winks, for the spotlight.

27. HOW MANY FRIENDS DO YOU HAVE? “I don’t need ‘friends’ outside of my family.”

28. WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS ON PIE? “Finally, an intelligent question!” he laughs rudely. “My thoughts are that we should change the standard approximation for π to something closer to 3.16. That’s what I use in my calculations, and I find things just seem to work out better for me because of it.”

29. FAVORITE DRINK? “I’ve started drinking a lot more water, and I think that’s pretty much all I drink lately.”

30. WHAT’S YOUR FAVOURITE PLACE? “It’s comforting being in my office, knowing where I belong, knowing that with me there, everyone I love is safe, knowing how I got there, and being proud of all I’ve accomplished, but...” [sometimes anxiety about it being Gozaburo’s old office creeps into his mind like an evil spirit or ghost...] “But more than that, I enjoy the wild freedom of just taking my Blue-Eyes jet out with some good music playing.” [oh my various gods he will always be an emo teen at heart <3]

31. ARE YOU INTERESTED IN SOMEONE? He scoffs. “Yes, I am genuinely interested in my wife. Mai is an amazing person. And- Ah, and, um, next question?” [and Joey!]

32. WHAT’S YOUR BRA CUP SIZE AND/OR HOW BIG IS YOUR WILLY? “What kind of magazine is this for, anyway?” he asks as an aside, then thinks up a ridiculous enough response. “Ever hear of Zorc? I’d say that’s roughly one-third the size of mine.” Under his breath, he scoffs in disgust. “Imbeciles.”

33. WOULD YOU RATHER SWIM IN THE LAKE OR THE OCEAN? “Er, a private pool, thanks. Too many paparazzi anyplace else, and I wouldn’t want to close off anything from the public.” [I hear there’s a river in Egypt he lives in though]

34. WHAT’S YOUR TYPE? “Independent. Strong. Great duelist. Someone who knows what it’s like at rock bottom, but still managed to claw their way to the top...” [he spaces out off to the side]

35. ANY FETISHES? *zoom out to room full of Blue-Eyes White Dragon themed EVERYTHING* “Nah.” [*insert Will Smith presenting his AO3 tags]

36. SEME OR UKE? TOP OR BOTTOM? DOMINANT OR SUBMISSIVE?

[Switch! But “And You?” is stuck at a T rating, sooo...]

37. CAMPING OR INDOORS? "The fuck- you’re giving me whiplash with these questions,” he mutters. “Camping sounds nice. Real camping. Mokuba and I used to build forts and play outside a lot. I should ask him if he wants to go on a camping trip when he gets back. I doubt- well, no, I think Mai would like that, too.” [And Joey can cook them “candy bars!”]

38. ARE YOU WANTING THE QUIZ TO END?

[gold-from-straw]

Link to AO3 - other chapters - 1, 2

TW for references to child abuse and internalised blame for abuse

Chapter 3

Ron’s eyes lit up in glee when they walked up to maths with their fingers linked, and when Credence looked away to get his books out, Ron did a ridiculous little silent happy dance. Harry blushed and slapped him on the back of his head, then sat down next to his boyfriend.

He was smiling so wide it hurt his cheeks, and his fingers itched to touch him, to have constant proof that he hadn’t dreamed it all. He clenched his fingers into a fist as he found them drifting towards Credence again, even if just to grab onto the corner of his blazer. Hold on and never let him go, to know he was safe even if Harry wasn’t looking.

When Credence's hand brushed over his, he almost jumped. He looked down. Credence's fingers were just barely touching the back of his fist, like he thought Harry might not welcome it. As if Harry didn’t want to spend every waking moment with Credence wrapped in his arms. He quickly opened his hand up and linked their fingers, and watched the pink flush spread across his cheekbones above a tiny smile.

***

When Hermione’s birthday weekend rolled around, Harry was almost beside himself with excitement. He was waiting by the window, fully dressed and twitching, at least an hour before Hermione’s parents were due to pick him up. When they pulled up he nearly jumped out of his skin. “Sirius, they’re here, bye!”

“Slow down, Pup! Have you got the present?”

“Yep, see you later!”

“Oh my god,” Sirius laughed. “Wait! Have you got enough money?”

“Mr and Mrs Granger are paying, Sirius, please?”

He pulled him in and kissed him on the head even as he bounced up and down on the balls of his feet. “Look, take a twenty, just in case, and give me or Remus a ring if you need anything.”

“Thanks, Sirius,” he said, his cheeks dimpling as he squeezed him back tightly, and ran out of the door. He could hear his uncle chuckling at him, but he didn’t care. “Happy birthday, Hermione!” he said breathlessly, and gave her a hug, their bodies twisted awkwardly in the back seat.

“Thanks, Harry,” she grinned. “You OK?”

“Yeah, me? Yeah. Great. No problem. You?”

She raised an eyebrow and laughed at him.

Ron was at Pintos when they got there, but though Harry craned his neck and peered around, there was no sign of Credence. Ron was blushing as Hermione opened his present, a thin chain with a heart pendant, but Harry barely heard a word she said, or noticed their shy, under the eyelashes looks. He could just feel his own heart sinking.

Maybe Credence had forgotten. Maybe he hadn’t been able to come. Maybe his mum had given him a last minute job.

And under it all, a quiet, scared voice: maybe he’s hurt.

They ordered coffee and flicked through the menu. Hermione looked at her watch. “Do you think we should order for Credence?”

Harry bit his lip. “I don’t know… I wish he had a phone.”

Ron frowned, concerned. “I’m sure he’s on his way, mate.”

He forced himself to smile and tear his face away from the door. “Yeah. He’ll be fine.”

He’d almost given up hope by the time Credence arrived, flushed and breathless. He’d just been about to tell Hermione to place their orders, when he appeared at their table, biting his lip, his head hunched low, his fingers tangling over and over as he apologised.

“Credence, you made it!” Hermione said, standing up to give him a hug. “Do you want a burger?”

He blinked at her. “Uh… a burger?”

“Yeah, that’s what we’re all going to have - or would you like to choose?”

He sat down heavily next to Harry. “I… I don’t… I’m not supposed to be…”

She sat down as well, frowning. “What’s up?”

Harry wrapped his fingers around Credence’s cold hands, frowning at the tremor in them. It wasn’t so cold today, even his insubstantial jacket should have been enough - especially with how fast he’d obviously run to get there. “Are you OK?”

“I’m not… I’m not supposed to have lunch?”

Hermione blinked. “I’m sorry, are you asking me, or…?”

“N-no, I just… it’s my punishment. Ma… she said I don’t get…”

“When was the last time you ate?” said Ron, his voice hard.

Credence blinked and shrank back a little, and Harry rubbed the back of his hand, turning towards him like he could protect him from the world. “I think… school lunch?”

“Fuck,” breathed Ron. “‘Mione, get him the biggest burger they have.”

She frowned. “Are you saying your mum’s starving you?” she asked, leaning closer, glancing around to check that nobody was listening.

“No,” he frowned, shaking his head, almost laughing at her. “Of course not, I’m not starving. There are people much worse off—“

“But she’s not given you any food for over twenty four hours, that’s starving you - that’s abuse, Credence!”

“It’s… no, it’s fine!” he said, voice rising in panic. “I’m fine!”

“Why isn’t she letting you have food?” Ron asked, face crumpled in an angry frown.

“That doesn’t matter,” said Hermione firmly. “There’s no indiscretion that should be punished by withholding food, it’s—“

“It’s not what you think,” Credence insisted. “I broke her rules, I’m…” he stared down at his hands, haunted. “I’m breaking them now,” he whispered.

“It doesn’t matter what rules she has in place,” Hermione said, leaning forward like if she got closer she could impart the facts directly into his brain. “Food is a fundamental human right, withholding it from prisoners is a form of torture outlawed by the Geneva convention - it’s a war crime. How dare she—“

“That’s my mom you’re talking about,” he protested, frowning, but all it did was make him look more miserable.

“It doesn’t matter who it is,” she insisted, taking the hand that Harry wasn’t already holding. “Credence, you’re a person under her guardianship, blood relation or not, that kind of treatment is against the law. You have the right to be fed!”

He scoffed and turned his face away from all of them. “Oh, c’mon, that’s crazy. What about people who can’t afford food? Do they get punished if they don’t feed their kids?”

“No,” she said gently, ducking to try and catch his eye. “But there are food banks in this country to make sure that, as far as possible, people never go hungry. And that’s beside the point anyway - is your mum too poor to afford food for you?”

His lip wobbled just a little. “No,” he whispered.

She squeezed his shoulder and smiled at him. “I’m so sorry, Credence, but this should never happen to anyone. You shouldn’t be starved as a punishment.” She glanced at Harry. “Can we do anything? Can we help you?”

He wiped his face and sniffed, still not turning towards them. “You are helping,” he said thickly. “Just being here, this is… this is so much more than…” He trailed off, and when Harry saw his shoulders shake he pulled him around so he could cry into his neck, circled in a hug.

“Credence,” Hermione said, her eyes wide and sad. “I’m sorry, I didn’t mean…”

Ron squeezed her shoulder, and the two of them went to order lunch. Harry stroked Credence’s hair, running his fingers through the longer strands as Credence clung to him and cried silently. “She’s right,” he said. “I don’t want you to be hurt. Won’t… won’t you please let me help you?”

“You do help me,” he whispered. “You help me so much, I could never have imagined anything like… like this.”

His heart hurt and he closed his eyes, pressing a kiss to the top of his head. “I wish I could take you away from there.”

He could feel his muscles tensing up, and rubbed his flank, trying to make it better without taking it back. “I can’t,” said Credence at last. “I… I just… I’m sorry.”

“Don’t be,” he said. “I want to help you, but if you’re not ready…”

“I’m just… I’m such a coward,” he whispered.

“No you’re not,” He insisted. “You’re so brave, Credence, you’re surviving a really difficult situation.” He cupped his cheek as Credence sat up, looking at him with sad brown eyes. “It took me ages to believe it, too. I thought I deserved everything, I thought… I thought I was a freak, like my aunt and uncle told me. But Sirius, and Ron and his family, and Hermione, they’ve taught me that I didn’t deserve any of it. That what happened to me was wrong, and nobody should ever go through anything like that.”

“It’s not so bad,” he said, shrugging. “You talk like I’m… I don’t know, fighting a war or something, but… I have a roof over my head, and I get to go to school, and… plenty of people have it far worse. Starving orphans in Africa, you know?”

“And are you helping the starving orphans in Africa by suffering like this?” he said, raising an eyebrow.

Credence snorted.

“Yeah, I didn’t think so. Look, just because someone else has it worse? Doesn’t mean she can get away with doing what she does to you. And… I’m not saying you have to fight. It’s hard. It’s so hard. And Hermione, and Ron… they don’t really get that. I mean, I love them, but they don’t… they don’t know how scary it is.” He was whispering now, leaning close, speaking his past in secret so as not to contaminate the good world he knew now. “But you’ve got someone on the outside now. You’ve got a lot of someones. Not just the three of us, I know we can’t do much - we could even make it worse, I know. But there’s Sirius, and Remus, and the Weasleys, and the Grangers, they’re all adults, and they know how to fight adults. They’ll believe you. I swear!”

He was quiet, something shuttered in his eyes, some sort of glimmer of hope held back by fear and years of learning there was no sanctuary anywhere else. “I’ll think about it,” he said at last.

“And I’ll be here.” He kissed the tears away from his eyes until Ron sat down and jolted their chair.

“Alright, lovebirds,” he smirked. “I ordered you a chicken burger, is that OK, Credence?”

He nodded and smiled. “Thank you. Oh!” He fumbled in his pocket. “I forgot your present,” he said, handing a paper bag to Hermione. “I’m… it’s not very… I’m sorry…”

“Oooh, I love this stuff,” Hermione said, peering into the bag. “Is it from that market stall? The one near the precinct? Their fudge is the best! Thank you, Credence.”

He blushed, a pink wave rushing up his neck to his cheekbones, and smiled down at his hands. Harry couldn’t resist kissing him.

He couldn’t resist much about Credence. He couldn’t stop staring at him, the hollows by his square jaw, the curve of his lips, the crinkles around his eyes every time he smiled. He wanted to make him smile all the time just to see his eyes sparkle and almost disappear beneath the force of his joy.

They ate so much even Harry’s stomach was groaning. Credence couldn’t even finish his, and they wrapped leftover chips and burger into napkins to stuff into his pockets, ignoring his protests. “Eat them before you get home,” Harry said quietly with a kiss just below his ear. “Eat it when you’re walking back and throw the evidence away before you get there.”

They sat in the dark of the cinema to watch a political thriller Hermione had been looking forward to for weeks. Ron fell asleep, and Harry soon lost track of the plot, focusing instead on the lights reflecting off Credence’s face. He found himself smiling goofily at his beautiful boyfriend as he stared, open mouthed, at the screen, jumping at the gunshots and then laughing sheepishly at himself.

Credence turned, about to tell Harry something, and stopped, doing a double take when he saw how he was staring at him. Harry blinked and shook himself, looking away, embarrassed. “Sorry,” he whispered.

Credence shook his head, leaned closer, and kissed him, his fingertips resting on his jaw. Harry closed his eyes in bliss, linking their fingers together and pressing closer to kiss him back. He’d never felt so happy in his life as he did right now, kissing Credence under the final scenes of a movie he hadn’t watched.

They were still holding hands, tucked close together until they walked out of the cinema into the chilly evening air. Harry let go of him reluctantly. He didn’t think the Barebones knew many people in the town just yet, but the last thing he wanted was for someone to see them and mention it to Credence’s mum. “I’ll see you at school, yeah?” he said softly, smiling up at him.

Credence nodded and his whole face lit up in a beautiful smile, it was like walking into the sunlight. “I want to give you a kiss right now, but I can’t,” he whispered.

Harry blushed and lifted his hands to his face like he was going to blow on them to warm them up, but instead kissed his own knuckles, then quickly slipped the kiss into Credence’s hand. Credence lit up again. “Sorry,” grinned Harry. “That was probably the soppiest thing I’ve ever done in my life.”

“I’m honoured, then.”

“OK,” said Ron suddenly, on a sharp breath. He turned to Hermione, his fists clenched and his eyes wide. “OK, so… they’re being really disgustingly cute and… uh… I don’t suppose you might… be OK with me kissing you?”

Hermione burst out laughing. Ron groaned and turned to run away, but she grabbed his wrists. “I would be more than OK with it, Ronald. I’ve only been waiting for it all year.”

“Oh,” he breathed. “Really?”

“Kiss her,” Harry fake coughed.

Ron swept forward, holding Hermione’s face with both hands, and kissed her. Harry and Credence whooped and laughed, voices echoing around the town square. When Ron pulled back his face was as red as his hair, and Hermione was looking dazed.

“I’ve never been prouder of you, mate,” Harry grinned, slapping Ron on the back.

“Yup. Um. Awesome. That was… So I’m going to walk home and… Credence! We’re walking home together. Come on. Happy birthday Hermione!”

He grabbed Credence by the elbow and marched away. Hermione and Harry stared after them. Harry nudged her.

“Shut up,” she said.

“I didn’t say anything.”

“Your smug was so loud you didn’t have to.”

He shrugged. “It was about damn time.”

She snorted. “You’re telling me. I thought I was being really obvious with my flirting.”

He wobbled his hand. “Eh. Not so much.”

[david-watts]

nose swabs should be outlawed under the geneva convention /j

[sciencespies]

Global meet to mull trade rules to protect endangered species

https://sciencespies.com/biology/global-meet-to-mull-trade-rules-to-protect-endangered-species/

Global meet to mull trade rules to protect endangered species

African specialists say the only real way to stem the poaching of elephant ivory and rhinoceros horns is to curb demand

Specialists will meet in Geneva from Saturday to try to tighten rules on trade in elephant ivory, rhino horns and other endangered animal and plant species amid growing alarm over accelerating extinctions.

Thousands of conservationists and policymakers from more than 180 countries will meet for 12 days to evaluate changes to regulations and species protection listings under the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES).

The treaty, created more than four decades ago, regulates trade in over 35,000 species of plants and animals and contains mechanisms to help crack down on illegal trade and sanction countries that break the rules.

CITES Secretary General Ivonne Higuero said the conference would ���focus on strengthening existing rules and standards while extending the benefits of the CITES regime to additional plants and animals threatened by human activity.”

The meeting follows warnings about rapid species decline, with a UN report in May indicating that one million species are being pushed to the brink of extinction.

Poaching crisis

The devastation caused to many species by poaching and booming illegal wildlife trade will be in the spotlight during the meeting, as will new challenges arising as the illicit commerce increasingly moves online.

The CITES agenda comprises 56 proposals, which thousands of specialists are to debate over 12 days in Geneva

As is often the case, the plight of African elephants is expected to dominate the discussions.

Global trade in elephant ivory has largely been outlawed since 1989 after their numbers plunged from millions in the mid-20th century.

The African Elephant Database estimates that by 2015, fewer than 415,000 of the giant mammal remained on the continent.

The CITES meeting, which is held every three years, will consider three competing elephant proposals.

Two proposals from countries in southern Africa, where elephant populations have more protection and are healthier, urge the resumption of ivory stockpile sales.

They argue this could satisfy the demand, especially from Asia, that is fuelling illegal poaching and would provide funds for conservation programmes.

Highly prized rhino horns have caused the species to become common prey for poachers

Animal protection activists counter that previous experiments with stockpile sales actually boosted demand for tusks, and more poaching, since it is hard to distinguish between legal and illegal ivory.

“We should not be repeating this again when the poaching crisis is still so severe,” Matthew Collis, policy chief at the International Fund for Animal Welfare (IFAW), told AFP.

Several countries in western, eastern and central Africa meanwhile want all elephant populations, including healthier southern ones, to be placed in the most-protected category, effectively barring all ivory sales.

None of the proposals are expected to be voted through however.

Mammoth ivory

Collis said attention should focus on legal and illegal ivory markets that are driving demand, to shut down “avenues for criminals to launder their ivory.”

Former CITES secretary general John Scanlon was also involved in shutting down illegal ivory markets

One of 56 proposals on the meeting’s agenda aims to prevent traffickers from passing off illegal elephant ivory as coming from mammoths, by listing the long-extinct mammals as a threatened species and thus subject to regulated trade.

CITES scientific chief Tom De Meulenaer said the idea raises interesting philosophical questions about the boundaries of the treaty, but noted that the practice did not seem to be taking place on a large scale.

Rhino horn trade?

Southern white rhinos that have been heavily poached in recent years will also figure on the agenda, with Swaziland seeking to sell its existing rhino horn stock.

Collis termed such an idea “disastrous”, and “deeply flawed” as there is currently no legal market for rhino horn.

Giraffes are on the agenda for the first time, with a number of African countries calling for a so-called Appendix II listing that would require tracking and regulation of trade in giraffe parts.

A UN report in May said one million species are being pushed to the brink of extinction

The African giraffe population is considered threatened after shrinking by an estimated 40 percent over the past three decades.

But the CITES secretariat voiced scepticism that trade was a major factor behind the decline, which has largely been linked to habitat loss.

Collis questioned this, pointing to US data indicating that in the decade prior to 2015, around 40,000 giraffe parts, mainly bones, had been traded.

Finally, three proposals for Appendix II listings of 18 heavily fished shark and ray species have been sponsored by dozens of countries, indicating strong support.

Explore further

Zimbabwe wants ivory ban lifted so it can sell $600-mln stockpile

© 2019 AFP

Citation: Global meet to mull trade rules to protect endangered species (2019, August 16) retrieved 16 August 2019 from https://phys.org/news/2019-08-global-mull-endangered-species.html

This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only.

#Biology

[automatismoateo]

Abrahamic theism is actually Anti-American, a threat to the Free World & borders on Orwellianism via /r/atheism

Submitted November 02, 2019 at 02:39PM by NotLessOrEqual (Via reddit https://ift.tt/36suK47) Abrahamic theism is actually Anti-American, a threat to the Free World & borders on Orwellianism

Okay, so as an Australian doing demographic research on religion of the United States I came to find that despite the irreligious population (includes agnostics, atheists, spiritual but not religious et. al) making up about 20% of the population, the majority of the religious population of the U.S have an ingrained fear, if not distrust and hate of the non-religious. The amount of trust for an atheists (non-capitalized) are '[...]similar to that of a rapist' and that approximately ~50% of the people surveyed have stated that they would not be okay if they or their family members were to marry an atheist over a person of faith, as well as the same percentage also wouldn't vote for a presidential candidate who either did not believe in a god(s) or align himself to any established religion. Despite the U.S federal constitution, at least 8 U.S States (Arkansas, Maryland, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas & Pennsylvania) ban atheists from partaking in governing or political positions in their state constitutions.

Apparently the reason for this is because the lack of religion is seen as 'going against the [majority of U.S citizens'] vision of what America society should be or valued combined with a sense of immorality and the lingering fear from McCarthyism (the history between communist countries & atheism). The religious conservatives online tend to tout about their 'God-given rights' and suchlike.

Now, after realization, it became ironically clear that the morals and tenants of the Abrahamic faiths are in fact, an oxymoron and antithesis to the 'American values' and the Constitution of which the American religious majority claim. Many are quick to criticize and denounce communist regimes for their violations of human rights despite some of the tenants of their beliefs share similar views and values. Let's take a look:

Some Judeo-Christian values:

3 of the 10 Commandments violate the 1st amendment outright as well as UNDHR Articles 18, 19 & 20 by banning blasphemy (no freedom of speech), banning the creation of religious idols to worship and banning the right to partake in other religion or worship of other gods (no freedom of religion/religious practice). Congregating in protest (against God) is also banned - a hilarious ironic event where God kills 14,700 of his own followers for protesting about God killing too many people (No right to assembly and protest). Make's the Communist China's crackdown of Tiananmen Square Protest in 1989 look like a walk in the park (resulted death estimated to be as high as 2700. Hong Kong protests going on right now don't even have any deaths resulting from police action. Yeah, it's that bad.

The existence of the concept of 'hell' is the spiritual equivalent of a concentration camp/political prison where God sends dissidents, people who do not submit to him/worship him, those who criticize him & those who may have differing opinions. Forced-conversions under threat of punishment (of hell), favoritism of believers over non-believers as well as inhumane & torturous conditions of hell described in the Holy Texts all fall within violations of the 8th Amendment regarding 'cruel & unusual punishments' as well as UNDHR Articles 1, 5, 6 & 9 respectively.

Both the Bible, Torah & Quran either promote and/or justifies slavery, legal loopholes to own a slave after 7 years as well as how to sell one's children off as a slave for profit - direct violation of the 13th Amendment as well as the UNDHR Article 4 & 23. This also includes passages in the New Testament too. No where in any Judaic, Christian or Islamic religious doctrine where it is made a rule to ban and outlaw slavery outright, unconditionally.

Theocratic religious ideology means no separation of religion and state and no democracy to elect leaders as God basically rules over anything and everyone anyway (a violation of the 1st Amendment & any proceeding Amendments guarantee right to vote or democratic elections - also includes UNDHR violation of Article 21). Humans on Earth can't simply cast a ballot & vote him out if he does a shit job. When God decides to mass-murder humans, there is no 'Congress' or 'House of Representatives' in Heaven to decide if God's actions are the best or worse to solve a problem. When God violates his own 'Thy shalt not kill law' there is no impeachment process either. Ultimate power ultimately corrupts. So long as God is above the (his own) laws, there is no true justice.

No right to fair trial or proper due process in a court of law: Get accused by at least two or three people regardless of evidence (if any at all) and it's enough to convict you. A violation of the 6th Amendment. Jesus himself was a victim of the very same method of unfair trial by an angry mob to be put to death by Pontius Pilate. Ironic. In addition to this is a flawed and biased theocratic justice system - despite outlawing murder and thievery, there are many instances in both Judeo-Chrisitian & Islamic texts where it shows either God or his followers breaking the rules and receive only a light punishment, no punishment at all or even outright rewarded for breaking the rules under certain circumstances (such as going on an offensive war, pillaging and looting against an enemy state). That said...

violation of the Geneva Convention Protocols Articles 51, 54, 76, 77, 15 & 79 by God by justifying his followers to commit war crimes as an act of revenge against surrendered soldiers, civilian men, women and children (except for virgin females), rape, confiscation and looting of enemy property (which also ironically violates an additional 3 Mosaic commandments - no killing, no adultery and no stealing). In addition, the defeated parties were given no opportunities to negotiate conditions of surrender - it wasn't just a war, it was an ethnic cleansing and land occupation no different to what Nazi Germany did against Poland in 1939.

Justification for persecution, discrimination and targeted genocide against Homosexuals probably violates multiple U.S Constitutional and Human Rights articles already listed above.

Side note: Despite most right-leaning conservative claiming to hold 'Judeo-Christian family-values" who are anti-abortionist, The Bible actually finds the act of Abortion morally justifiable so long as it's used to test if a woman has committed an act of adultery or not heck, there is even a detailed procedure for it. During the war against the Midianities of which the Israelite were victorious, God then commanded for all the Midianite men women & children are to be slaughtered except for the virgin women for them to keep for themselves (as sex slaves or forced-marriages). From this passage we can conclude that there were also probably pregnant Midianite women who were casualties as well and their pregnancy is an obvious visual indicator that a woman was not a virgin - and therefore as per God's instructions they were most likely killed whilst their fetus was STILL IN THEIR WOMB. If abortion to you was not sickening enough, this was a double murder (killing of the mother and her fetus).

In the book of Exodus, God sent the final plague to wipe out the Egyptian first-borns, this also includes Egyptian first-born who were still in their mother's wombs and if it is not the fetus, then the mother who may have been a first-born of her family would have died WITH HER FETUS still in the womb. In addition, it seems God is okay if babies are murdered by smashing them against rocks. So it seems God has little regard for human life both within and without the womb.

There were a many great things Karl Marx got wrong in life, but one thing he hit the nail on the head was that religion truly is, the Opium of the People. Just like opiates like Heroin, religion relieves the pain without actually curing the ailment, whilst also creating an addiction and destroying lives (in this case, countries) in the process.

Religion is just like Communism: Every time it has been tried it never works and usually results in the country where it takes hold of become plagued by an assortment of war/civil war/sectarian violence, corruption, poverty, crime, famine, disease, pollution, illiteracy, gender inequality/violence, homophobia, xenophobia and a blatant disregard for even the basic concepts of Human Rights of varying degrees. Look no further than the United States, The Middle East, Africa, South & Southeast Asia and South America compared to secular countries of Europe, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Japan and South Korea. If the majority of the population of the country accepts these as part of their values, it's not a surprising their nation is in the state that they are.

So long as Abrahamic theism exists, there can never ever truly be, a Free World.

[clusterassets]

New world news from Time: A Long, Brutal History of Chemical Weapons Lies Behind Trump’s Decision to Order Airstrikes in Syria

When President Donald Trump announced on Friday night that he had ordered airstrikes on Syria, he explained the decision with an appeal to a longstanding international consensus that the use of chemical weapons — such as were used a week ago on Syrian opposition forces and civilians in Douma, per the assessment of the U.S., despite denials from the Syrian regime — is a wrong that merits such a forceful response.

“Following the horrors of World War I a century ago, civilized nations joined together to ban chemical warfare,” Trump noted, later adding that the world never wants to see the “ghastly specter” of those weapons return.

The indications that such an announcement might be coming had been present for days since the initial report of the attack, which left Trump once again considering how such news might change his plans, as he had formerly expressed a desire to get the U.S. out of Syria.

Many dead, including women and children, in mindless CHEMICAL attack in Syria. Area of atrocity is in lockdown and encircled by Syrian Army, making it completely inaccessible to outside world. President Putin, Russia and Iran are responsible for backing Animal Assad. Big price…

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) April 8, 2018

The news follows a similar pattern to the events of about a year ago, when the use of chemical weapons in Syria and the resulting horrific imagery of the dead seemed enough to prompt a reversal in President Trump’s stated aversion to U.S. intervention there.

And yet noncombatants are killed in the course of war in countless other fashions, and attempting to rank the cruelest ways to kill is an exercise in both futility and inhumanity. So why is it that chemical weapons spark such automatic revulsion when years of bombs and bullets have not? Though Trump correctly pinpointed World War I as a turning point, in fact the story is even older than that.

Early Developments

Chemical and biological weapons predate even our modern understanding of what those terms mean; there’s evidence of the use of noxious gas as a weapon in the ancient world and, as TIME has pointed out, the purposeful spread of smallpox in the 18th century as a tactic against American Indians was its own kind of biological warfare.

The feeling that such poisons are not an appropriate or honorable tactic of warfare is also an old one. As Julian Perry Robinson has written in his history of the subject, the earliest example of that idea might possibly be found in ancient Indian epics. And in Greek mythology, the use of poison as a weapon of war was often considered cowardly, a tricky technique used by those who were not heroes. By 1675, according to the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, France and Germany had signed what was the first international treaty that limited such weapons (in this case, poisoned bullets).

So it should be no surprise that in 1899, during a conference at the Hague on the laws of war, it was decided by the signatory nations that it would be “especially” prohibited “to employ poison or poisoned arms.” Though the convention they signed did not come with any enforcement mechanism, the moral imperative to avoid using poison during wartime had been established by that point.

But, during the 19th century, the technology that could be deployed in the use of chemical weapons underwent a shift. Pressurized canisters of noxious gas could replace the poisoned arrow tips of the past. As Robinson describes, Germany had an “industrial edge” in the development of such technology, and soon enough a reason to want to take advantage of that edge. The infamous trench-based stalemates that quickly set in after the 1914 beginning of World War I made the combatants eager to try something new — and that something included gas, even despite those centuries of history condemning such an idea.

Read More: These Battlefields Were Devastated in World War I. See What They Look Like Today

The World Wars

On April 22, 1915, “German infantrymen gave the world its first whiff of poison-gas warfare,” as TIME later recalled, “by sending a huge, grey-green cloud of noxious chlorine rolling over two French divisions in the trenches at Ypres, killing 5,000, incapacitating 10,000, and cutting a 31-mile swath in Allied lines.” Chlorine, phosgene, chloropicrin and mustard gas were all used during the Great War, though all involved — both sides developed and used chemical weapons — discovered that gas could be a difficult tool to use well, as the wind had to cooperate to make it work and developments such as increased use of tanks mitigated some of the chemicals’ impacts.

By TIME’s later estimate, that war saw 124,000 tons of chemical weapons used, between both sides, and the resulting deaths of 91,000 soldiers.

So it was that, in the wake of that conflict, the Treaty of Versailles included a ban on Germany manufacturing any poison gas. In addition, as members of League of Nations met in Geneva in 1925, delegates from 45 countries sought to find a out a way to come up with what TIME called back then “a protocol generally prohibiting chemical and bacteriological warfare.”

“[The] use in war of asphyxiating, poisonous or other gases, and of all analogous liquids, materials or devices, has been justly condemned by the general opinion of the civilized world,” the protocol proclaimed. The Geneva Protocol, however, did not end the history of chemical weapons. It had “no teeth,” per TIME, and allowed nations to make and keep such agents as long as they promised not to use them. (The U.S., which had not actually ratified its membership in the League, did not sign the Geneva Protocol at the time.)

And, before the League of Nations participants would have hoped, the world had cause to put the Protocol to the test. The Great War turned out not to be, as had been hoped, the “war to end all wars.”

Get your history fix in one place: sign up for the weekly TIME History newsletter

When World War II began, as TIME noted in 1944, “the horror and repugnance aroused by the use of gas in World War I [was] still alive,” though some Americans argued that using chemical weapons would be a more modern and humane approach to warfare. Yet, though soldiers had gotten much better prepared to withstand a gas attack since the 1915 Ypres battle that was still so fresh in humanity’s collective memory, chemical weapons still held the deadly threat of death for civilians. Nor was it necessary to use chemical weapons, one military official told the magazine: in order to really make a difference the gas must be used by a combatant with a superior air force, and having a superior air force meant there was no reason to use gas.

In 1943, President Franklin Roosevelt warned the Axis powers not to use poison gas during war, and promised that the U.S. would only do so in retaliation:

Use of such weapons has been outlawed by the general opinion of civilized mankind. This country has not used them, and I hope that we never will be compelled to use them. I state categorically that we shall under no circumstances resort to the use of such weapons unless they are first used by our enemies.

As President of the United States and as Commander in Chief of the American armed forces, I want to make clear beyond all doubt to any of our enemies contemplating a resort to such desperate and barbarous methods that acts of this nature committed against any one of the United Nations will be regarded as having been committed against the United States itself and will be treated accordingly. We promise to any perpetrators of such crimes full and swift retaliation in kind and I feel obliged now to warn the Axis armies and the Axis peoples, in Europe and in Asia, that the terrible consequences of any use of these inhumane methods on their part will be brought down swiftly and surely upon their own heads. Any use of gas by any Axis power, therefore, will immediately be followed by the fullest possible retaliation upon munition centers, seaports, and other military objectives throughout the whole extent of the territory of such Axis country.

Even as Nazi scientists were experimenting with new and potent poison gases, including nerve agents like sarin, some of which were manufactured by concentration camp prisoners, Hitler chose not to endorse their use against Allied soldiers. (“Although many senior military officers encouraged Hitler to deploy their powerful new chemical weapon, he waffled, likely for two reasons,” according to Sarah Everts’ summary of the history for the Chemical Heritage Foundation. Those reasons were Hitler’s own experience as a victim of battlefield gas in World War I and his worry that the Allies might have developed similar technology and would retaliate in kind.)

But despite what happened on the battlefield, deadly chemicals were widely used by the Nazi regime as part of their effort to wipe out the population of Jews and other minorities from the area they controlled. For example, in 1944, when TIME’s Moscow Correspondent Richard Lauterbach visited the Majdanek concentration camp and reported on the tour he received from Dmitri Kudriavtsev, Secretary of the Soviet Atrocities Commission, he saw the bathhouses in which Nazis had used Zyklon B to kill as many as 250 people at a time. He was told that on Nov. 3, 1943, alone, “they annihilated 18,000 people — Poles, Jews, political prisoners and war prisoners” with the gas.

New Agreements, New Trespasses

After World War II, as proud as the world powers may have been to have avoided the use of chemical weapons during the battles, the Cold War arms race extended to chemical-weapons research competition, too. One rationalization for that research was helped along by the widespread Cold War idea that, as long as one didn’t strike first, any weapon could be on the table. Plus, the Geneva Protocol only prevented the use of those weapons, not the creation or storage of them.

So it should perhaps be no surprise that the late 20th century was a time of both new diplomatic advances and new uses of new weapons, despite those advances.

On the one hand, the U.S. — after decades of supporting the doctrine voiced by Roosevelt — signed agreements that barred the use of chemical weapons, as did other nations. On the other hand, research continued apace, and the prohibition on the use of chemical weapons did not completely stop them from being put into action.

Controversy over whether the U.S. was using gas in Vietnam raged during the 1960s — that the U.S. was using chemicals such as Agent Orange was clear, but whether that herbicide counted as a chemical weapon as governed by the Geneva Protocol was disputed — and by the end of that decade the U.S. was spending hundreds of millions of dollars a year on its chemical and biological weapons program, stockpiling the results. Then, in the wake of that controversy, President Nixon resubmitted the Geneva Convention to the U.S. Senate, shortly before the 1972 Biological Weapons Convention — which strengthened the biological-weapons portion of the Geneva protocol — was submitted, too. Both were approved by the Senate in late 1974 and ratified by President Ford in early 1975.

In 1988, Iraq used poison gas on Kurdish towns during the course of its war with Iran. “The bloated bodies of Kurdish residents littered the silent streets of the northern Iraqi town of Halabja. A dead turbaned man who had tried to shield a porcelain-faced infant in his arms from a cloud of poison gas lay frozen in time on a road. Families died together in their homes or in cars. The dead were among the hundreds and possibly thousands of victims of one of the worst chemical-warfare attacks since World War I,” TIME reported. The weapons used were primarily mustard gas. The world’s response was somewhat muted — perhaps due to a lack of desire to take the side of Iran among many of the Geneva Protocol signatories who might have otherwise spoken up — but President Ronald Reagan said in a speech that year that the use of those weapons “jeopardizes the moral and legal strictures that have held those weapons in check since World War I.”

In 1993, after the fall of the Soviet Union, an even tougher U.N. Chemical Weapons Convention was created. This agreement prohibited stockpiling. At the time of the signing, both the U.S. and Russia had tens of thousands of metric tons of chemical weapons in store. Following through on the timely destruction of the chemical agents, as required by that agreement, has proved difficult.

And yet one question, raised by Julian Perry Robinson, has remained unanswered through these many decades: if chemical weapons were more tactically useful, easier to control and harder for armies (if not civilians) to guard against, would those who make such decisions have come up with justifications for their use?

After all, as a TIME essay in 1969 began, “The dark side of progress is man’s spectacular skill at devising better and better ways to kill other men.”

April 13, 2018 at 06:38PM ClusterAssets Inc., https://ClusterAssets.wordpress.com