Johnny Depp Crashes Disneyland Ride In Character And People Had Zero Chill

function onPlayerReadyVidible(e){‘undefined’!=typeof HPTrack&&HPTrack.Vid.Vidible_track(e)}!function(e,i){if(e.vdb_Player){if(‘object’==typeof commercial_video){var a=”,o=’m.fwsitesection=’+commercial_video.site_and_category;if(a+=o,commercial_video[‘package’]){var c=’&m.fwkeyvalues=sponsorship%3D’+commercial_video[‘package’];a+=c}e.setAttribute(‘vdb_params’,a)}i(e.vdb_Player)}else{var t=arguments.callee;setTimeout(function(){t(e,i)},0)}}(document.getElementById(‘vidible_1’),onPlayerReadyVidible);

Depending on how you feel about Johnny Depp these days, the prospect of the actor showing up without warning is either entirely off-putting or a welcome surprise.

Guests of the Disneyland Resort in Anaheim, California, apparently fit squarely into the latter category when Depp popped up at the “Pirates of the Caribbean” attraction multiple times on Wednesday night.

Ahead of the release of the fifth installment in the franchise, “Dead Men Tell No Tales,” the actor, dressed in a full Captain Jack Sparrow getup, delighted visitors at the happiest place on earth. 

At this point, Depp could probably channel the perpetually rum-drunk pirate in his sleep, so it’s nice to see him making an effort to bring Sparrow to life once more. Riders immediately took to social media to share video of Depp’s surprise visit, with one tweeter enthusing: “JOHNNY DEPP WAS ON PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN WHILE I WAS ON IT AND IM SCREAMING.”

That must have been one huge paycheck, considering how Depp, in his own words, has been “overpaid” for his part in the franchise.

Check him out in action below. 

“Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales” hits theaters May 26.

type=type=RelatedArticlesblockTitle=Related… + articlesList=58794a62e4b0b3c7a7b162a3,57b331f4e4b0a8e1502566c1,57b653b5e4b03d5136877dc8,574d9ec7e4b03ede44154fc3

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

This Drag Queen Is Recreating Carrie Bradshaw's Most Iconic Looks

When New York City resident Dan Clay dressed up as the legendary Carrie Bradshaw from “Sex And The City” last Halloween, he had no idea that he was unleashing a creative force that the internet would absolutely adore.

After posting photos of his look throughout the night, Clay received an outpouring of engagement from fans of the show and “Sex And The City” Instagram accounts.

“All the comments were so so kind, and I still had all these pictures left from our little West Village photo shoot, so I decided to keep it going for a bit,” Clay told HuffPost. “I posted a few more pics, even trying to capture Carrie’s classic narration style. I always thought it would just sort of fade away ― [but] it never did!” 

And thus, Carrie Dragshaw was born.

For Clay, the creative process of selecting and reimagining iconic Bradshaw looks, and then creating a “Sex And The City” inspired caption for each post, began to serve a number of different purposes in his life. For one, the social media star really started to treasure the joy and positive energy that his Bradshaw looks seemed to bring to people’s lives.

“People kept on saying really kind things about the pictures and the captions (including Patricia Field and SJP, so if that’s not motivation I don’t know what is!),” Clay told HuffPost. “The internet isn’t always full of positivity and love, and this seemed to spread both. Made people smile, gave them a little boost, a reason to connect with friends. It was so cool to have this opportunity to spread a little joy!”

Dan also found the Carrie Dragshaw character to be a cathartic release from the pressures and stress of a volatile political climate following the election of President Donald Trump.

“All of this happened right during election time, and I found getting into ‘Carrie’ character to be this really immersive escape,” he continued. “You try thinking about politics while also learning how to apply fake eyelashes! Add to this that it forced me to confront my own insecurities around masculinity – I was sold!… A delightful personal oasis that spreads a little love.”

Clay has no plans to stop his Carrie Dragshaw character anytime soon, and he hopes that she continues to bring people around the world happiness and solace during uncertain political times.

“I love the idea that the pictures could brighten someone’s day,” Clay said. “Life isn’t always rainbows and butterflies, and just this tiny opportunity to make someone smile – that’s reason enough to prance around the Plaza in imitation Dior. I especially love the idea that the captions could connect with people. There were moments in ‘Sex and the City’ that were really empowering—preaching independence, self-confidence, friendship, and fabulosity. I really appreciate the opportunity, even on a small scale, to provide that kind of uplift and perspective.”

Head here to follow Dan Clay on Instagram and keep up with all of Carrie Dragshaw’s adventures.

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Cecile Richards To Ivanka Trump: 'Words Don't Matter. Women Want To See Action.'

Planned Parenthood President Cecile Richards has some strong words for Ivanka Trump. 

In an interview with Cosmopolitan published Wednesday, Richards discussed the president’s first 100 days in office and how the country needs to hold the first daughter accountable for her actions (or lack thereof) on women’s issues. 

When asked if Trump has shown any signs of being an ally to women, Richards did not mince words. As one of the highest-ranking women in the White House, Richards said, Trump has a responsibility to the women of the U.S. that she’s now quite literally working for as an employee of the federal government. 

“Her portfolio is women’s issues ― or, it includes all women’s issues. So this is her job,” Richards told Cosmopolitan. “And for the first three months of this administration, women have seen an unrelenting attack on every fundamental right that we’ve achieved, and particularly that we’ve achieved over the last eight years in getting equity and health care access.”

Richards said that when it comes to working in the White House, words don’t matter ― actions do. 

“What women want to see is what’s the action,” Richards said. “And so [Ivanka] has a lot of responsibility now, and she has a responsibility of women all around this country ― you can’t talk about child care or entrepreneurism and take women off of health care benefits, deny their access to Planned Parenthood, deny their access to maternity benefits, charge them more for health insurance coverage.”

“So, that’s a long way of saying not only Ivanka Trump, but everyone who works for this administration, has a decision to make here about whether they’re going to stand on the side of women and allow women to move forward in this country and this economy, or whether they’re going to roll back years of progress,” she added.

Richards also addressed the news that Trump was booed at a recent summit in Germany after defending her father and telling the crowd that he’s “a tremendous champion” for women and families. 

The fact that Trump is the president’s daughter should be “irrelevant” at this point, the Planned Parenthood president said. 

“She actually works for the federal government. She’s now an employee for all of us. She chose that role. So now, if she’s not comfortable standing up for what she believes in for women, then she perhaps needs to think about that,” Richards said.

“This isn’t a personality thing. Millions of women’s lives are at stake, in this country and around the globe,” she continued. “The first act this president took the first day in office was to repeal maternal and child health benefits for women around the world, to end access to HIV and Zika screening for women. Women around the world are going to be impacted by the decisions that this president has already made, and anyone who works for him and takes a job in this government should be held accountable.” 

The Planned Parenthood president added that without advocating for women, Trump can’t keep his promise to boost our economy ― women are half of the population. 

“President Trump was elected saying he wanted to create jobs and rebuild our economy,” she said. “You cannot do that and leave half of the economy behind and so, fundamentally, his promises to the country are at odds with what they are trying to do to roll back women’s access to health care and opportunities to plan their families.”

Head over to Cosmopolitan to read the full interview. 

type=type=RelatedArticlesblockTitle=Related… + articlesList=589a14e1e4b0c1284f28b5ec,58ecdfdfe4b0df7e20456221,58751b8fe4b099cdb0ffb855

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Secret U.S. Military Documents Reveal America’s War-Fighting Footprint In Africa

Cross-posted with TomDispatch.com

General Thomas Waldhauser sounded a little uneasy.  “I would just say, they are on the ground.  They are trying to influence the action,” commented the chief of U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM) at a Pentagon press briefing in March, when asked about Russian military personnel operating in North Africa.  “We watch what they do with great concern.”

And Russians aren’t the only foreigners on Waldhauser’s mind.  He’s also wary of a Chinese “military base” being built not far from Camp Lemonnier, a large U.S. facility in the tiny, sun-blasted nation of Djibouti.  “They’ve never had an overseas base, and we’ve never had a base of… a peer competitor as close as this one happens to be,” he said.  “There are some very significant… operational security concerns.”

At that press conference, Waldhauser mentioned still another base, an American one exposed by the Washington Post last October in an article titled, “U.S. has secretly expanded its global network of drone bases to North Africa.”  Five months later, the AFRICOM commander still sounded aggrieved.  “The Washington Post story that said ‘flying from a secret base in Tunisia.’  It’s not a secret base and it’s not our base… We have no intention of establishing a base there.”

Waldhauser’s insistence that the U.S. had no base in Tunisia relied on a technicality, since that foreign airfield clearly functions as an American outpost. For years, AFRICOM has peddled the fiction that Djibouti is the site of its only “base” in Africa. “We continue to maintain one forward operating site on the continent, Camp Lemonnier,” reads the command’s 2017 posture statement.  Spokespeople for the command regularly maintain that any other U.S. outposts are few and transitory ― “expeditionary” in military parlance. 

While the U.S. maintains a vast empire of military installations around the world, with huge ― and hard to miss ― complexes throughout Europe and Asia, bases in Africa have been far better hidden.  And if you listened only to AFRICOM officials, you might even assume that the U.S. military’s footprint in Africa will soon be eclipsed by that of the Chinese or the Russians. 

Highly classified internal AFRICOM files offer a radically different picture.  A set of previously secret documents, obtained by TomDispatch.com via the Freedom of Information Act, offers clear evidence of a remarkable, far-ranging, and expanding network of outposts strung across the continent.  In official plans for operations in 2015 that were drafted and issued the year before, Africa Command lists 36 U.S. outposts scattered across 24 African countries.  These include low-profile locations ― from Kenya to South Sudan to a shadowy Libyan airfield ― that have never previously been mentioned in published reports.  Today, according to an AFRICOM spokesperson, the number of these sites has actually swelled to 46, including “15 enduring locations.”  The newly disclosed numbers and redacted documents contradict more than a decade’s worth of dissembling by U.S. Africa Command and shed new light on a constellation of bases integral to expanding U.S. military operations on the African continent and in the Middle East.


A map of U.S. military bases ― forward operating sites, cooperative security locations, and contingency locations ― across the African continent in 2014 from declassified AFRICOM planning documents (Nick Turse/TomDispatch).

A Constellation of Bases

AFRICOM failed to respond to repeated requests for further information about the 46 bases, outposts, and staging areas currently dotting the continent.  Nonetheless, the newly disclosed 2015 plans offer unique insights into the wide-ranging network of outposts, a constellation of bases that already provided the U.S. military with unprecedented continental reach.

Those documents divide U.S. bases into three categories: forward operating sites (FOSes), cooperative security locations (CSLs), and contingency locations (CLs).  “In total, [the fiscal year 20]15 proposed posture will be 2 FOSes, 10 CSLs, and 22 CLs” state the documents.  By spring 2015, the number of CSLs had already increased to 11, according to then-AFRICOM chief General David Rodriguez, in order to allow U.S. crisis-response forces to reach potential hot spots in West Africa.  An appendix to the plan, also obtained by TomDispatch, actually lists 23 CLs, not 22.  Another appendix mentions one additional contingency location.

Today, according to an AFRICOM spokesperson, the number of these sites has actually swelled to 46, including “15 enduring locations.”

 

These outposts ― of which forward operating sites are the most permanent and contingency locations the least so ― form the backbone of U.S. military operations on the continent and have been expanding at a rapid rate, particularly since the September 2012 attack on the U.S. Mission in Benghazi, Libya, that killed U.S. Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens and three other Americans.  The plans also indicate that the U.S. military regularly juggles locations, shuttering sites and opening others, while upgrading contingency locations to cooperative security locations in response to changing conditions like, according to the documents, “increased threats emanating from the East, North-West, and Central regions” of the continent.

AFRICOM’s 2017 posture statement notes, for example, a recent round of changes to the command’s inventory of posts.  The document explains that the U.S. military “closed five contingency locations and designated seven new contingency locations on the continent due to shifting requirements and identified gaps in our ability to counter threats and support ongoing operations.”  Today, according to AFRICOM spokesman Chuck Prichard, the total number of sites has jumped from the 36 cited in the 2015 plans to 46 ― a network now consisting of two forward operating sites, 13 cooperative security locations, and 31 contingency locations.

Location, Location, Location

AFRICOM’s sprawling network of bases is crucial to its continent-wide strategy of training the militaries of African proxies and allies and conducting a multi-front campaign aimed at combating a disparate and spreading collection of terror groups.  The command’s major areas of effort involve: a shadow war against the militant group al-Shabaab in Somalia (a long-term campaign, ratcheting up in the Trump era, with no end in sight); attempts to contain the endless fallout from the 2011 U.S. and allied military intervention that ousted Libyan dictator Muammar Qaddafi (a long-term effort with no end in sight); the neutralizing of “violent extremist organizations” across northwest Africa, the lands of the Sahel and Maghreb (a long-term effort with no end in sight); the degradation of the Islamist militant group Boko Haram in the Lake Chad Basin nations of Nigeria, Niger, Cameroon, and Chad (a long-term effort ― to the tune of $156 million last year alone in support of regional proxies there ― with no end in sight); countering piracy in the Gulf of Guinea (a long-term effort with no end in sight), and winding down the wildly expensive effort to eliminate Joseph Kony and his murderous Lord’s Resistance Army in Central Africa (both live on, despite a long-term U.S. effort). 

The U.S. military’s multiplying outposts are also likely to prove vital to the Trump administration’s expanding wars in the Middle East.  African bases have long been essential, for instance, to Washington’s ongoing shadow war in Yemen, which has seen a significant increase in drone strikes under the Trump administration.  They have also been integral to operations against the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, where a substantial (and deadly) uptick in U.S. airpower (and civilian casualties) has been evident in recent months.

In 2015, AFRICOM spokesman Anthony Falvo noted that the command’s “strategic posture and presence are premised on the concept of a tailored, flexible, light footprint that leverages and supports the posture and presence of partners and is supported by expeditionary infrastructure.” The declassified secret documents explicitly state that America’s network of African bases is neither insignificant nor provisional.  “USAFRICOM’s posture requires a network of enduring and non-enduring locations across the continent,” say the 2015 plans.  “A developed network of FOSes, CSLs, and non-enduring CLs in key countries… is necessary to support the command’s operations and engagements.”

According to the files, AFRICOM’s two forward operating sites are Djibouti’s Camp Lemonnier and a base on the United Kingdom’s Ascension Island off the west coast of Africa.  Described as “enduring locations” with a sustained troop presence and “U.S.-owned real property,” they serve as hubs for staging missions across the continent and for supplying the growing network of outposts there. 

The U.S. military’s multiplying outposts are also likely to prove vital to the Trump administration’s expanding wars in the Middle East.

Lemonnier, the crown jewel of America’s African bases, has expanded from 88 acres to about 600 acres since 2002, and in those years, the number of personnel there has increased exponentially as well. “Camp Lemonnier serves as a hub for multiple operations and security cooperation activities,” reads AFRICOM’s 2017 posture statement.  “This base is essential to U.S. efforts in East Africa and the Arabian Peninsula.”  Indeed, the formerly secret documents note that the base supports “U.S operations in Somalia CT [counterterrorism], Yemen CT, Gulf of Aden (counter-piracy), and a wide range of Security Assistance activities and programs throughout the region.”

In 2015, when he announced the increase in cooperative security locations, then-AFRICOM chief David Rodriguez mentioned Senegal, Ghana, and Gabon as staging areas for the command’s rapid reaction forces.  Last June, outgoing U.S. Army Africa commander Major General Darryl Williams drew attention to a CSL in Uganda and one being set up in Botswana, adding, “We have very austere, lean, lily pads, if you will, all over Africa now.” 

CSL Entebbe in Uganda has, for example, long been an important air base for American forces in Africa, serving as a hub for surveillance aircraft.  It also proved integral to Operation Oaken Steel, the July 2016 rapid deployment of troops to the U.S. Embassy in Juba, South Sudan, as that failed state (and failed U.S. nation-building effort) sank into yet more violence. 

Libreville, Gabon, is listed in the documents as a “proposed CSL,” but was actually used in 2014 and 2015 as a key base for Operation Echo Casemate, the joint U.S.-French-African military response to unrest in the Central African Republic.

AFRICOM’s 2015 plan also lists cooperative security locations in Accra, Ghana; Gaborone, Botswana; Dakar, Senegal; Douala, Cameroon; Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso; and Mombasa, Kenya.  While officially defined by the military as temporary locales capable of being scaled up for larger operations, any of these CSLs in Africa “may also function as a major logistics hub,” according to the documents.

Contingency Plans 

The formerly secret AFRICOM files note that the command has designated five contingency locations as “semi-permanent,” 13 as “temporary,” and four as “initial.”  These include a number of sites that have never previously been disclosed, including outposts in several countries that were actually at war when the documents were created.  Listed among the CLs, for instance, is one in Juba, the capital of South Sudan, already in the midst of an ongoing civil war in 2014; one in Bangui, the capital of the periodically unstable Central African Republic; and another in Al-Wigh, a Saharan airfield in southern Libya located near that country’s borders with Niger, Chad, and Algeria.

Officially classified as “non-enduring” locations, CLs are nonetheless among the most integral sites for U.S. operations on the continent.  Today, according to AFRICOM’s Prichard, the 31 contingency locations provide “access to support partners, counter threats, and protect U.S. interests in East, North, and West Africa.”

AFRICOM did not provide the specific locations of the current crop of CLs, stating only that they “strive to increase access in crucial areas.” The 2015 plans, however, provide ample detail on the areas that were most important to the command at that time.  One such site is Camp Simba in Manda Bay, Kenya, also mentioned in a 2013 internal Pentagon study on secret drone operations in Somalia and Yemen.  At least two manned surveillance aircraft were based there at the time. 

Chabelley Airfield in Djibouti is also mentioned in AFRICOM’s 2015 plan.  Once a spartan French Foreign Legion post, it has undergone substantial expansion in recent years as U.S. drone operations in that country were moved from Camp Lemonnier to this more remote location.  It soon became a regional hub for unmanned aircraft not just for Africa but also for the Middle East.  By the beginning of October 2015, for example, drones flown from Chabelley had already logged more than 24,000 hours of intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance missions and were also, according to the Air Force, “responsible for the neutralization of 69 enemy fighters, including five high-valued individuals” in the war against the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria. 

AFRICOM’s inventory of CLs also includes sites in Nzara, South Sudan; Arlit, Niger; both Bamako and Gao, Mali; Kasenyi, Uganda; Victoria, the capital of the Seychelles; Monrovia, Liberia; Ouassa and Nema, Mauritania; Faya Largeau, Chad; Bujumbura, Burundi; Lakipia, the site of a Kenyan Air Force base; and another Kenyan airfield at Wajir that was upgraded and expanded by the U.S. Navy earlier in this decade, as well as an outpost in Arba Minch, Ethiopia, that was reportedly shuttered in 2015 after nearly five years of operation.

A longtime contingency location in Niamey, the capital of Niger, has seen marked growth in recent years as has a more remote location, a Nigerien military base at Agadez, listed among the “proposed” CSLs in the AFRICOM documents.  The U.S. is, in fact, pouring $100 million into building up the base, according to a 2016 investigation by the Intercept.  N’Djamena, Chad, the site of yet another “proposed CSL,” has actually been used by the U.S. military for years.  Troops and a drone were dispatched there in 2014 to aid in operations against Boko Haram and “base camp facilities” were constructed there, too. 

The list of proposed CLs also includes sites in Berbera, a town in the self-declared Republic of Somaliland, and in Mogadishu, the capital of neighboring Somalia (another locale used by American troops for years), as well as the towns of Baidoa and Bosaso.  These or other outposts are likely to play increasingly important roles as the Trump administration ramps up its military activities in Somalia, the long-failed state that saw 18 U.S. personnel killed in the disastrous “Black Hawk Down” mission of 1993.   Last month, for instance, President Trump relaxed rules aimed at preventing civilian casualties when the U.S. conducts drone strikes and commando raids in that country and so laid the foundation for a future escalation of the war against al-Shabaab there.  This month, AFRICOM confirmed that dozens of soldiers from the Army’s 101st Airborne Division, a storied light infantry unit, would be deployed to that same country in order to train local forces to, as a spokesperson put it, “better fight” al-Shabaab.

Many other sites previously identified as U.S. outposts or staging areas are not listed in AFRICOM’s 2015 plans, such as bases in Djema, Sam Ouandja, and Obo in the Central African Republic that were revealed, in recent years, by the Washington Post.  Also missing is a newer drone base in Garoua, Cameroon, not to mention that Tunisian air base where the U.S. has been flying drones, according to AFRICOM’s Waldhauser, for quite some time.”  

The command’s physical footprint may, in fact, have been its most jealously guarded secret.

Some bases may have been shuttered, while others may not yet have been put in service when the documents were produced.  Ultimately, the reasons that these and many other previously identified bases are not included in the redacted secret files are unclear due to AFRICOM’s refusal to offer comment, clarification, or additional information on the locations of its bases.    

Base Desires

“Just as the U.S. pursues strategic interests in Africa, international competitors, including China and Russia, are doing the same,” laments AFRICOM in its 2017 posture statement. “We continue to see international competitors engage with African partners in a manner contrary to the international norms of transparency.” 

Since it was established as an independent command in 2008, however, AFRICOM itself has been anything but transparent about its activities on the continent.  The command’s physical footprint may, in fact, have been its most jealously guarded secret.  Today, thanks to AFRICOM’s own internal documents, that secret is out and with AFRICOM’s admission that it currently maintains “15 enduring locations,” the long-peddled fiction of a combatant command with just one base in its area of operations has been laid to rest.

“Because of the size of Africa, because of the time and space and the distances, when it comes to special crisis-response-type activities, we need access in various places on the continent,” said AFRICOM chief Waldhauser during his March press conference.  These “various places” have also been integral to escalating American shadow wars, including a full-scale air campaign against the Islamic State in Libya, dubbed Operation Odyssey Lightning, which ended late last year, and ongoing intelligence-gathering missions and a continued U.S. troop presence in that country; drone assassinations and increased troop deployments in Somalia to counter al-Shabaab; and increasing engagement in a proxy war against Boko Haram militants in the Lake Chad region of Central Africa.  For these and many more barely noticed U.S. military missions, America’s sprawling, ever-expanding network of bases provides the crucial infrastructure for cross-continental combat by U.S. and allied forces, a low-profile support system for war-making in Africa and beyond.

Without its wide-ranging constellation of bases, it would be nearly impossible for the U.S. to carry out ceaseless low-profile military activities across the continent.  As a result, AFRICOM continues to prefer shadows to sunlight.  While the command provided figures on the total number of U.S. military bases, outposts, and staging areas in Africa, its spokespeople failed to respond to repeated requests to provide locations for any of the 46 current sites.  While the whereabouts of the new outposts may still be secret, there’s little doubt as to the trajectory of America’s African footprint, which has increased by 10 locations ― a 28% jump ― in just over two years. 

America’s “enduring” African bases “give the United States options in the event of crisis and enable partner capacity building,” according to AFRICOM’s Chuck Prichard.  They have also played a vital role in conflicts from Yemen to Iraq, Nigeria to Somalia.  With the Trump administration escalating its wars in Africa and the Middle East, and the potential for more crises ― from catastrophic famines to spreading wars ― on the horizon, there’s every reason to believe the U.S. military’s footprint on the continent will continue to evolve, expand, and enlarge in the years ahead, outpost by outpost and base by base.

Nick Turse is the managing editor of TomDispatch, a fellow at the Nation Institute, and a contributing writer for the Intercept. His latest book, Next Time They’ll Come to Count the Dead: War and Survival in South Sudan, was a finalist for the 2016 Investigative Reporters and Editors Book Award.  His website is NickTurse.com.

Follow TomDispatch on Twitter and join us on Facebook. Check out the newest Dispatch Book, John Dower’s The Violent American Century: War and Terror Since World War II, as well as John Feffer’s dystopian novel Splinterlands, Nick Turse’s Next Time They’ll Come to Count the Dead, and Tom Engelhardt’s Shadow Government: Surveillance, Secret Wars, and a Global Security State in a Single-Superpower World.

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

'The Circle' Led Emma Watson To Think More About Internet Privacy

function onPlayerReadyVidible(e){‘undefined’!=typeof HPTrack&&HPTrack.Vid.Vidible_track(e)}!function(e,i){if(e.vdb_Player){if(‘object’==typeof commercial_video){var a=”,o=’m.fwsitesection=’+commercial_video.site_and_category;if(a+=o,commercial_video[‘package’]){var c=’&m.fwkeyvalues=sponsorship%3D’+commercial_video[‘package’];a+=c}e.setAttribute(‘vdb_params’,a)}i(e.vdb_Player)}else{var t=arguments.callee;setTimeout(function(){t(e,i)},0)}}(document.getElementById(‘vidible_1’),onPlayerReadyVidible);

When Dave Eggers published The Circle ― about a young upstart employee in a Google-esque, all-knowing tech company ― in 2013, the idea of being constantly connected, of having all one’s private data in one place, seemed safely in the realms of fiction.

Just four years later, with “The Circle” film adaptation hitting theaters Friday and Congress rolling back protections against ISPs selling users’ web histories, his darkly humorous vision of the future doesn’t seem so far off.

When asked if the relentless march of technological progress should be seen as good or bad for humanity at a Tribeca Film Festival screening Wednesday, Emma Watson, who plays new Circle employee Mae in the film, felt the answer was complicated. 

“There’s no right answer,” she said. “Trust me, I grilled Dave Eggers. Really, I’ve taken him to a room and have been like, ‘Tell me what we do! How do we stop it? What do we do?’ And you know, it’s much more complicated than that, unfortunately, as is life.” 

“I guess the big thing for me having been involved in this is just taking back the idea that this information that belongs to us, or belongs to me,” she continued, “and just being mindful and much more aware of what’s unveiling before our very eyes, oftentimes without us even realizing.”

The all-eyes-on-you feeling that Mae experiences in the film — the result of participating in a radical new form of transparency — isn’t dissimilar to the microscope of celebrity.

“It was a very vulnerable experience for me to be in this movie,” Watson explained earlier in the Q&A session. “I felt very vulnerable watching it. And I think it’s just ‘cause it really went to the bone, a lot, just in terms of experiences where you know you have to walk out to a stage and there are things going on behind the scenes that no one knows about, and you just have to turn on and kind of be this thing. Getting to play Mae and put that on screen was really hard for me, and really meaningful.”

function onPlayerReadyVidible(e){‘undefined’!=typeof HPTrack&&HPTrack.Vid.Vidible_track(e)}!function(e,i){if(e.vdb_Player){if(‘object’==typeof commercial_video){var a=”,o=’m.fwsitesection=’+commercial_video.site_and_category;if(a+=o,commercial_video[‘package’]){var c=’&m.fwkeyvalues=sponsorship%3D’+commercial_video[‘package’];a+=c}e.setAttribute(‘vdb_params’,a)}i(e.vdb_Player)}else{var t=arguments.callee;setTimeout(function(){t(e,i)},0)}}(document.getElementById(‘vidible_2’),onPlayerReadyVidible);

Watson elaborated on the rules she has in place to protect her privacy in a chat with Jessica Chastain for Interview magazine this month. Having been thrust into the spotlight at a young age as Hermione Granger in the “Harry Potter” franchise, Watson explained, “The story of my life has been of public interest, which is why I’ve been so passionate about having a private identity.”

The actress sees keeping her private life under wraps as a part of her job. “When I step into a character, people have to be able to suspend their disbelief; they have to be able to divorce me from that girl,” she said. “And not having everyone know every single intimate detail of my entire life is part of me trying to protect my ability to do my job well.”

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Koi Restaurant In Trump Soho Will Close After Post-Election Decline

Some of you may recall when, back in December of 2016, celebrity chef Anthony Bourdain publicly stated that he’d never eat at one of Donald Trump’s restaurants. It looks like others have followed suit.

As a result of the election, one celebrity-frequented restaurant is being forced to shut it doors because it’s located in Trump Soho.

That restaurant is Koi, a Japanese-fusion spot with locations around the world. Koi ― which is owned by Koi Group, not Trump ― was simply located in the Trump Soho building and that was enough to hurt its sales. The clubby restaurant was beloved by the elite, but apparently not enough elites love Trump.

Grubstreet spoke to Suzanne Chou, Koi Group’s general counsel, and she told them: “Obviously, the restaurant is closing because business is down. I don’t think anyone would volunteer to close a business if they were making money. Beyond that, I would prefer not to speculate as to why, but obviously since the election it’s gone down.”

Jonathan Grullon, a busser at Koi explained it to Grubstreet in even clearer terms: “Before Trump won we were doing great. There were a lot of people we had, our regulars, who’d go to the hotel but are not affiliated with Trump. And they were saying if he wins, we are not coming here anymore.”.

Apparently, that was not a bluff. Servers have had to take second jobs since Trump won the election because business got so slow. Ricardo Aca, who worked at the restaurant for four years, told Grubstreet that the Kardashians stopped coming altogether. 

The restaurant is reportedly closing June 18. Its Bryant Park location is still open and going strong.

HuffPost has reached out to Koi for comment.

type=type=RelatedArticlesblockTitle=Related… + articlesList=5632f074e4b063179911e45c,585c06cae4b0d9a594575f5f,58f0eb41e4b0b9e9848b6313,58ee5e4ee4b0f3927474ad90

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Barbra Streisand Says It Was 'Heartbreaking' To See Hillary Clinton Lose The Election

function onPlayerReadyVidible(e){‘undefined’!=typeof HPTrack&&HPTrack.Vid.Vidible_track(e)}!function(e,i){if(e.vdb_Player){if(‘object’==typeof commercial_video){var a=”,o=’m.fwsitesection=’+commercial_video.site_and_category;if(a+=o,commercial_video[‘package’]){var c=’&m.fwkeyvalues=sponsorship%3D’+commercial_video[‘package’];a+=c}e.setAttribute(‘vdb_params’,a)}i(e.vdb_Player)}else{var t=arguments.callee;setTimeout(function(){t(e,i)},0)}}(document.getElementById(‘vidible_1’),onPlayerReadyVidible);

Like many after the 2016 election, Barbra Streisand was disappointed with the results. In fact, she was heartbroken.

On Wednesday, the Oscar winner opened up about Hillary Clinton’s loss during an interview with WNYC’s Leonard Lopate. In her opinion, it all came down to the fact that “women are still so underestimated” in society. 

“It’s incredible to watch even this last election with Hillary, the kind of strong woman, the powerful woman, the educated woman, the experienced woman, being thought of as the other, or too elite, or too educated,” she said. 

“It’s very, very odd to me, and it was heartbreaking for her to lose, you know?”

When Lopate asked whether Streisand agreed with Clinton, who’s said misogyny played a part in the election she replied, “Totally.

She later added, “Power and woman has always been suspect. Strong women have always been suspect ― don’t you think? ― in this country.”

Streisand, a strong, powerful woman in her own right, has long been an advocate for women’s rights and has openly talked about sexism in society over the years. 

Aside from that, she established The Streisand Foundation in 1986, which is “committed to gaining women’s equality,” and she’s contributed millions to the Women’s Heart Center at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, which was renamed in her honor

She was also actively involved during Clinton’s campaign, lending her time to fundraising events and speaking out against then-Republican nominee Donald Trump.

Following the election, she attended the Women’s March in LA, where she gave a speech telling the crowd that Trump’s presidency “presents a real opportunity for social change, and sometimes we have to hit rock bottom in order to rise up again.”

To hear Streisand’s full interview with Lopate, head to WNYC

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Pentagon Warned Michael Flynn Against Accepting Foreign Money In 2014; He Didn't Listen

function onPlayerReadyVidible(e){‘undefined’!=typeof HPTrack&&HPTrack.Vid.Vidible_track(e)}!function(e,i){if(e.vdb_Player){if(‘object’==typeof commercial_video){var a=”,o=’m.fwsitesection=’+commercial_video.site_and_category;if(a+=o,commercial_video[‘package’]){var c=’&m.fwkeyvalues=sponsorship%3D’+commercial_video[‘package’];a+=c}e.setAttribute(‘vdb_params’,a)}i(e.vdb_Player)}else{var t=arguments.callee;setTimeout(function(){t(e,i)},0)}}(document.getElementById(‘vidible_1’),onPlayerReadyVidible);

President Donald Trump’s former national security adviser, Michael Flynn, failed to heed warnings from the Pentagon about accepting foreign funds for a trip to Russia in 2015, the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee announced Thursday.

The Department of Defense sent classified documents to committee chairman Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah), said ranking member Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-Md.) at a news conference on Thursday. One of them, which is being prepared for public release, is a letter from the Defense Intelligence Agency to Flynn.

“This letter explicitly warned General Flynn, as he entered retirement, that the Constitution prohibited him from accepting any foreign government payments without advance permission,” Cummings said. “DIA did not locate any records of Lieutenant General Flynn seeking permission or approval for the receipt of money from a foreign source.”

But Flynn did accept the funds from Kremlin-backed news agency RT and failed to disclose them when he applied for a security clearance last year, Cummings and Chaffetz said Tuesday. He may have broken federal law. 

Some of Flynn’s former staffers also warned him about accepting the $40,000 and participating in RT’s 10th anniversary gala. “Please, sir: don’t do this,” Simone Ledeen, who had worked with him in Afghanistan, said in an email at the time, according to The New Yorker. “It’s not just you. You’re a retired three-star general. It’s the Army. It’s all of the people who have been with you, all of these analysts known as ‘Flynn’s people.’”

A second letter revealed that “we have no evidence that he obtained permission from the Secretary of the Army and the Secretary of State to accept any foreign government payments, as required under the law,” Cummings said.

The White House never provided any documents related to what Flynn told the administration when he was vetted even though the committee formally requested it.

So they must have a “paper trail” of evidence, Cummings added. “I honestly do not understand why the White House is covering up for Michael Flynn. I watched [press secretary] Sean Spicer make all kinds of excuses about how hard it would be to comply with our requests. C’mon man.”

A third letter released shows the Pentagon’s inspector general announcement of yet another investigation of Flynn’s actions. Cummings said that Chaffetz, however, refused to have Flynn testify before their committee.

Trump named Flynn to be national security adviser in mid-November. Flynn resigned from the position in mid-February.

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Garrisoning The Globe, A Missing American Story

Cross-posted with TomDispatch.com

If you’re a reader of TomDispatch, then you know something of real importance about this country that most Americans don’t.  As an imperial power, there’s never been anything like the United States when it comes to garrisoning this planet.  By comparison, the Romans and imperial Chinese were pikers; the Soviet Union in its prime was the poorest of runners-up; even the British, at the moment when the sun theoretically never set on their empire, didn’t compare. 

The U.S. has hundreds of military bases ranging in size from small American towns to tiny outposts across the planet, and yet you could spend weeks, months, years paying careful attention to the media here and still have no idea that this was so.  Though we garrison the globe in a historically unprecedented way, that fact is not part of any discussion or debate in this country; Congress doesn’t hold hearings on global basing policy; reporters aren’t sent out to cover the subject; and presidents never mention it in speeches to the nation.  Clearly, nothing is to be made of it.

It’s true that, if you’re watching the news carefully, you will find references to a small number of these bases.  In the present Korean crisis, for instance, there has been at least passing mention of Washington’s bases in South Korea (and the danger that the American troops on them might face), though often deep in articles on the subject.  If, to pick another example, you were to read about the political situation in Bahrain, you might similarly find mentions of the U.S. base in that small Gulf kingdom that houses the Navy’s Fifth Fleet. 

Generally, though, despite the millions of Americans, military and civilian, who have cycled through American bases abroad in recent years, despite the vast network of them (the count is now approximately 800), and despite the fact that they undergird American military policy globally, they are, for all intents and purposes, a kind of black hole of non-news.  Don’t even think to ask just why the U.S. garrisons the planet in this fashion or what it might mean.  It would be un-American of you to do so.

I must admit that, until I met Chalmers Johnson back at the turn of the century, I was a typical American on the subject.  I never gave much thought to what he called our “empire of bases.”  My own shock on grasping the nature of this country’s highly militarized presence across this planet led me to decide that, at least at TomDispatch, American basing policy would get some of the attention it obviously deserves.  This initially happened thanks to Johnson himself; later to David Vine, author of a rare book, Base Nation, on the subject; and finally to this site’s own Nick Turse, who in recent years has been following the U.S. military’s global basing policy as it moved onto the rare continent that had largely lacked them: Africa.  No longer.  Today, in “America’s War-Fighting Footprint in Africa,” he offers his latest update on the burgeoning set of bases and outposts that the U.S. military has been building or occupying and expanding there without notice, discussion, or debate, a network that will ensure we are plunged into the spreading terror wars on that continent for decades to come.

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Google has already lost the hardware chief it poached from Amazon

You probably have food that’s been in your freezer longer than David Foster (nope, still not the composer) stayed at Google after leaving Amazon. After six months, Foster is vacating his position as vice president of Google’s vice president of hardwa…