Aziz Ansari’s 'Chubby Cousin' Is Now That Buff Hottie On ‘Master Of None’

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);

Aziz Ansari likes to incorporate his family into his projects.

His parents have been featured in his Netflix show “Master of None,” and the comedian hilariously ripped on his Cinnabon-loving “chubby cousin Harris” for years in his early stand-up.

Well, it seems that the mall’s favorite pastry did a body good, because Harris, whose full name is Harris Gani, is now piping hot.

We know this because Gani was cast as Navid, the Muslim cousin of Ansari’s character Dev, in the episode “Religion,” who is featured in the second season of “Master of None.”

“That’s a little Easter egg for people who’ve followed Aziz’s stand-up for a while,” the show’s co-creator Alan Yang told Vulture. “Harris is looking very different these days!”

Indeed he is.

Son of Zeus by Chef Lee (@curtis.nyc)

A post shared by Harris Gani (@harrisrules13) on Mar 6, 2017 at 8:11pm PST

In the episode, Dev introduces his buff cousin Navid to pork, a food Muslims abstain from. Navid soon becomes obsessed with the tasty meat, leading Dev and Navid to ditch prayers during Ramadan to pig out on pork at a Brooklyn barbecue festival.

 Gani, who describes himself as shy in an Instagram post, said the role was “great for my personal growth.”

And although cousin Harris is now shredded, don’t worry, he still seems to really dig food. Some of his favs are sprinkled in photos throughout his Instagram account.

My favorite ice cream #CinnamonLove

A post shared by Harris Gani (@harrisrules13) on Oct 20, 2012 at 4:11pm PDT

Never change, Harris!

— 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.

One Drink Per Day May Raise Your Breast Cancer Risk

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);

Women who can’t wait to have their glass of wine at the end of the day, take note: A new report concludes that even one small drink daily can raise a woman’s risk of breast cancer.

The report includes data gathered from more than 12 million women worldwide — 260,000 of whom had breast cancer — during nearly 120 studies.

In the report, which was published today (May 23), researchers cut through the clutter of breast cancer studies, and offer a clear set of recommendations to help women reduce their risk of the disease. These recommendations include cutting back on alcohol and getting more physical activity. [10 Do’s and Don’ts to Reduce Your Risk of Cancer]

“It can be confusing with single studies when the findings get swept back and forth,” co-author Dr. Anne McTiernan, a cancer prevention researcher at Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, said in a statement.

“With this comprehensive and up-to-date report, the evidence is clear: Having a physically active lifestyle, maintaining a healthy weight throughout life and limiting alcohol — these are all steps women can take to lower their risk” of breast cancer, McTiernan said.

The researchers found that drinking 10 grams of alcohol per day was associated with a 5 percent increased risk of breast cancer in premenopausal women and a 9 percent increased risk in postmenopausal women, compared with women who don’t drink. A standard drink, such as a 12-ounce beer or a 5-ounce glass of wine, has 14 grams of alcohol, according to the National Institutes of Health, so 10 grams is considered a small drink.

It’s still not entirely clear how alcohol may affect breast cancer risk, according to the report. One hypothesis is that people who drink heavily also tend to eat a diet that lacks certain nutrients, such as folate, the authors wrote. Folate may be involved in cancer prevention. Other studies have suggested that the molecules that are formed when alcohol is broken down in the body might be harmful, or that alcohol might have an effect on hormone levels, which, in turn, could increase cancer risk, according to the report.

Alcohol wasn’t the only risk factor the researchers looked at in the report. Women’s body weight, for example, was also found to be a risk factor for breast cancer in both premenopausal and postmenopausal women. However, the researchers noted that the evidence for this link was more convincing in postmenopausal women.

The amount of physical activity that a woman gets was also found to play a role. The premenopausal women in the review of studies who exercised vigorously had a 17 percent lower risk of breast cancer than those who didn’t exercise at all. And in postmenopausal women, vigorous exercise was associated with a 10 percent lower risk of breast cancer. [7 Cancers You Can Ward Off with Exericse]

Interestingly, for premenopausal women, the most convincing evidence was for a risk factor that women can’t control: their height. Compared with shorter women, taller women had a greater risk of breast cancer, the researchers found.

The new report, called the Diet, Nutrition, Physical Activity and Breast Cancer report, was conducted by two major cancer research organizations: the American Institute for Cancer Research and World Cancer Research Fund International.

Originally published on Live Science.

— 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.

Trump’s United States Of Amnesia Threatens Everything We Once Knew As Fact

Down the Memory Hole
Cross-posted with TomDispatch.com

The Trump administration seems intent on tossing recent history down the memory hole. Admittedly, Americans have never been known for their strong grasp of facts about their past. Still, as we struggle to keep up with the constantly shifting explanations and pronouncements of the new administration, it becomes ever harder to remember the events of yesterday, let alone last week, or last month.

The Credibility Swamp

Trump and his spokespeople routinely substitute “alternative facts” for what a friend of mine calls consensus reality, the world that most of us recognize. Whose inaugural crowd was bigger, Barack Obama’s or Donald Trump’s? It doesn’t matter what you remember, or even what’s in the written accounts or photographic record. What matters is what the administration now says happened then. In other words, for Trump and his people, history in any normal sense simply doesn’t exist, and that’s a danger for the rest of us. Think of the Trumpian past as a website that can be constantly updated to fit the needs of the present. You may believe you still remember something that used to be there, but it’s not there now. As it becomes increasingly harder to find, can you really trust your own memory?

In recent months, revisions of that past have sometimes come so blindingly fast that the present has simply been overrun, as was true with the firing of FBI Director James Comey. First, the president ordered up some brand new supporting documents from Attorney General Jeff Sessions and his deputy, Rod Rosenstein. These were designed to underpin his line that Comey was fired on their recommendation ― for being “unfair” to Hillary Clinton. Then, even as his surrogates were out peddling that very story, Trump told NBC’s Lester Holt that, “regardless of [Sessions’ and Rosenstein’s] recommendation, I was going to fire Comey.” And he explained why:

“And in fact when I decided to just do it I said to myself, I said, ‘You know, this Russia thing with Trump and Russia is a made-up story, it’s an excuse by the Democrats for having lost an election that they should’ve won.’”

Which rationale for Comey’s departure is true? Both? Neither? What is “truth” after all?

When the need to ask such questions occurs once in a while, it’s anomalous enough that we notice. We have time to remark that someone or various people in this story ― Sessions, Rosenstein, the surrogates, Trump himself ― are mistaken or even lying. Fortunately, in the case of Comey’s firing, journalists are still reporting the lies, but what happens if the rewrites of our recent history begin to come so fast that we stop keeping up?

During the Vietnam War, President Lyndon Johnson was famously said to have a “credibility gap.” People, including journalists, had stopped believing everything his administration said about one very important topic: the war. Trump doesn’t have a credibility gap; he’s tossed us into a credibility swamp. We’re all there together swimming in a mire of truth and lies, with the occasional firecracker thrown in just to see if we’re still paying attention.

If the age of Trump doesn’t end relatively soon, the daily effort to sort out what happened from what didn’t may eventually become too much for many of us. Memory fatigue may set in, and the whole project of keeping the past in focus shelved. In that case, we might very well start to give up the concept of citizenship altogether and decide instead to just get on with our own private uninsured, underpaid, and overworked lives.

In recent months, revisions of that past have sometimes come so blindingly fast that the present has simply been overrun…

Sometimes it’s easier to simply adjust to an ever-changing official version of reality than to keep up a constant, unrewarding struggle to remember. This was the phenomenon George Orwell described so unforgettably in his dystopian novel 1984. His hero, Winston Smith, becomes aware that the sole party that runs his country incessantly rewrites the past to its own liking and advantage. In fact, he realizes that “the past not only changed, but changed continuously.”

Like most inhabitants of the mega-state of Oceania, it wasn’t that Smith couldn’t accept such a reality.  He could. What he couldn’t shake was a nightmarish sense “that he had never clearly understood why” the Party needed to do it. “The immediate advantages of falsifying the past were obvious, but the ultimate motive was mysterious” to him. That “ultimate motive,” he eventually realizes, is to so destroy people’s hold on memory that they come to believe that truth genuinely is whatever the Party says it is.

In the end, the Party would announce that two and two made five, and you would have to believe it. It was inevitable that they should make that claim sooner or later: the logic of their position demanded it. Not merely the validity of experience, but the very existence of external reality was tacitly denied by their philosophy. The heresy of heresies was common sense. And what was terrifying was not that they would kill you for thinking otherwise, but that they might be right. For, after all, how do we know that two and two make four? Or that the force of gravity works? Or that the past is unchangeable?

Does President Trump know what he’s doing? Does he know that, in a more chaotic fashion than Orwell’s “Big Brother,” he’s grinding away at American memories, threatening to turn them into so much rubble? It’s hard to say; he appears to be incapable of either self-reflection or planning, indeed of acting in any way except on impulse. He does, however, seem to know in an intuitive way what works for him, what gets him things he wants, as he has his whole professional life. He’s called his method “truthful hyperbole.” And regardless of what he himself understands, there are certainly people around him who do grasp all too well the usefulness of that “ultimate motive,” of convincing the public that facts are not all that stubborn after all.

The Memory Hole

Supplying alternative facts is one way of destroying memory. Erasing real facts is another.

In Orwell’s 1984, there was a slot in the wall at the Ministry of Truth where Winston Smith worked, a memory hole, into which inconvenient documents could be fed to be consumed forever by a huge basement furnace. There are, it seems, plenty of memory holes in Washington these days.

Since January, the Trump administration has been systematically removing from federal websites inconvenient information on subjects as diverse as climate change and occupational health and safety and replacing it with anodyne messages. Take, for instance, this one, which you get when you search the Environmental Protection Agency’s website for the term “climate change” and click on links that search turns up:

This page is being updated.

Thank you for your interest in this topic. We are currently updating our website to reflect EPA’s priorities under the leadership of President Trump and Administrator [Scott] Pruitt. If you’re looking for an archived version of this page, you can find it on the January 19 snapshot.

If you do click on the link for that January 19, 2017, “snapshot,” you can still (for now) see what the old climate change portal of the Obama era looked like. At the top of the “snapshot,” however, is a bright red notice announcing:

This is not the current EPA website. To navigate to the current EPA website, please go to www.epa.gov. This website is historical material reflecting the EPA website as it existed on January 19, 2017. This website is no longer updated and links to external web sites and some internal pages may not work.

The government has now entered full-scale climate change denial mode. Information of just about any sort on global warming has been or is being memory-holed in a wholesale fashion at other agency websites as well. The Guardian, for instance, reports that in the part of the Department of Energy’s site addressed to children, “sentences that point out the harmful health consequences of burning coal and other impacts of fossil fuels have gone.” At the State Department, references to President Obama’s Climate Action Plan and a recent U.N. meeting on climate change have similarly been expunged.

However, it’s not just government pronouncements on issues like climate change that are being sanitized. Actual data is disappearing from government websites. The federal government collects vast amounts of data, much of it the results of studies it has funded. Some agencies, like the Environmental Protection Agency, are required by law to retain data they collect, but they are not required to post it. This means basic information and the results of scientific research, once available online, are now only available through a Freedom of Information Act request. Of course, you have to know that the information exists in the first place in order to request it.

One result of hiding such data is that scientists citing U.S. government web pages as sources in their own work are now finding that the references they’ve pointed to have disappeared. Arctic researcher Victoria Herrmann describes watching her citations dissolve into thin air:

At first, the distress flare of lost data came as a surge of defunct links on 21 January. The U.S. National Strategy for the Arctic, the Implementation Plan for the Strategy, and the report on our progress all gone within a matter of minutes. As I watched more and more links turned red, I frantically combed the Internet for archived versions of our country’s most important polar policies.

Herrmann was able to find some of her missing articles using the Wayback Machine, an Internet archiving project. But as Herrmann points out, “Each defunct page is an effort by the Trump administration to deliberately undermine our ability to make good policy decisions by limiting access to scientific evidence.”

It’s not just environmental information that’s been tossed down the memory hole.  Concerned about the health and safety of workers or animals? The Washington Post reports some things you won’t find any more on federal sites:

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration, for instance, has dramatically scaled back on publicizing its fines against firms. And the Agriculture Department has taken offline animal-welfare enforcement records, including abuses in dog breeding operations and horse farms that alter the gait of horses through the controversial practice of ‘soring’ the animals’ legs.

Sometimes information only hangs around for a brief moment, before sliding down the memory hole. That’s what happened to an advertisement for Trump’s Florida resort, Mar-a-Lago, which was masquerading as an entry on Share America, which the State Department calls its “platform for sharing compelling stories and images that spark discussion and debate on important topics like democracy, freedom of expression, innovation, entrepreneurship, education, and the role of civil society.” The page appeared on the website of the U.S. embassy in London.

Someone must have realized that using the State Department to advertise the President’s private club was not a great idea. Conflict of interest? No problem. It’s down the memory hole.

[W]hat happens if the rewrites of our recent history begin to come so fast that we stop keeping up?

Nor is it just government websites that are being reworked in a distinctly Orwellian fashion. Recently, the Trump 2020 reelection campaign (yes, it already exists) quietly removed many 2016 campaign documents from its website. The Washington Post’s Avi Selk describes some of the missing press releases, among them the one that reproduced Trump’s full interview with ABC News’ George Stephanopoulos in which he so infamously insulted Khizr Khan, the Gold Star father who spoke out against him at the Democratic Party convention, and his wife, Ghazala.

Similarly, links to Trump’s “New Deal for Black America,” released a week before the 2016 election, now bring up a dreaded “404 – Page not found” message on the Trump-Pence website. Whatever that “deal” was, it’s evidently no longer on offer, nor is it even to remain in the historical record.

The same memory hole has also evidently devoured a December 2015 press release announcing that “Donald J. Trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country’s representatives can figure out what is going on.” Fortunately, versions of that particular statement were repeated often enough in enough places that lawyers have been able to continue to use it to argue against the president’s executive orders banning the entry of people from seven (now six) majority-Muslim countries.

The Trump administration’s memory holes have swallowed up more than documents and data. People have also disappeared ― if not from the world, at least from their government positions. We still remember former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn and former FBI Director James Comey, but who remembers Ponisseril Somasundaran or Courtney Flint? They are among the scientists recently dismissed from the Environmental Protection Agency’s Board of Scientific Counselors. Among their duties was to give advice on environmental regulation. They are to be replaced, according to agency spokesperson J.P. Freire, by people “who understand the impact of regulations on the regulated community” ― that is, representatives of polluting industries.

The United States of Amnesia

Gore Vidal coined the expression “the United States of Amnesia” in a 2004 book about George W. Bush’s America. The particular instance of amnesia Vidal highlighted with that phrase was the failure of those then waging the “war on drugs” to remember the disasters of the prohibition of alcohol sales in the 1930s, and the ensuing corruption, gangsters, and smuggling rings that came with it. 

His larger point, however, was that, in general, American historical memory is short. Thirteen years after Vidal’s book appeared, and with a new Republican administration ascendant, it seems that this country is in danger of sinking ever deeper into a state of amnesia. And can there be any question that, in a distinctly Orwellian fashion, the new administration is doing everything in its power to hasten that process? As the Trump administration prepares for a new “surge” on the perpetual battlefield that is Afghanistan, we’ve conveniently forgotten how little the last one achieved. We’ve forgotten how deregulation led to the Great Recession, as the federal Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission concluded in 2011. “The greatest tragedy,” that panel wrote, “would be to accept the refrain that no one could have seen this coming and thus nothing could have been done. If we accept this notion, it will happen again.” Yet the Republicans in Congress can’t wait to repeal Dodd-Frank, the law that restored a semblance of regulation to the world of commercial banking.

The fifth-century African bishop St. Augustine was probably the first Western thinker to pay attention to human memory. In his Confessions, Augustine observes that it is memory ― the ability to bring into present awareness past experiences and the ability to recognize the difference between past, present, and future ― that makes us self-aware beings. He described the “vast hall of my memory,” where “I meet myself and recall what I am, what I have done, and when and where and how I was affected when I did it.” It is on the basis of memory, he added, that “I reason about future actions and events and hopes, and again think of all these things in the present. ‘I shall do this and that,’ I say to myself within that vast recess of my mind which is full of many rich images, and this act or that follows.”

If Augustine was right and memory gives us ourselves, allowing us to “reason about future actions and events and hopes,” then a political regime that seeks to destroy its people’s memory is an existential threat.

In that case, the first act of resistance is to remember who we are.

Rebecca Gordon, a TomDispatch regular, teaches in the philosophy department at the University of San Francisco. She is the author of American Nuremberg: The U.S. Officials Who Should Stand Trial for Post-9/11 War Crimes. Her previous books include Mainstreaming Torture: Ethical Approaches in the Post-9/11 United States and Letters from Nicaragua.

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.

type=type=RelatedArticlesblockTitle=Related… + articlesList=5904bd23e4b0bb2d086ee483,587e8865e4b01cdc64c83e84

— 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.

Ben & Jerry's Bans Same-Flavored Scoops Until Australia Passes Marriage Equality

Ben & Jerry’s is coming for Australian’s taste buds, announcing a pledge that no one in Oz can order two scoops of the same flavor until marriage equality becomes law of the land Down Under.

Ben & Jerry’s currently operates 26 stores across the nation, and is placing the ban on same-flavored scoops as a statement of opposition to the country’s stance on same-sex marriage, were it is currently illegal for two men or two women to wed. The “ban” is part of the company’s push for global LGBTQ rights.

Currently 70 percent of Australians support same-sex marriage, and the push for its legalization is an ongoing conversation in the country.

“We are proud to be standing alongside The Equality Campaign to continue the fight for marriage equality in Australia,” Imogen Rugg, Ben & Jerry’s Australia spokesperson, said in a statement to HuffPost. “Ben & Jerry’s has a long and proud history of commitment to social justice, including LGBTQI rights and marriage equality. This commitment is grounded in our company’s core values and an unshakable belief that everyone deserves full and equal civil rights.” 

In conjunction with the ban on same-flavored scoops, Ben & Jerry’s has also established a postal system of sorts across its Australian stores. Customers and supporters of marriage equality can write messages advocating for the legalization of same-sex marriage, with Ben & Jerry’s staff prepared to deliver their messages directly to local MPs. 

Ben & Jerry’s aims to have all messages from customers delivered before the final parliamentary session of the season on June 13th.

Ben & Jerry’s has long used its product to create high-visibility statements of support in the fight for LGBTQ rights on a global level. In 2015, the company renamed its beloved Chocolate Chip Cookie Dough flavor to “I Dough, I Dough” in celebration of America legalizing same-sex marriage. The company made a similar move in 2012 in the UK, renaming their “Oh! My! Apple Pie!” flavor “Apple-y Ever After” in support of coalitions pushing for the legalization of same-sex marriage throughout England.

— 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.

Pruitt's First 100 Days: He's Nothing Like Trump, And That's A Problem

Columnists across the political spectrum have been calling President Trump names – questioning his discipline, knowledge, and focus. No one can say the same things about Scott Pruitt.

Indeed, as we approach Pruitt’s 100th day as leader of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, it’s clear that he is nothing like the president. And that, ironically, makes him even worse for our health and environment.

Scott Pruitt is highly disciplined, skillful and focused – and obsessed with his mission of advocating for big polluters and undermining the EPA’s historic role of protecting public health. Now that he’s in charge of the agency, he’s methodically pushing to gut rules that limit pollution, hobble enforcement of clean air and water laws, and shove aside unbiased scientific guidance.

In contrast to the often-dysfunctional White House, Pruitt has been laser focused. In his first 100 days, he has:

  • begun the process of abandoning the Clean Power Plan, America’s only national limits on carbon pollution from our largest source. This will allow the power plants to emit unlimited amounts of this pollution – leading to more asthma attacks and a more dangerous future for our children.
  • taken aim at the Mercury and Air Toxics Rule, which reduces dangerous neurotoxins that harm children’s brain development. Pruitt is opposing it even though virtually all power plants in the country now comply with the rule, demonstrating that none of the fear-mongering about cost and reliability problems we heard from industry were true.
  • actively been lobbying the White House to withdraw from the Paris Climate Agreement, a move that would hurt our economy and cede American leadership to China and Europe. We would join only two other countries in the world – Nicaragua and Syria – on the outside of this global system, potentially inviting tariffs on our exports. In true Alice in Wonderland fashion, the EPA administrator is reportedly lobbying the coal industry to support withdrawal from the climate agreement.
  • appeared to be trying to shut out neutral scientific advice. He’s declined to reappoint half of a scientific advisory board, with some reports indicating he may choose more industry-friendly advisors instead. On his watch, the EPA has removed key pollution and climate data from its web site. Pruitt also claimed on CNBC that carbon dioxide is not “a primary contributor to the global warming that we see” – flatly contradicting the scientists at NASA, every major American scientific organization and his own agency.
  • paved the way for the Trump administration’s call for a 31-percent cut to the EPA budget – more than what any other federal agency faces. If enacted, it would dramatically reduce protections against pollutants such as mercury, lead, smog, and carbon pollution; undermine enforcement of the Clean Air and Clean Water acts; and reduce cleanup of toxic waste sites. It will result in more asthma attacks for kids, more health problems for elderly Americans, accelerated climate change and more pollution in our lives.
  • slowly been stocking his agency with appointees with serious conflicts of interest. A few examples: Nancy Beck moved from the chemical industry’s main lobbying organization to be the highest political appointee at the EPA office overseeing the chemical industry. Justin Schwab, now a top lawyer at the EPA, previously represented a coal utility. Christian Palich, a lobbyist for a coal industry group, was appointed to a senior position in the EPA’s Congressional relations office.  

The fact is, the EPA has saved countless lives and made America dramatically cleaner and healthier by sticking to sound science, seeking smart solutions to limit pollution, and enforcing the law. In his first 100 days, Scott Pruitt has turned the agency’s mission on its head.

Estimates suggest that if he is able to fully enact his agenda, about 130,000 Americans will die prematurely due to air, water, and toxic pollution. So while America will survive Scott Pruitt’s tenure at the EPA, we know that many Americans won’t.

This post originally appeared on EDF Voices

On Twitter @RealKeithGaby

— 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.

Girl Accuses Teacher Of 'War Crimes' In Hilarious Year-End Review

Ava Morrison-Bell is an 11-year-old from the UK with a whole lot of moxie.

Morrison-Bell was asked to fill out a form for school with questions for students about their teachers. One asked how teachers can do better. 

The conscientious Bell suggested that they “not use collective punishment” as it is not fair for the people who “did nothing,” as per a tweet of the response by her father Mason Cross.

She goes even further to cite the “1949 Genva Conventions” as evidence that this behavior is “a war crime.” 

Undoubtedly, Bell means the Geneva Conventions, a series of international treaties established between 1864 and 1949. Most intriguingly, she’s referencing the 1949 Protocol II within the Conventions that “prohibited collective punishment.”

Granted, that protocol also prohibits torture, the taking of hostages, acts of terrorism, slavery, rape, enforced prostitution, etc., but the point is salient: Bell doesn’t want to be held responsible for things she didn’t do.

Cross told HuffPost that his daughter “said very positive things in the other answer” and that her teacher responded to her answer with “a dignified silence.” 

Additionally, Cross said that this wasn’t even the only time his daughter has mentioned the Geneva Conventions in casual conversation. 

“She also cites minimum wage legislation when we offer her £2 to tidy her room,” Cross told us.

Ava, you’re the best. We can only hope you’ll become a human rights lawyer one day.

— 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.

Forget Big Brother — Trump Is Omnipresent

Cross-posted with TomDispatch.com

In the first paragraphs of George Orwell’s famed novel 1984, Winston Smith slips through the doors of his apartment building, “Victory Mansions,” to escape a “vile wind.”  Hate week ― a concept that should seem eerily familiar in Donald Trump’s America ― was soon to arrive.  “The hallway,” writes Orwell, “smelt of boiled cabbage and old rag mats.”  Smith then plods up to his seventh-floor flat, since the building’s elevator rarely works even when there’s electricity, which is seldom the case.  And, of course, he immediately sees the most famous poster in the history of the novel, the one in which BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING YOU. (“It was one of those pictures, so contrived that the eyes follow you about when you move.”)

Now, imagine us inside our own “Victory Mansions,” an increasingly ramshackle place called the United States of America in which, like Smith, we simply can’t escape our leader.  Call him perhaps “Big Muddler.”  He may not be looking directly at YOU, but he is, thanks to a never-ending media frenzy, remarkably omnipresent.  Go ahead and try, but you know that whatever you do, however you live your life, these days you just can’t escape him.  And if Donald Trump’s America isn’t already starting to feel a little like that ill-named, run-down building in a future, poverty-stricken London, then tell me what it’s like.

Can’t you feel how rickety the last superpower on planet Earth is becoming as our very own Big-Muddler-in-Chief praises himself eternally for his “achievements”?  Here’s just a small sample from a recent graduation address President Trump gave at the Coast Guard Academy. (You know, the one where he so classically claimed that “no politician in history ― and I say this with great surety ― has been treated worse or more unfairly”): 

“I’ve accomplished a tremendous amount in a very short time as president. Jobs pouring back into our country… We’ve saved the Second Amendment, expanded service for our veterans… I’ve loosened up the strangling environmental chains wrapped around our country and our economy, chains so tight that you couldn’t do anything ― that jobs were going down… We’ve begun plans and preparations for the border wall, which is going along very, very well. We’re working on major tax cuts for all… And we’re also getting closer and closer, day by day, to great healthcare for our citizens.”

This is, of course, all balderdash ― from the “big, fat, beautiful wall” the Mexicans were going to finance, for which he’s requested $1.6 billion in the next budget (compared to the up to $67 billion it might actually cost) and which he’s unlikely to get, to those scam jobs supposedly flooding in thanks to him. His urge is clearly to establish a fantasy America, a true Victory Mansion (undoubtedly with his name in golden letters above it) in the potential ruins of the country we once knew, which would indeed be an Orwellian trick of the first order. In the meantime, as TomDispatch regular Rebecca Gordon points out, President Trump and his coterie of cabinet plutocrats and advisers have been doing Orwell one better and, 33 years after 1984 passed us by, are in the process of creating their own memory hole down which they plan to stuff reality itself. 

— 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.

Well, Trump Sure Looks Like He's Making Friends At The NATO Summit

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 attended the NATO summit in Brussels on Thursday, where he tried his best to settle in among his fellow world leaders.

The whole event seemed to have a new-kid-at-school feel for Trump. But every class has a bully, and reports suggest the president made some effort to embrace that role.

He began the day with a confrontational address, in which he chided NATO allies for not spending enough on defense. Others looked on with, well, whatever these expressions are:

Later, Trump was seen buffaloing his way to the front of a group.

The man Trump seemed to push past is Montenegro Prime Minister Dusko Markovic, whose nation is set to join NATO in June ― much to the displeasure of Russian President Vladimir Putin.

The Washington Post’s Philip Rucker described the ensuing NATO “family photo” in a pool report that confirmed Trump is unlikely to win any most-popular awards.

“Some of the leaders interacted with one another on stage, but not Trump,” he wrote. “He stood silently, shifting his stance at moments and looking around.”

And when Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau encouraged the group to wave, “some followed Trudeau’s command, but not Trump, who did not raise an arm.”

“Trump smiled for a brief moment, but otherwise kept a serious, perhaps even stern, expression on his face for the duration of the photo opp,” according to Rucker.

The world leaders began to disperse after the photos were taken. Some remained on stage to mingle, but Trump did not. 

“Your pooler did not see any leaders approach Trump or talk with him on his way out,” Rucker wrote. 

— 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.

Portland Burrito Cart Closes After Owners Are Accused Of Cultural Appropriation

Two Portland-based women were forced to shut down their burrito food cart over accusations of cultural appropriation and recipe stealing. 

Liz “LC” Connelly and Kali Wilgus’ Kooks Burritos business was featured in the Willamette Week on May 16. During the interview, Connelly described how the duo made their own tortillas after taking a trip to Puerto Nuevo, Mexico, in December and obtaining information on the process.

The method by which the two non-Hispanic white women obtained the information on tortilla making is questionable. 

“I picked the brains of every tortilla lady there in the worst broken Spanish ever, and they showed me a little of what they did,” Connelly told the Willamette Week. “They told us the basic ingredients, and we saw them moving and stretching the dough similar to how pizza makers do before rolling it out with rolling pins.”

But Connelly also noted that many of the Mexican women were hesitant to give away their methods ― a fact that didn’t stop them from trying to gather more information. 

“They wouldn’t tell us too much about technique, but we were peeking into the windows of every kitchen, totally fascinated by how easy they made it look,” Connelly said. “We learned quickly it isn’t quite that easy.”

Once back in Portland, Connelly said she went to the Mexican market to buy ingredients and recreated the tortillas to the best of her ability with trial and error. The two women opened up their food cart on Cesar E. Chavez Boulevard.

Mic.com’s Jamilah King responded to the Willamette Week interview with a piece Friday calling out the women for “stealing recipes from Mexico to start a Portland business.”

“The problem, of course, is that it’s unclear whether the Mexican women who handed over their recipes ever got anything in return,” King wrote in the piece that also outlined how others had begun to accuse the women of cultural appropriation. “And now those same recipes are being sold as a delicacy in Portland.”

That same day, the Willamette Week tweeted an update that Kooks Burritos had closed.

While the food cart’s online presence quickly disappeared, the business’s Yelp page is still active (with an “active cleanup alert” that monitors comments based on the spike in activity due to news reports). Both supporters and critics have sounded off on the page. 

“How would you people feel if I went and spied on your family or business recipes and took it somewhere else for my own financial benefit?” Olivia L. from Portland wrote in a Yelp review. “This is stealing.”

Supporters, however, have pointed to how common it is within the culinary world and food industry to take methods and ingredients from other countries and profit off of them. 

Writer Jagger Blaec weighed in on the controversy in The Portland Mercury on Monday, saying “Portland has an appropriation problem” and breaking down how the issue is a reflection of a bigger problem within the city.

“Several of the most successful businesses in this town have been birthed as a result of curious white people going to a foreign country, or an international venture, and poaching as many trade secrets, customs, recipes as possible, and then coming back to Portland to claim it as their own and score a tidy profit,” Blaec wrote. “Now don’t get me wrong: cultural customs are meant to be shared. However, that’s not what happens in this city.”

“Because of Portland’s underlying racism, the people who rightly own these traditions and cultures that exist are already treated poorly,” the writer continues. “These appropriating businesses are erasing and exploiting their already marginalized identities for the purpose of profit and praise.”

— 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.

'America's Got Talent' Producers Sued After Tyra Banks Accused Of Verbally Abusing Girl

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);

Tyra Banks’ time on “America’s Got Talent” is already getting off to a shaky start, and the first episode of the new season hasn’t even aired yet.

The supermodel, who replaced Nick Cannon as host of the talent competition show, is at the center of a lawsuit, filed Tuesday, against Marathon Productions, which produces “AGT.” 

According to the suit, obtained by Deadline, a woman identifying as Jane Doe claims her young daughter, Mary Doe, was “physically manipulated and verbally abused” by Banks during a March 19 performance. 

Jane claims she and her husband, who were performing a song about motherhood in front of the judges and some audience members, were “publicly humiliated.” She also claims Banks “physically manipulated and verbally abused Mary” by shaking the girl’s shoulder, pulling her hair back and insinuating she was conceived accidentally. Mary did not stop Banks because she is said to have been “fearful.” 

Jane also alleges the former “America’s Next Top Model” host made fun of the couple’s performance and ridiculed the song, which she says is “especially favored” by Mary, in front of the girl and while cameras were rolling.

The suit notes Banks asked Mary to share her opinion of her parents, after they had been ridiculed, and claims the girl was “traumatized and became deeply depressed” after her experience with Banks. 

A few weeks after the performance, Jane requested “AGT” refrain from televising any footage of her, her husband and Mary. Marathon agreed not to feature Mary on the show and acknowledged the girl’s “emotional distress.” Jane requested a second time that all footage of herself, her husband and Mary be left off the show, but she alleges Marathon “maintained that they will exploit footages of Jane and her husband, and that they will not air those footages in their entirety.”  

Jane is seeking a jury trial for the case and in her suit claims Banks (acting on behalf of Marathon and “AGT”) “knowingly, willfully and with malicious intent, initiated a harmful and offensive physical contact with Mary’s person.” 

Jane is looking for an unspecified amount in punitive damages, which will be “determined by proof at trial.” 

HuffPost has reached out to Marathon and a representative for Banks and will update this post accordingly. 

— 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.