Two weeks ago, when rumors surfaced that Phish would cover an “obscure album from 1981,” some jumped to conclusions that they would play Mark of the Mole by The Residents while others placed their bets on My Life in the Bush of Ghosts by Brian Eno and David Byrne and Rush‘s Moving Pictures. Some classic thrill seekers continued the tradition of wishful thinking by suggesting Led Zepplin’s Physical Graffiti, or even the Allman Brothers Band’s Eat a Peach. When the playbill was given to the first attendees, everyone at the MGM Grand Garden Arena and on social media was buzzing about the ultra-obscure Scandanavian prog-rock hidden gem, í Rokk by Kasvot Växt.Upon further speculation and criticism, some members of the vast Phish community discovered that the entire album was a hoax. The sketchiness of the whole “Swedish Phish” concept began once researchers and phistorians couldn’t find much information about the album. Conclusions were made that Phish had orchestrated one of the biggest pranks in the band’s 35-year-career by fabricating the false links and album cover themselves, and they did just that. Phish knocked it out of the park as they pulled off this stunt, executing the 10 new songs with precision and confidence.Last week, Phish revealed that all 10 í rokk tracks are credited to the four members of the band — Trey Anastasio, Page McConnell, Mike Gordon and Jon Fishman. The day after Phish’s Halloween show, frequent Phish songwriting collaborator, Tom Marshall, explained on his Couch Tour podcast that he had nothing to do with Phish’s Halloween stunt, and took zero songwriting credit for the new material.After releasing a series of pro-shot videos, including “Say It To Me S.A.N.T.O.S.”, “The Final Hurrah”, and “Turtle In The Clouds”, and adding the entirety of their Kasvot Växt í Rokk album to Spotify, Phish has updated a freshly mastered version of Kasvot Växt’s í Rokk from Halloween, which is now available via all streaming outlets (Spotify, iTunes, Amazon Music, Apple Music or wherever you get your tunes these days).Kasvot Växt – í Rokk
Topics : “Today is a very historic day for us.” Salih Hudayar, prime minister of the self-styled East Turkestan government in exile, told a virtual press conference held in Washington and The Hague.China is not an ICC member but lawyers for the Uighurs said the court could follow the example of its ongoing probe into the treatment of Rohingya Muslims by Myanmar, which is also not party to the tribunal.ICC judges ruled in 2018 that the Rohingya investigation could go ahead because the situation in Myanmar affects people in neighboring Bangladesh, which is a member of the ICC.Rodney Dixon, a London-based human rights lawyer for the Uighurs, said it was a “historic breakthrough” and “hopefully a turning of the tide as the ICC can now act.” The evidence filed with the court showed that China was guilty of “harsh repressive measures” over more than a decade, he told the press conference from The Hague.”These include mass internments in excess of a million people, murders, disappearances, torture, and harrowing accounts of sterilizations and birth control measures,” said Dixon.The dossier includes a list of senior Chinese Communist Party members who are allegedly responsible for the treatment of the Uighurs including President Xi Jinping.Dixon said following the example of the Myanmar case begun by the ICC prosecutor last year showed there was a “clear way which allows the ICC to exercise jurisdiction.”The case was possible because crimes including forced deportations back to China happened in Tajikistan and Cambodia, which are both ICC members, the dossier filed by the exiles says.The ICC has no obligation to consider complaints filed to the prosecutor, who decides independently what cases to submit to judges at the court, set up in 2002 to achieve justice for the world’s worst crimes. Exiled Uighurs urged the International Criminal Court on Tuesday to investigate China for genocide and crimes against humanity, filing a huge dossier of evidence with the Hague-based court to back their case.The evidence handed to the ICC’s prosecutor accuses China of locking more than one million Uighurs and other mostly Muslim minorities in re-education camps and of forcibly sterilizing women. China has called the forced sterilization accusations baseless and says the facilities in the northwestern Xinjiang region are job training centers aimed at steering people away from terrorism.
The Daily Signal 26 April 2020Family First Comment: AS PREDICTED – unfortunately……This has led to “the American Psychological Association’s creation last year of its Consensual Non-Monogamy Task Force, formed to destigmatize such relationships and explore changes in public policy. Schechinger, the task force co-chair, said it’s much easier to stereotype and hate a marginalized group when people in the normative majority operate by stereotypes and misinformation. “That’s part of what the task force is seeking to accomplish–to gather empirical data, promote accurate information about CNM relationships, and ask if these relationships are causing harm or are not,” he said. “And what are the implications on society for promoting a one-size-fits-all model versus promoting people being in touch with what’s the good fit for them.” As with the debates over human nature during the gay rights struggle, non-monogamy advocates are also raising the possibility that desiring multiple sexual partners is less a lifestyle choice and more of a sexual orientation.”Activists are moving to dismantle the legal and social barriers, and say their goals are beginning to take shape.They are laying the groundwork to have their cause become the next domino to fall in a long line of civil rights victories secured by trans people, gays, lesbians, women, and blacks.Not too long ago, those marginalized groups were also viewed as unnatural, depraved, or inferior, until negative judgments became socially unacceptable and often illegal.The aspirations of non-monogamists don’t sound like such a moonshot in an increasingly tolerant society where a transgender man can menstruate and experience childbirth, and Pete Buttigieg, a gay man married to another man, can make a serious run for U.S. president.As the topic breaks into the mainstream, some churches are beginning to grapple with the issue, and polyamorous students are forming university clubs and organizing events.Last fall polyamory got attention, some of it sympathetic, when California Rep. Katie Hill was forced to resign over allegations she was having an affair with a campaign staffer in a “throuple” with her then-husband.A recent TV episode of “House Hunters” featured three adults searching for a home to build their polyamorous nest, and Hollywood celebrities are opening up about their polyamorous lifestyles as well.“There is plenty of evidence that consensual non-monogamy is an emerging civil rights movement,” said Heath Schechinger, a counseling psychologist at the University of California, Berkeley, and co-chair of the Consensual Non-Monogamy Task Force, recently created within the American Psychological Association. “I’ve heard from a number of people advocating for relationship structure diversity over the past 20 years who are elated about this issue finally gaining traction.”Activists are already working with elected officials in more than a dozen local governments, especially in California, to expand local anti-discrimination ordinances to include a new protected class, “relationship structure,” said Berkeley psychologist and poly activist Dave Doleshal.Most efforts are at the informal stage but the city of Berkeley did consider a formal proposal to extend protections in housing, employment, business practices, city facilities, or education to swingers, polyamorists, and other non-monogamists.The proposal stalled last year amid concerns that it would have required employers to provide health insurance to numerous sexual and romantic partners outside of marriage.Undaunted by that setback, advocates continue to generate a body of ideas and theories that normalize non-monogamy as a form of positive sexuality—and possibly an identity—following a script followed by other marginalized groups.Their efforts have led to reassessments of non-monogamy in the psychological and legal fields, contending the relationships are emotionally healthy and ethical, and thus forging a social movement with a shared identity, shared vocabulary, shared history, and a shared desire for full recognition.Once changes get under way, things can move quickly. The rise of the modern gay rights movement in the mid-20th century led to a decision by the American Psychiatric Association in 1973 to remove homosexuality from its list of mental disorders (gender dysphoria was de-pathologized in 2012).Those medical reversals are seen as analogous to the American Psychological Association’s creation last year of its Consensual Non-Monogamy Task Force, formed to destigmatize such relationships and explore changes in public policy.Schechinger, the task force co-chair, said it’s much easier to stereotype and hate a marginalized group when people in the normative majority operate by stereotypes and misinformation.“That’s part of what the task force is seeking to accomplish–to gather empirical data, promote accurate information about CNM relationships, and ask if these relationships are causing harm or are not,” he said. “And what are the implications on society for promoting a one-size-fits-all model versus promoting people being in touch with what’s the good fit for them.”As with the debates over human nature during the gay rights struggle, non-monogamy advocates are also raising the possibility that desiring multiple sexual partners is less a lifestyle choice and more of a sexual orientation.Conservatives had long warned that redefining marriage to allow same-sex unions would throw open the door to allowing any kind of marriage, from polygamy to incest.Those arguments reached a crescendo when gay marriage was winding its way through the legal system, en route to the 2015 ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court to legalize same-sex marriage.In that 5-4 decision, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote a dissenting opinion warning of what was to come.“It is striking how much of the majority’s reasoning would apply with equal force to the claim of a fundamental right to plural marriage,” Roberts wrote. “Why would there be any less dignity in the bond between three people who, in exercising their autonomy, seek to make the profound choice to marry?”Princeton professor of jurisprudence Robert George was among those who warned of the slippery slope.In a 2015 article, he predicted that the civil rights challenges were inevitable, but initially judges would “swat away on procedural grounds the first few constitutional challenges to marriage laws.” Gradually the legal objections will give way to the force of logical consistency.He told RealClearInvestigations in an email that this process is often characterized by indignant dismissal of the logical implications, followed by total capitulation.“Of course, advocates of revising the law denounced us not only as ‘bigots’ but as ‘scare-mongers,’” George said. “There was, they insisted, no ‘slippery slope’ from same-sex marriage to polyamory. The two concepts had nothing to do with each other.“I could see that this was nonsense—often disingenuous nonsense,” George said. “So I am not in the least surprised to see what is happening now. We have quickly gone from, ‘It will never happen,’ to ‘You’re a bigot for thinking there is anything wrong with it.’”READ MORE: https://www.dailysignal.com/2020/04/26/polygamy-advocates-lay-groundwork-for-civil-rights-revolution/