It has been one year since hundreds of thousands of the Rohingya population streamed into Bangladesh, as a result of a brutal crackdown carried out by the Myanmar army that was described by the United Nations as “textbook ethnic cleansing”.

The latest assault took place after a coordinated attack by the Arkan Rohingya Salvation Army (ARSA) rebel group on a Myanmar police post and army base killed 12 security personnel.

For many of the Rohingya, who are not recognised by Myanmar as an ethnic group and are denied citizenship and government services, this was not the first time they had forcibly left their homes. 

Previous waves of displacement took place in 1978, 1991 and 2016.

According to the Inter Sector Coordination Group (ISCG), over the past year there has been an influx of 919,000 refugees who have been displaced from their villages in Myanmar’s Rakhine state.

They live in 32 camps in the Ukhiya and Teknaf sub-districts, or upazilas, of the tourist beach town Cox’s Bazar, joining the 300,000 other Rohingya who were displaced in previous years.

The camps suffer from overcrowding and squalid conditions, with sanitation problems and lack of basic infrastructure.

About 200,000 Rohingya are at risk of landslides during the monsoon season, as the tarpaulin and bamboo shelters are built haphazardly on soft ground.

Last November, the Bangladeshi and Myanmar governments signed a repatriation deal where they agreed that the Rohingya that fled across the border would be returned to Rakhine state.

However, little is known about what the deal holds, and there has not been a single return yet.

Many of the Rohingya cite their fears of returning only to be forcibly displaced again in the future.

For this reason, they say they will not return unless their demands are met, such as for Myanmar to grant them citizenship, greater inclusivity in government services such as education and workforce, the ensuring of security and safety, and reparations for all that they have lost.

Al Jazeera spoke with refugees living in various camps in Cox’s Bazar about whether they would return to their homelands and their thoughts on the repatriation deal.

Ali is from Taung Bazar village in the Buthidaung Township, where he used to be a local trader in food items.

He arrived in Jamtoli refugee camp last August with his wife, son and sister.

“I didn’t know there was a repatriation deal. But I won’t go back unless certain demands are met, such as granting the Rohingya people citizenship, for Myanmar to ensure greater security for us, and to give us compensation for all that we’ve lost.”

Gulsahar is from Taung Bazar and now lives in the Jamtoli refugee camp with her husband, Mohammad Shafi and her five children.

“I lost my sister and my nieces and nephews. They were killed by the Myanmar soldiers. I have made up my mind to stay here in Jamtoli until I die. Here, I receive help from the aid agencies. But even if the government of Bangladesh cuts off the aid, I would rather die from starvation than return to Rakhine.

“I have three daughters and two sons. My eldest daughter is 20, and she is still unmarried. We are searching for a bridegroom.”

[Rohingya women tend to marry in their early teens because they fear getting raped by Myanmar soldiers, she said, adding that if the women are married, the soldiers lose interest]

Mahmud is from the Raballah village in Maungdaw Township. He is the eldest of seven siblings. He and his unmarried brothers live with their mother in Nayapara – Shalbagan refugee camp in Teknaf.

“I have no demands. I want to go back to my village without any compensation or conditions. I used to be a porter. Now I do nothing.

“Every day I face many difficulties just to get food. I am dependent on aid. There are also hygiene problems, such as the lack of sanitary latrines. I don’t know much about the repatriation deal.”

Mir is from Fukira Bazar in Maungdaw Township, where he was a farmer and owned 10 kani (1.6 hectares) of land. He now lives in Balukhali camp.

“I am married with two sons and one daughter. I am willing to go back to Rakhine if the Myanmar government meets our demands, such as compensation and recognising us as citizens.”

“Here I can get food and shelter. I feel better here than in my own village because there’s more security. But I want to return to Fukira Bazar because there, I can live in dignity.”

Hujjatul is from a village in Maungdaw Township, and now lives with his parents, two brothers and two sisters in Kutupalong camp, in the unregistered bloc 11.

“I was in Year Three in school when I was in Rakhine. Now I can’t find a proper school here except for the madrasahs where we learn the Quran. I haven’t heard of any repatriation deal.”

“I’ll go back if we have Rohingya recognition. We would much rather die here if Myanmar forces us to go back without granting us citizenship.”

She is from Bolibazar village in Maungdaw Township and now lives in the Kutupalong camp.

“I have nine children and a husband. It took us two days to reach Cox’s Bazar. I saw so many massacres, rapes, and homes set on fire.

“I haven’t heard of the repatriation deal. I would only go back if Myanmar granted us Rohingya recognition. I don’t feel good here because this is not my land.

I am grateful for the role of the Bangladeshi government and the aid agencies for helping us, but I want to live in dignity back in my own land.”

They are cousins from the Maungdaw Township. Amin has 10 kids and Ahmad has eight kids.

Nural Amin: “We haven’t heard of a repatriation deal. If the governments of both countries decide to physically return us to Rakhine, we have conditions that must be met first, like the Rohingya recognition and compensation.”

“I hope we won’t be forced to go back without any guarantees. We would prefer to die here in a Muslim country and not among Buddhists.”

“This is our third time being displaced. The first was in 1978 and the second time in 1991. Every time we returned to Rakhine we faced torture and government repression.”

“We were fishermen and farmers in Myanmar. Even though Myanmar is our country, there is no way we would go back there again without security or conditions. Bangladesh is more peaceful.”

Liverpool v Brighton & Hove Albion live in the Premier League – Live – BBC Sport

<!–

<!–

<!–
<!–

<!–
<!–

<!–
<!–

<!–
<!–

<!–

<!–

<!–

WASHINGTON – President Donald Trump unloaded on the media, the FBI and his own attorney general in a Saturday morning Twitter rant – saying he “may have to get involved” in the investigations into the 2016 presidential campaign. 

Trump’s latest tweets come after a week of stunning developments in two investigations into Trump’s political campaign and businesses. Two top associates were found guilty of tax evasion and bank fraud charges – and one of campaign finance violations. And two other associates – his accountant and a publisher – reportedly reached immunity deals with prosecutors.

In recent days, Trump has turned his ire to Attorney General Jeff Sessions – even leading Sessions to put out a statement saying he “will not be improperly influenced by political considerations.”

Trump shot back Saturday that Sessions only said that because he “doesn’t understand what is happening underneath his command position.”

Special counsel Robert Mueller, who is investigating possible collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign, reports to Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein because Sessions, a former Trump campaign adviser, recused himself.

“The special counsel Highly conflicted Bob Mueller and his gang of 17 Angry Dems are having a field day as real corruption goes untouched,” Trump said, repeating a partly true assertion. Thirteen of the 17 members of Mueller’s team are registered to vote as Democrats, but Mueller himself is a Republican.

Trump also quoted Sen. Lindsay Graham, R-S.C., who suggested this week that the Department of Justice may need fresh leadership “sooner rather than later.”

“Every president deserves an attorney general they have confidence in,” Trump said, quoting Graham. I believe every president has a right to their cabinet, these are not lifetime appointments. You serve at the pleasure of the president.”

But Trump also expressed lingering anger over the 2016 investigation into rival Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server to conduct sensitive government business. He claimed on Twitter that the FBI “ignored tens of thousands of Crooked Hillary Emails, many of which are REALLY BAD.”

And he said that if the FBI doesn’t get to the bottom of Clinton’s corruption, “at some point I may have to get involved!”

Trump also defended himself against accusations that he knew about a 2016 Trump Tower meeting in which campaign officials met with a Russian agent in an effort to get damaging information about Hillary Clinton. His former attorney, Michael Cohen, reached a plea deal with prosecutors Tuesday and was expected to testify that Trump did know about the meeting, which was attended by his son, son-in-law and campaign chairman.

More: Michael Cohen’s hush money plea marks rare ‘win’ in campaign system

But the source of that story, Cohen attorney Lanny Davis, later clarified to the New York Postthat he could not “independently confirm” Trump’s advance knowledge of the meeting. 

“The answer is that I did NOT know about the meeting,” Trump said Saturday. “Just another phony story by the Fake News Media!”

Read or Share this story: https://usat.ly/2o792h8

A case where the original still reigns supreme is in the geeky collectibles and gear subscription box.
Loot Crate is the best of the best, and has built an entire community around unboxing their loot.

The original Loot Crate set out to be “comic-con in a box,” containing at least four pop-culture related items valued at over $45 total. There’s guaranteed to be a t-shirt in every box, and they often collaborate with brands to deliver exclusive products. Each monthly box is centered around a theme – past themes have included “future,” “anti-hero,” and “origins.” There’s also a
Loot Crate DX subscription for the truly dedicated nerds out there, with premium items worth at least $100. We here at Mashable have a fun time every month trying to
what the new theme will bring.

Loot Crate has also branched out into all kinds of other nerdy areas. There’s an
anime box, a
Sanrio box (delivered every 3 months — Hello Kitty has a busy life,) and even an adorable box for
pets. Gamers can subscribe to a specific
box, or even pick a bi-monthly box with exclusively
Halo– or
Fallout-related loot. The
Loot Wear offshoot has apparel subscriptions for socks, underwear, t-shirts, wearables, and “For Her.” I haven’t even gotten to the
film and TV crates yet, but you get it. There’s a lot of stuff here. All nerds will be able to find something they’ll love unboxing every month.    

With all this the variety, the fan community, and exclusive items, there’s just no competitor even coming close to beating
Loot Crate in the geeky collectible box game.

Social media users have slammed a decision to ban a catsuit worn by US tennis champion Serena Williams as part of changes to the dress code at the French Open.

French Tennis Federation President Bernard Giudicelli singled out Williams’ black and red outfit, which she wore at the tournament in May, in an interview with Tennis Magazine saying “certain limits” would be imposed on player’s uniforms going forward.

“I think that, sometimes, we’ve gone too far,” he said. “[The catsuit] will no longer be accepted. One must respect the game and place.”

The comments have prompted a lively debate on social media, with users attributing the decision to racism, sexism and ignorance.

Others have questioned the wisdom in banning an outfit which was specially designed by Williams’ sponsor, Nike, for health reasons.

Williams told reporters after she first wore the outfit in May that the skin-tight material helped avoid blood clots, which caused her to have a pulmonary embolism after giving birth in September.

“I’ve been wearing pants, in general, a lot when I play so I can keep the blood circulation going. It’s a fun suit, but it’s also functional so I can be able to play without problems,” she said.

Rafi D’Angelo, a blogger, said in a series of posts on Twitter that the ban was about men telling women what to wear and white men “continuing to be uncomfortable with Serena’s body”.

Serena Williams, who wore an outfit specifically designed to help prevent blood clots because she almost *died* after giving birth, won’t be able to wear her catsuit again at the French Open because the tournament chief…doesn’t like it.

That’s literally the only reason. https://t.co/TiLo8JcSJj

— Rafi (@RafiDAngelo) August 24, 2018

After playing in May’s French Open, Williams said the outfit made her feel like a “warrior”.

“I call it my Wakanda-inspired catsuit,” she said, referring to the fictional African country which is home to the Marvel superhero Black Panther.

“I feel like a warrior in it, like a warrior princess kind of, queen from Wakanda maybe … I’ve always wanted to be a superhero, and it’s kind of my way of being a superhero. I feel like a superhero when I wear it.”

A photo of Williams in her catsuit next to a 1985 shot of former US tennis player Anne White wearing a long-sleeved white bodysuit has been widely shared by social media users who say it shows a double-standard in clothing restrictions for white and black women.

At the time, White was asked to wear something more “appropriate”.

For the record, Serena Williams wasn’t the first woman to wear a catsuit at a Grand Slam. Anne White did it in 1985 at the US Open. They knew this was a possibility but didn’t ban it until Serena did it for MEDICAL REASONS. pic.twitter.com/0GyDbKnhEO

— Mizzly (@mizzlywizz) August 24, 2018

Kristen Clarke, president of the US-based Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law said the decision was “racist and sexist” and reflected how black women’s bodies are subject to increased restrictions. 

“Arbitrary dress code policies have been disproportionately used to target Black women in schools, at work and now on the tennis court. This is the unfair policing of Black women’s bodies,” she said on Twitter.

Let’s call this French Open restriction on Serena Williams for what it is- racist and sexist. Arbitrary dress code policies have been disproportionately used to target Black women in schools, at work and now on the tennis court. This is the unfair policing of Black women’s bodies https://t.co/kbMbLSHF2a

— Kristen Clarke (@KristenClarkeJD) August 25, 2018

Many social media users took exception to the suggestion that Williams choice of outfit showed a lack of respect for tennis. 

“The French Open needs to learn how to respect the GREATEST OF ALL TIME and stop telling Serena Williams what to wear,” environmental activist Ryan White said in a post on Twitter.

The 36-year old is considered one of the greatest tennis players of all time, having won 23 singles grand slam titles, the second-highest number for a female player after Australian former tennis player Margaret Court’s 24.

The French Open needs to learn how to respect the GREATEST OF ALL TIME and stop telling Serena Williams what to wear.

— Ryan Knight (@ProudResister) August 25, 2018

Giudicelli’s comments came on Friday, as Williams topped Forbes’ annual list of highest paid female athletes, having taken home some $18.1m between June 2017 and June 2018.

Williams, who is currently training for September’s US Open, has not responded to the comments but did not attend a pre-tournament press conference yesterday because she was feeling “under the weather,” according to a tournament announcement.

However, Nike responded by sharing a photo of Williams in the outfit, saying: “You can take the superhero out of her costume, but you can never take away her superpowers.”

You can take the superhero out of her costume, but you can never take away her superpowers. #justdoit pic.twitter.com/dDB6D9nzaD

— Nike (@Nike) August 25, 2018

Giudicelli did not offer specifics on what the new dress code would entail, but said it would not be as strict as those in place at Wimbledon, where players are required to wear white.

The next French Open will be held in May 2019 and many player’s uniforms have already been designed but Giudicelli said the FFT would be asking manufacturers for an advance look at them. 

Wolves manager Nuno Espirito Santo said his side have “nothing to prove” after they held Manchester City to a draw at Molineux, with Aymeric Laporte’s header rescuing a point for the champions.

Pep Guardiola’s side came here on the back of convincing victories at Arsenal and at home to Huddersfield Town – but were given a severe test by the team who won the Championship last season.

In an eventful match, City hit the post twice in the first half – first, through Sergio Aguero and and then when Wolves keeper Rui Patricio brilliantly turned Raheem Sterling’s rising 25-yard drive onto the bar. Wolves striker Raul Jimenez also had a goal ruled out for offside.

The hosts took the lead in controversial fashion after 57 minutes when defender Willy Boly’s attempted diving header went in off his hand from Joao Moutinho’s free-kick.

City had appeals for a penalty turned away by referee Martin Atkinson after Ruben Neves’ challenge on David Silva, but drew level in the 69th minute when Aymeric Laporte scored his first goal for the club – a towering header from Ilkay Gundogan’s free-kick.

Both sides had opportunities to win it in the closing stages, with City almost snatching three points when Aguero’s free-kick glanced off the bar with virtually the last kick of the game.

Wolves became only the third team since the beginning of last season to reach double figures in attempts on goal against Manchester City.

“It is a big victory for the boys today,” Nuno told BBC Sport. “No matter what opponent you have you should play the way you think you should play.

“It is our way. We don’t have to prove nothing to nobody. We just have to be ourselves, the way we work together.”

Wolves at home at the top table

The thunderous roar that greeted the final whistle and this well-earned point was just the sort of moment Wolves’ Chinese owners had in mind when they embarked on this hugely ambitious Molineux project.

“We’re on our way back” boomed from the Sir Jack Hayward Stand as manager Nuno Espirito Santo and his players took the acclaim for taking the first points off Manchester City this season.

It has been a difficult opening to the season for Wolves with defeat at Leicester City following a home draw against Everton on the opening weekend.

On Saturday, however, Wolves showed commitment, energy and quality to carry out Nuno’s gameplan – one which he said he would not downgrade or tailor simply because Guardiola’s champions were in town.

Yes, there were moments when the hosts carried their luck. Boly’s goal was clearly scored with the aid of his hand, while City were frustrated by the woodwork – once via a brilliant Patricio save – but few would begrudge them this point.

Backed by a fervent support at a packed Molineux, they were not hanging on for a point and twice the raw pace of substitute Adama Traore almost provided crosses that led to a late goal.

Make no mistake, City did not deserve to lose either – but this is a result, occasion and performance that will do wonders for Wolves’ self-belief and help them settle into life in the Premier League.

Man City lack usual cutting edge

Guardiola and his Manchester City players will be frustrated at dropping their first points of the season after two convincing wins.

While City saw plenty of the ball, they were just short of their dazzling best in all areas of the pitch and could not find the clinical end product that normally comes so naturally to them.

Their luck was also out. Aguero hit the woodwork twice and Patricio’s athleticism left Sterling holding his head in anguish.

City still showed resilience to fight their way back into contention after the shock of falling behind to Boly’s goal, and plenty of City’s title rivals will have looked on in envy at the sheer firepower Guardiola was able to introduce from the bench as they went in search of victory.

Gabriel Jesus, Leroy Sane and Riyad Mahrez all came on – it did not do the trick on this occasion but their presence demonstrates the sheer size of the task of those hoping to wrestle the crown away from City.

Tough day for officials

The video assistant referee (VAR) will not be present in the Premier League this season – and Manchester City may well have been left regretting its absence at Molineux on Saturday.

Boly’s final touch on to Moutinho’s free-kick to give Wolves the lead clearly came off his hand, but it was incredibly tough for referee Atkinson and his assistant to spot as the ball was delivered into a crowd in the penalty area.

And City also felt they were denied a penalty when Silva tumbled under a Neves challenge, but their appeals were ignored.

In the end a draw was accepted by both sides – but City clearly felt aggrieved that big decisions had gone against them.

Man of the match – Joao Moutinho (Wolves)

‘A very good point’ – Guardiola

Wolves manager Nuno Espirito Santo: “It was a good performance overall in all moments of the game and in all circumstances of the game, when we had the ball and when we didn’t have the ball.

“You have to be cautious and realise your opponents are the best team, the champions, stick together, reduce the spaces and have balance.

“When we had the ball we created chances and played good football. It was a good game.

“But – and there is always a but – maybe we should have managed those couple of minutes better after we scored. There were a couple of first passes that put Manchester City in control of the game but it is one more game, one more tool to work on.”

Manchester City manager Pep Guardiola, speaking to BBC Sport: “It was a very good point. We created chances but their keeper made saves, so today we draw. We knew how good they were this season. No complaints.

“We created a lot, that’s why it’s good. In the first half, Aguero hit the post – sometimes it goes in, sometimes not.

“We were not solid defensively today, that is why we conceded a few chances to them. But in general, the game – considering the quality of the opponent – was good. We have to give credit.”

The stats – French flourish in English top flight

• Wolves have lost just two of their 28 home games under Nuno Espírito Santo, winning 18 and drawing eight.
• Manchester City have lost only one of their past 30 Premier League games against newly promoted teams.
• City conceded the opening goal in a league game for the first time in 18 games, when they lost 4-3 to Liverpool on 14 January.
• City captain Vincent Kompany became the first Belgian to make 250 Premier League appearances.
• Wolves defender Willy Boly and Manchester City’s Aymetic Laporte became the 117th and 118th French players to score in the Premier League (excluding own-goals).
• In fact, Laporte’s goal was the 1,500th scored by a French player in the Premier League – with only English players scoring more.

What’s next?

Wolves travel to Sheffield Wednesday in the Carabao Cup second round on Tuesday (19:45 BST kick-off) before visiting West Ham in the Premier League next Saturday.

Manchester City host Newcastle in the league next Saturday at 17:30.

Dane Lang, a co-owner of Yarrabee Farms outside of Brooklyn, Iowa, stood outside his family farm this week and lamented that he had employed the undocumented immigrant charged in the murder of 20-year-old Mollie Tibbetts.

Then he was asked if any other non-U.S. citizens were among the 10 employees on the dairy farm.

“I don’t think I can comment to that,” Lang said.

That vague answer highlights the worst-kept secret in the agriculture business: roughly half of the nation’s 1.4 million field workers (47 percent, or 685,000 workers) are undocumented immigrants. And that estimate, from the Labor Department, is a conservative one with labor experts citing far higher percentages. 

While presidents have approached undocumented immigrants living in the U.S. in vastly different ways, Republicans and Democratic administrations — under heavy lobbying from the agricultural industry — have always treated undocumented farm workers differently.

While the federal government was herding more than 100,000 Japanese immigrants into internment camps during World War II, it was also administering the Bracero Program, which allowed millions of Mexicans to enter the U.S. to work on farms.

When President Ronald Reagan signed a landmark immigration law in 1986 that granted amnesty to nearly 3 million undocumented immigrants, those who worked on farms were given the easiest path to U.S. citizenship.

A bipartisan immigration reform bill that passed the Senate (but not the House) in 2013 would have created a special “blue card” just for agricultural workers and their immediate families that granted them legal status and the chance to become U.S. citizens.

And now, many Republicans are citing Tibbetts’ death as a reason to pass a bill requiring all U.S. companies to use the federal E-Verify system to check the immigration status of all job applicants. But even that bill — the Legal Workforce Act filed by Rep. Lamar Smith, R-Texas — gives farmers 2.5 years before they must start vetting their field workers, the only such exception.

Chris Chmielenski, deputy director of NumbersUSA, a group that advocates for lower levels of legal and illegal immigration, said that history reflects both the power of the agricultural industry, and the willingness of politicians to help them out.

He says the easiest solution would be to require that all U.S. business use E-Verify, which allows employers to check the immigration status of job applicants using a government website. The Iowa farm that employed Cristhian Bahena Rivera, who is charged with first-degree murder in Tibbetts’ death, initially said they used that program to screen Rivera, but later backtracked and conceded that they had used a different system not designed to flag immigration violations.

“That would have a pretty big impact on future flows of illegal immigration,” Chmielenski said.

But farmers, ranchers, and other business owners who rely on undocumented immigrants say passing an E-Verify bill would cripple their industries. Already struggling to recruit enough Americans to do the back-breaking field work, and operating under the constant threat of raids by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, they say implementing E-Verify with no other changes to the immigration system would put untold numbers of companies out of business.

That’s why the U.S. Chamber of Commerce said that it would only support mandatory electronic worker verification if it’s coupled with an overhaul, and expansion, of the country’s guest worker programs. The American Farm Bureau Federation goes a step further, arguing that passing E-Verify alone would cause production to drop by $60 billion and food prices to increase by 5 to 6 percent.

“Farmers and ranchers get that we have immigration laws in our country, and they want nothing more than to be able to attain their workers legally,” said John-Walt Boatright, the national affairs coordinator for the Florida Farm Bureau. “But we cannot have E-Verify without a workable, functioning, accessible guest work program in place.” 

Farmers across the country saw exactly what would happen if the government took an enforcement-only approach after Arizona passed an anti-immigration bill in 2010, leading a half-dozen states to follow suit. The laws, which included the requirement that all businesses use the E-Verify system, sent undocumented immigrants out of those states in droves.

Alabama’s immigration law pushed up to 80,000 workers out of the state, according to a study conducted by the University of Alabama. 

Georgia’s immigration law led to more than $140 million in unharvested crops in 2011 because so many workers fled the state, according to a report commissioned by the Georgia Fruit and Vegetable Growers Association.

The fleeing workers in Arizona resulted in an average 2 percent drop in the state’s gross domestic product every year through 2015, according to an analysis conducted by The Wall Street Journal.

Finding American workers to make up for the shortfall was just as difficult. In Georgia, Gov. Republican Nathan Deal turned to people on probation in 2011, but most walked off the jobs almost immediately.

That same year in North Carolina, as 489,000 people were unemployed statewide, the North Carolina Growers Association listed 6,500 available jobs, but just 268 North Carolinians applied, 163 showed up for work, and only seven finished the season, according to a study by the Partnership for a New American Economy.

The solution, according to farmers, is a nationwide guest worker program that improves on the current H2A visa program that has been a headache for farmers for decades.

Those visas are designed for temporary, seasonal workers, and have been used more frequently in recent years. The number of H2A visas approved has increased from 74,192 in 2013 to 161,583 in 2017, according to State Department data. 

“That doesn’t mean it’s a great program,” he said. “It just means it’s the only program.”

Boatright said the H2A program is too rigid to accommodate the unpredictable timing of harvests. He said it’s overloaded with too many regulations that often requires farms to have immigration attorneys on staff just to fill out paperwork. And because the visas cannot be used for year-round workers, Boatright said it makes dairies, nurseries, and livestock ranches ineligible.

Chmielenski said his organization, which can successfully pressure Washington by activating its network of thousands of supporters to flood congressional offices with calls, emails, and Tweets, is willing to consider a tandem bill that includes mandatory E-Verify with improvements to the agricultural guest worker program. And that, in the end, may be the only way to get a bill through Congress.

“We acknowledge the fact that H2A could be cleaned up,” he said. “We’re willing to work with them on that and to give them a pool of foreign workers they can tap into when there’s not an American worker willing to do that for a decent wage.”

Read or Share this story: https://usat.ly/2o5a79c

It’s fascinating to watch conspiracy theories die — their diehard captains still clinging to shards of evidence as the ship of belief cracks and sinks all around them. 

We’re watching that happen in two areas of the culture this week. There are the QAnon crazies, whose bizarre pro-Trump theory is taking on water after lawyer Michael Cohen turned on his former boss. Moderators in the Q forums have started banning mentions of Cohen’s name.

Alas, much this same reality-denying dynamic is at work in parts of Star Wars fandom.  

The parentage of Rey (Daisy Ridley) was revealed in The Last Jedi way back in December: her parents were drunken nobodies. Still, all these months later, some true believers in discredited theories hold out hope that this plot point will be reversed by J.J. Abrams in the upcoming Episode IX — and some websites are all too ready to attract eyeballs by stoking that belief.

But that’s just not how stories work. That’s not how any of this works. 

Let’s back up, all the way back to Abrams’ first Star Wars movie, The Force Awakens. Rey was introduced as a junkyard orphan on the planet Jakku, selling scraps of old Imperial war equipment in exchange for a pittance paid in self-raising bread. She passes the time by telling herself that her parents are coming back for her. 

In the course of her adventures, Rey meets Maz Kanata (Lupita Nyong’o), an ancient and wise woman who is able to tell a lot about a person’s history by looking in their eyes. Here’s what Maz tells Rey, plain as day: “You already know the truth. The belonging you seek is not behind you. It is ahead.” 

Still, elaborate parental theories sprung up in the wake of the movie: Rey must be a Skywalker, because Anakin and Luke’s lightsaber gave her a vision! No wait, she must be a Solo, because she’s so good at piloting the Millennium Falcon! Or maybe she’s a descendent of Obi-Wan Kenobi, because … reasons! 

And then there was the fourth option, the one many of us preferred post-Force Awakens: she’s a nobody. Because Force powers can spring up in anyone, even a Jakku orphan. Because if she is related to any of our heroes, that instantly turns them into assholes for abandoning her. But most of all, because Maz basically said it already, right there in Abrams’ film.

Then writer and director Rian Johnson confirmed the “nobody” theory in The Last Jedi. “You know the truth,” Kylo Ren tells Rey, literally echoing Maz. “They were filthy junk traders; sold you off for drinking money. They’re dead in a pauper’s grave in the Jakku desert.” 

To underline the fact that the villain of the piece isn’t lying, it is Rey herself who delivers the crucial piece of dialogue in between those two quotes above: “They were nobody,” she admits.

Case closed, right? There was foreshadowing in the first movie. A major fan theory got it right. The point that both movies were making about the democratic nature of the Force is clear. Johnson even cautioned us in advance not to make too much of the Rey’s parents thing. All should be right in Star Wars world. 

But of course it wasn’t. Skywalker, Solo and Kenobi theory purists lost their minds. This was all Rian Johnson’s fault, they said. Abrams will reverse it in the next film, they said. Drunk on fan theories, a number of movie and science fiction websites garnered clicks by holding out that hope. 

Actor and Abrams friend Simon Pegg added fuel to the fire in a podcast in April. Pegg said that way back before The Force Awakens there was “some talk” being “chucked around” about “a kind of relevant lineage for her.” Which is quite possible, given how many ideas Abrams and writer Lawrence Kasdan threw around in their year-long journey of writing the script. Revealingly, Pegg added: “Honestly, I don’t know.”  

Do you think the internet cared about that nuance? It did not. Controversy-seeking articles and (especially) YouTube videos made hay with Pegg’s quote. They played telephone with it to the point where the revelation came from Abrams himself. Surely, they assumed, he must be mad at Rian Johnson! Surely he’ll reverse course in Episode IX, giving Rey the famous parents she was always meant to have!

Cue millions of headlines giving hope to the hopeless, such as this week’s piece of fact-free tabloid nonsense from the UK’s Daily Express: “Star Wars 9 leak: this new scene reveals both Rey’s PARENTS?” 

To save you a click, I’ll point out that the question mark is doing a lot of heavy lifting here. 

But even if you ignore the fact that the pair of directors have had dozens of meetings about the two movies thus far, and even if you believe that J.J. Abrams is quietly seething and desperate to give Rey some famous parents, let us say it clearly again: that’s not how stories work. 

This isn’t a game of Whose Line Is It Anyway. Abrams and Johnson aren’t improv antagonists trying to score points by screwing each others’ content. They are collectively creating a trilogy of films that will hang together as one complete story, in collaboration with the many fine storytelling minds of Lucasfilm. 

Abrams isn’t going to go out of his way to make his film say “nu uh.” His job is to bring the trilogy’s story to a satisfying conclusion using logic and emotional beats. That’s it. 

Ask yourself this, true believers: How satisfying would it have been in 1983 if Return of the Jedi had simply said: “Never mind! Darth Vader was lying! Luke’s not his son after all!” 

And yet, as a 10-year-old kid at the time, that was absolutely the answer I wanted. After Empire Strikes Back, my friends and I simply couldn’t handle the fact that our hero and the galaxy’s most evil man were related. There had to be some other explanation, right? 

Four decades later, I’m relieved that George Lucas stuck to the plot development that was best for the story as a whole. I’m glad he didn’t listen to the world’s 10-year-olds. One day, fans of Rey Skywalker and Rey Solo and Rey Kenobi, you too will feel the same.

I’m not holding out that much hope for the QAnon folks, however. 

Rohingya refugees have held protests in Bangladesh to mark one year since Myanmar’s army launched a brutal crackdown of the mainly-Muslim minority, forcing hundreds of thousands to flee across the border. 

More than 15,000 gathered on Saturday at the Kutupalong refugee camp in Bangladesh’s Cox’s Bazar to demand justice for what they called “genocide” committed by Myanmar’s forces.

On August 25, 2017, Myanmar launched a military offensive – termed by the UN as a textbook example of ethnic cleansing – after a Rohingya armed group carried out attacks on border security forces.

The ensuing violent crackdown forced more than 700,000 Rohingya to flee Rakhine state for neighbouring Bangladesh, living in squalid conditions in overcrowded camps. 

“The refugees had to get special permission from the Bangladeshi authorities in order to stage these demonstrations,” said Al Jazeera’s Mohammed Jamjoom, reporting from Cox’s Bazar, which has become home to the world’s largest refugee settlement.  

“We saw men, women, young and old, demanding their rights, demanding justice, pleading to the international community to do more to help them, but also saying that they want to make sure that the perpetrators of this genocide – the Myanmar army – need to be held to account and brought to justice by the International Criminal Court,” he added. 

Returning home

Rohingya, one of the most persecuted communities in the world, have been denied citizenship and basic human rights by Myanmar’s authorities since 1982.

Bangladesh signed a deal with Myanmar last year to allow the refugees to return, but the repatriation process has been stalled.

But little is know about the deal, and many of the Rohingya say they are afraid of returning only to be forcibly displaced again in the future.

Among their demands are for Myanmar to grant them citizenship, greater inclusivity in government services such as education and workforce, the ensuring of safety and security, as well as reparations for all that they have lost.

“We want to go back home,” said Mohammad Elias, member of the Arakan Rohingya Society for Peace and Human Rights (ARSPH).

“We want to be citizens of our country. We want to live there with safety and security.”

Elias, who fled Rakhine state in August 2017 with his family, believes there is absolutely no excuse for the Rohingya not to be recognised as citizens of Myanmar.

“Our mothers and fathers are from Myanmar,” he told Al Jazeera.

“We were also born there but still they made us suffer. They didn’t let us get an education. They didn’t even let us pray in the mosque.”

Children’s crisis 

The UN’s refugee agency, UNHCR, estimates that children make up 55 percent of the total Rohingya refugee population in Bangladesh.

A family-counting exercise conducted in December 2017 by UNHCR found more than 5,500 families being led by children under 18.

More than half a million Rohingya refugee children are being denied the chance of a proper education, UNICEF said in a report marking one year since the start of the latest influx of Rohingya into Bangladesh.

Many arrived at the camps unaccompanied – either separated from their families or orphaned. 

“From the outset, this has truly been a children’s crisis,” said Daphnee Cook, a representative for the UK-based non-profit Save the Children. 

“Many children have seen their parents killed in front of them, they’ve had to endure long, hard journeys where they have arrived here with basically no food and then they’ve had to survive now in these camps for about a year now,” she told Al Jazeera in an interview at Cox’s Bazar.

“It’s horrible,” she added. “It’s not a place where children should be living.”

Lewis Hamilton beat title rival Sebastian Vettel to a sensational pole position in a thrillingly chaotic Belgian Grand Prix qualifying in the rain.

A rain shower as the cars began to prepare the first flying laps in the top 10 shoot-out caused havoc but Hamilton came out on top by 0.726 seconds with his final lap.

The Force Indias of Esteban Ocon and Sergio Perez locked out the second row after timing the conditions right – just days after the team were rescued from going out of business.

Red Bull and Ferrari’s Kimi Raikkonen lost out in the pits at the key moment.

Hamilton shines when the sun doesn’t

Ferrari had looked narrow favourites for pole in the dry but the late rain threw form up in the air and, as so often, Hamilton fared best in the treacherous conditions.

The world champion created anxiety at his Mercedes team with an error, running wide at Fagnes with less than three minutes to go when on a fast lap.

But he put it all together on his crucial final lap to take pole by a very impressive margin.

Vettel heads into the race 24 points adrift of Hamilton and for the sake of his title hopes needs to beat him and take advantage of a weekend when the Ferrari looks the faster car, something he has failed to do in the last two races in Germany and Hungary.

Fairytale for Force India

In the early moments, the Force Indias stayed out on slicks, hoping to get in a quick lap before conditions worsened too much.

But it is was too wet – and Perez did well to save a huge moment as he lost the car over the brow at Raidillon, part of the famous Eau Rouge section.

The decision to stay out seemed set to cost the team, which went into administration over the last race weekend in Hungary in July but was saved by a consortium of businessmen led by Lawrence Stroll, the father of Williams driver Lance.

But, as the rain eased, both men drove well to take the team’s best qualifying position for years.

Some big losers

Red Bull’s Max Verstappen was the early pace-setter in the rain, turning the car around quickly while Mercedes and Ferrari took longer to prepare.

But after setting fastest time briefly, Verstappen pitted and dropped down to seventh as others improved at the end of the session. The implication is they did not have enough fuel in the car to finish the session.

Raikkonen will also be disappointed. He has been the form man all weekend and pipped Verstappen, only to pit. His demeanour – shaking his head as he stood by the car – betrayed his frustration

Ferrari said he came back in for fresh tyres and a splash of fuel, but they were too marginal on time to go back out.

Behind the Force Indias, Haas’ Romain Grosjean starts fifth on the mixed-up grid, with Verstappen’s team-mate Daniel Ricciardo and the second Haas of Kevin Magnussen.

Hamilton’s team-mate Valtteri Bottas was 10th, not setting a time in Q3, but will start from the back after engine penalties.

Bottas had illustrated the madness of the opening minutes of qualifying with a spin at Blanchimont on his warm-up lap as the rain came down with the drivers on unthreaded slick tyres.

Hamilton also nearly lost his car just afterwards at the Bus Stop chicane, and all piled into the pits for intermediate tyres.

More McLaren woe

In the dry conditions early in qualifying, McLaren were desperately slow.

Fernando Alonso, who is retiring from Formula 1 at the end of the year, was only 17th and team-mate Stoffel Vandoorne slowest of all, the two split by the Williams cars.

What they said

“That was one of the toughest qualifying sessions I can remember,” Hamilton said. “It seems to get harder and harder all year. I don’t know if they definitely had it. It looked like (the gap was) 0.05secs and I was hopeful I could make it up.

“Then the rain came, I can’t even express how difficult it was. I went wide in Turn One, the track looks dry even though it’s wet. It was so hard. I went off twice but I am so glad it came together on that last lap.”

Vettel said: “I don’t think we timed it quite right. I think we had the pace for pole but we will never find out. The gap was quite big so Lewis deserves pole but I think we have good pace for the race so I am confident. We have strong pace so anything can happen.

“I didn’t feel I got everything out and it was a bit of a scrappy session. But we saw others not putting enough fuel into until the end so it could have been a lot worse.”