I remember where I was, and what theater I was in when I saw Mad Max: Fury Road. I remember feeling myself almost rise out of my theater seat, in the Battery Park movie theater in downtown Manhattan, when Furiosa slugged a man in the face with her stump. In case you haven’t seen Fury Road since then and don’t have as strong a memory as I do for the particulars of the film, or haven’t seen Furiosa yet and want a sense of how things go, here’s a brief, but spoiler-filled paragraph to catch you up to speed: Furiosa is a child born in a post-apocalyptic world where water is as scarce as ethics and morals in the wasteland. Gangs rove the deserts in search of bullets, water, and food, will do just about anything to get it, and no one cares about the safety of others. Also, things got weird after the fall of civilization. No one is “sane.” Furiosa is kidnapped from likely the only well-watered and -fed place in the world, watches her mother get murdered by Dementus, and spends the rest of her life trying to get home. During the course of her time on screen, she survives captivity, the loss of an arm, attempted assaults, the loss of a partner, and living in a misogynistic hellscape. And she tries to rescue others on her quest to just go home again. I hoped that when I saw the new movie, Furiosa, that I would find myself with similar emotions. But I was worried—would the film have the same disability justice motif that had made Mad Max: Fury Road so compelling to me? I assumed that the character would not have a disability for what I believed would be most of the movie. Prologues are writing a history of what came before, and that isn’t always a good thing. The upcoming Quiet Place: Day One is rewriting history, it looks like: creating a story about the monsters that prey on sound without the benefit of the Deaf-centric heroism that made the original two films so compelling to me. It is erasing what made the franchise groundbreaking to go to the safe ground of non-disabled heroes. I was utterly delighted to see that George Miller was not afraid to be bold. Imperator Furiosa is a disabled heroine, from start to finish. Within the first section of the film, she is kidnapped from her home, witnesses the horrific loss of her mother, and becomes selectively mute. The character does not speak (though she does scream) until an hour and fifteen minutes into the film. Selective mutism is a disability, typically acquired through experiencing a traumatic event. As someone who lost a parent to a disease that did horrible things to my father’s body, I can confirm that the loss of a parent is traumatic, whether it is by a disease that wreaks havoc on the body, or a demented wasteland warlord who does so. And so even before Furiosa loses her arm, she is disabled. This, too, is an excellent writing and directorial choice. Disabled people know how to adapt to new disabilities. Credit: Warner Bros. Pictures As an example, when I started to lose more of my hearing, and had to go from one hearing aid to two, many people asked me if I was sad. Well, okay, they didn’t ask. They assumed that I was sad. The answer is that I wasn’t sad at all. My adaptive aids would work better, because I would be able to use the bluetooth capabilities that only one hearing aid denied me access to. Furiosa already knew how to adapt. She already had a sense of what a disabled body felt like. Adaptation was a skill she already had acquired, so even though the tools were new, the sensation in her body simply wasn’t. Furiosa has always been disabled. And because of that, Miller is telling a disabled story. One of the major critiques that I have had in my decade-long career as a media critic on disability is that there are no disabled heroes or heroines written by non-disabled people. We do not have blockbusters. But as I look back, I see that Imperator Furiosa was, and is, a turning point in our collective imagination. Much like in the first film, there was a moment in Furiosa when I found myself almost leaping out of my seat because the emotions within me were too much to hold. Furiosa had tattooed upon her left arm the map to get home, the only vestige she had left of her mother, and her only way back to where her childhood began. When she awakes and knows that her arm is gone, that her way home is gone, she transforms her trauma with her knowledge of the rigs, given to her by the people who helped her stay safe. What is truly empowering about Furiosa is that she takes what she needs, she fights for what she wants, and even when she fails, she perseveres. For so many disabled women, this is our reality. We need something, and we don’t get it, and we keep fighting even though the odds are against us. In the real world, people take ownership of their prosthetics, too. I have gemstone sparkly hearing aid molds, with streaks of gold in them. It looks like a tigers eye gemstone is sitting in my ear canal instead of a piece of plastic. Friends have modified their wheelchairs with bike spokes, or painted them fancy colors, or added lights (a little like a war rig!) and more. Owning a prosthetic, crafting it in some way with our own hands, is taking ownership of bodies that others want to control. It is the supreme act of self determination to craft for yourself the thing that you need most in this world. And Furiosa doesn’t just craft an arm. She crafts a tool. She crafts something that has pincers, she crafts something that sits just right on her shoulder, she crafts something that has tiny pulleys and levers so that she can control each movement. And by the second film, it is the key to her resistance, because it drives her rig. Credit: Warner Bros. Pictures Furiosa cannot be contained because she has found the well of self reliance that every disabled woman has to find. It is an endless well of rage, of frustration, and of body awareness. Watching Furiosa reminded me of my own power, it reminded me of the power of other disabled women I know. It echoed our rage, and our resistance, and our autonomy. And at the end, when Furiosa is screaming at her abuser to “give it back,” I felt myself screaming with her. Give it back. Give my dignity back. Give my childhood back. Give me the same things that everyone else has, and give them to me because I deserve it as a person in the world. Don’t give me pity, give me autonomy. Give me choices. Give me decisions. Give me my people. Furiosa is a testament to disabled resilience. Our disabilities are so often borne from trauma—even when we are born with our disabilities, the people who gave birth to us, who witnessed our bodies when they were small and vulnerable, saw us as traumas. Tiny traumas in blankets. And we survive. We thrive. Furiosa does not give up, she does not surrender. She builds her resistance with her own hands, and she takes her vengeance where she can. Furiosa is our first disabled heroine who is reliant upon no one, and I cannot wait to see more heroines like her. Because now we know: the audience is ready for us.[end-mark] The post <i>Furiosa</i> and the Disability Wasteland appeared first on Reactor.

Biden Keeps Threatening Conservatives With F-15s

Connecticut Dems Arrested After Voter Fraud Debacle

The battery revolution would see humanity move away from burning fossil fuels in favor of electric power, but in order to get there, we need metal. A lot of metal. Vast crops of “deep sea potatoes” have been located in the Clarion-Clipperton Zone bursting with crucial battery ingredients, but what do we know so far about the pros and cons of deep-sea mining?What is deep-sea mining?At depths of around 4,000 meters (13,123 feet) below the sea, transporting manganese nodules from the seabed to the surface isn’t a simple task. The proposed method for collection involves deep-sea vehicles using water to dislodge the nodules – which aren’t attached to anything – and effectively scoop them up and send them to the surface via a pipe.The key areas of concern center around what impact the plume created by the collectors might have, both when dislodging the nodules from the seabed, and that which gets dropped in the midwater when the nodules are transported to the surface. Sediment might not sound terribly dangerous, but there were concerns it might create dust storms that could travel long distances and choke small organisms."These particles could feasibly clog the feeding apparatus of these organisms for an area spanning hundreds of square kilometers from the point where the plumes generated,” said environmental manager for The Metals Company (TMC) Dr Michael Clarke, who after years working on environmental impact assessments for terrestrial mines has now moved to studying the impacts of mining the deep sea, speaking to IFLScience.“What we're actually finding when we go out there and do the tests is that the sediment goes into the vehicle and comes out the vehicle, forming what we call a turbidity flow. It behaves more like a liquid than a gas and doesn't rise much more than 2 or 3 meters [6.6 to 9.8 feet] above the back of the collector. So, it doesn't create the huge dispersive plumes that would be required for the sediment particles to travel hundreds of square kilometers and impact organisms over a huge area.”The plume generated at the midwater could feasibly have had the same impact, but tests have shown it’s very dilute.“You only have to get a few hundred meters away for it to dilute around 1,000 times and to become really hard to even find the sediment,” Clarke continued. “So, we really don't think there's much potential for these midwater sediment plumes to spread out over large areas either.”This stock diagram lays out the general jist of deep sea mining.Image credit: Naeblys/Shutterstock.comHowever, The Centre for Biological Diversity has stated that this “will inevitably harm” the sensitive ecosystems that exist across the marine environment, from sea-floor sponges and corals to turtles and sharks. As such, a group of 37 financial institutions has released a joint statement urging governments to not proceed with deep-sea mining until the risks are fully understood.Deep sea mining vs. terrestrial miningThere’s no getting away from the fact that we don’t currently have enough metals in circulation for recycling to supply enough energy transition metals, given the amount we need for the green transition. These source metals need to come from somewhere, so we’re faced with the dilemma of working out which approach has the best yield-to-impact ratio.“I've been implementing an environmental impact assessment like you would do for any mining project,” said Clarke. “The only difference is that this one is in the middle of the Pacific Ocean, a five-day sail from the nearest port at [a depth of] 4,000 meters.”That depth is a crucial point in the pursuit of manganese nodules, because pitted against terrestrial mining sites there’s comparatively very little life in the benthos. TMC told IFLScience there are 13 grams [0.46 ounces] of biomass per square meter on the abyssal seafloor, whereas in the rainforests of Indonesia (one of the leading countries for metal mining) you’re looking at closer to 30 kilograms [66 pounds] of biomass per square meter.Accessing metals from terrestrial sites means clearing forests, habitats, and ecosystems, making them vulnerable to erosion that can contribute to runoff, which ends up in the ocean. We know rainforests are biodiversity hotspots, and themselves act as a carbon sequestration tool, so while it’s important to establish the risks of deep-sea mining before we begin, there’s no getting away from the fact that existing methods are already incredibly damaging.Do the pros outweigh the cons?Academics across the globe have been researching life in the benthos to try and better understand this, hailing from institutions such as London’s Natural History Museum, the National Oceanographic Centre in Southampton, Heriot-Watt University in Scotland, the University of Leeds, the University of Bremen, the University of Hawaii, Texas A&M University, and the University of Maryland, among others.What they’ve discovered is that while there is life on and around the nodules, including some larger animals, most of it is microscopic. Some of the earlier press directed at deep-sea mining has warned of the risk of mass extinction events, often using imagery of wildlife from shallower water to demonstrate potential victims, but given the already great cost of mining on land, it becomes a balancing act of where the greater harm lies.The manganese nodules might not look like much, but there's a lot of potential locked in these deep-sea potatoes.Image credit: V.Gordeev/Shutterstock.com“A lot of people have a real misconception of what the seabed looks like at 4,000 meters depth,” said Clarke. “There is life down there, there's no doubt about it, but it's not as abundant as is often portrayed.”At present, 50 percent of the nickel market comes from Indonesia, where rainforest is flattened to make way for operations. This land is used by both humans and wildlife, so its absence is very apparent and its recovery is slow due to ongoing use. By comparison, after a collector has scooped up the nodules from the seabed, it can recover more quickly because little activity is going on here.While these nodules do take millions of years to form, the argument that once it’s gone – it’s gone – is true of any source metal. On the other hand, only one option requires the ripping up of carbon-sequestering rainforest to reach it.Carbon has been raised as a concern around deep-sea mining, as much of it is stored in sediments, but TMC explained that at present there’s no known mechanism through which this could rise to the surface. A 2020 study actually found that using nodules puts 94 percent less sequestered carbon at risk and reduces emissions by up to 80 percent depending on the specific metal.“90 percent of the world's exploration contracts for nodules are in the Clarion-Clipperton Zone, which represent less than half of 1 percent of the global seafloor,” TMC PR and Media Manager Rory Usher told IFLScience. “But this represents the largest source of manganese, nickel, and cobalt, anywhere on the planet and that dwarfs everything on land by many orders of magnitude. There are enough metals in situ at two of the sites that would satisfy the needs of 280 million cars, which represents every car in America, or a quarter of the world's vehicle fleet.”Research continues into the suitability of deep-sea mining for the task at hand, as well as the potential impacts it could have on the health of ecosystems, as well as humans – as some studies have found they may not be safe to handle due to radioactivity. They might only be the size of a potato, but there’s a lot of potential locked in those little nodules, we just need to work out if unleashing it is a good idea.An earlier version of this article was published in May 2023.

The Secretary-General of the United Nations (UN), António Guterres, has warned the world not to allow artificial intelligence (AI) a role in the decision to launch nuclear weapons.Speaking at a meeting of the Arms Control Association (ACA), Guterres warned that "humanity is on a knife's edge", with the risk of nuclear weapons use being at "heights not seen since the Cold War". "States are engaged in a qualitative arms race," Guterres said in his address. "Technologies like artificial intelligence are multiplying the danger, nuclear blackmail has reemerged with some recklessly threatening nuclear catastrophe, meanwhile the regime designed to prevent the use, testing, and proliferation of nuclear weapons is weakening. Dear friends, we need disarmament now."      The Secretary-General urged countries to disarm, and for those that already possess nuclear weapons to lead the way. "I also urge the United States and the Russian Federation to get back to the negotiating table, fully implement the new START treaty, and agree on its successor," he continued. "Until these weapons are eliminated all countries must agree that any decision on nuclear use is made by humans; not machines or algorithms."While that last part may sound like a far-off threat, automation played a part in the Cold War. A "dead hand" system of ensuring nuclear annihilation in the event that the Soviet Union's command was destroyed by a nuclear blast monitored seismic activity, radiation levels, and air pressure for signs that a nuclear weapon had been launched at the superpower. If the system detected such a strike, it would then check if communication lines between top Soviet officials were open. If they were, it would shut down after 15 minutes, as it would mean people who could decide on whether to launch a strike were still alive. If lines were dead, authority to launch nuclear weapons would be transferred to lower-level operators of the dead hand system inside a protected bunker, placing the fate of the world in the hands of a lower-level officer and a computer system.This was never activated, which you can tell on account of how you're alive. However, on September 26, 1983, a missile-detection system appeared to detect five nuclear missiles heading towards the Soviet Union. Soviet military officer Stanislav Petrov, skeptical of the detection, refused to tell the Soviet command to launch a retaliatory strike. The detection turned out to be the result of the Sun’s glare reflecting off high-altitude clouds, which looked like a potential strike from satellite data. Perhaps we should be wary of automating – via algorithms or AI – decisions that could wipe out humanity. If it was up to them, humanity could have already been wiped out due to clouds.

Disney's destruction of the Star Wars franchise has reached peak demolition with its new series, The Acolyte. In the past, Disney has created Star Wars shows that are woke, incoherent or girl-bossy, with the exception of early seasons of The Mandalorian and Andor. But the "House of Mouse" has straight-up lost its mind with this new series, released on June 4th. The first two episodes of The Acolyte, set long before the Republic crumbled and the Empire took over, premiered last week. The opening episodes fulfilled Hollywood diversity quotas while rolling out a murder mystery in which Jedi are killed by a mysterious woman with force powers. In episode one, "Lost," a former Padawan named Osha (Amandla Stenberg) is arrested as the likely suspect. By episode two, "Revenge/Justice," the Jedi realize that the murderer is actually Osha's evil twin sister, Mae (also played by Stenberg). Last night, Disney premiered episode three, "Destiny," which revealed the twins' back story. It's in this new episode that the series went off the rails. It turns out that Osha and Mae were created and birthed by two lesbian witches, Mother Aniseya (Jodie Turner-Smith) and Mother Koril (Margarita Levieva).  As the lesbian couple tells each other: Koril: I carried them. Aniseya: I created them.   Lesbian conception#Acolyte pic.twitter.com/w7ZKqUpNce — Nerdrotic (@Nerdrotics) June 12, 2024 In this galactic feminist fantasy, lesbians don't need a man to make a baby. Their coven has an "ascension ceremony" which looks like it could be from an old episode of a CW teen witch show. This is Disney Star Wars BWHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA#Acolyte pic.twitter.com/EZ4FcnNWb8 — Nerdrotic (@Nerdrotics) June 12, 2024 The ritual is interrupted by four Jedi who know the witches are hiding kids with potential powers of the Force. When Osha says she thinks the Jedi are good, Mother Aniseya tells her, "This isn't about good or bad. This is about power and who is allowed to use it." How very Marxist of mommy. When Jedi inquire about the twin's paternity, Aniseya proudly says, "They have no father." Mae lies during a Jedi test to hide her specialness, but Osha decides she wants to study with the Jedi. The thought of losing her twin to the Jedi causes Mae to go crazy. She burns down the whole coven with all the witches, including her lesbian mothers. One of the Jedi rescues Osha as the coven headquarters burn. The witches' peaceful existence is thus destroyed by the intrusion of the Jedi. Five more episodes remain of this new series, created by Leslye Headland, who was Harvey Weinstein's former personal assistant. Needless to say, any creator who worked for years with Weinstein is uninterested in topics like honor, heroism and timeless battles between good and evil. Future episodes will undoubtedly have more lesbian/Marxist/feminist "subversion" of patriarchal heteronormative narratives. Apparently, Disney still has a lot of nails left to hammer into Star Wars' coffin.

I’m so glad our police force is focused not on combating crime and keeping our cities safe but rather on hiring someone to cater to queer people’s emotions and sensitivities  On Tuesday the Fairfax County Police Department shared three images of PFC Tiara Goode who will serve as the county’s new LGBTQ Liaison Officer.  “We’re proud to introduce PFC Tiara Goode as our new LGBTQ Liaison Officer! Starting her journey in the McLean District, PFC Goode is a valued Honor Guard member and currently works as a detective in our recruiting section. Her role is vital in fostering inclusivity and support within the department and the community,” the group wrote in the Facebook post. It looks like Goode’s role will be to amplify and celebrate LGBTQ voices both within the Fairfax police department as well as the surrounding community.  I can’t say this is too surprising. Fairfax is a relatively progressive area and the Fairfax County Police Department seems to be pretty “all-in” when it comes to ramming "pride" in everyone's face. The group posted a reel on its social media pages with the caption “Celebrating #PrideMonth with the FCPD!” The video showed cops walking around a local pride event in the Mosaic district of Northern Virginia. It also showed some drag queen performances and highlighted a photo where two cops posed with a drag queen. In response to the announcement of Goode’s role, people actually worried about the area’s safety shared their concerns. A few different people commented on the group's Facebook post: “What does that have to do with police work?” One user wrote, “A ‘what’?? You can't think of a better use of the time/money than to cater to the permanent-victim crowd? I'm disappointed in this. Glad I don't live in that area anymore.” Similarly, over on X, Libs of TikTok shared an image of the post and wrote, “I have a wild idea but hear me out… what if police help stop crime and focus on protecting all citizens equally regardless of who they like to have s*x with.” Comments flooded in writing things like, “You know what would help bring everyone together? Less crime” or others called this “insanity” and “s**t” that “has to stop.” Hey, they’re right. If you live in the Fairfax, Virginia area, you may want to be extra cautious this summer since it’s clear your police officers are more focused on gayness than actually keeping you safe.  

Following the three felony convictions of Hunter Biden on Tuesday, ABC seemingly exposed the identity of one of the jurors against his will. The contrast was obvious, ABC broadcasted his face across the country while CBS News and NBC News both noted that he didn’t want his identity revealed and took precautions to protect him. ABC senior national correspondent Terry Moran seemingly ambushed Juror 10 in a parking garage somewhere and shoved the camera in his face, wanted to know why and how they convicted President Biden’s “only survived son”: MORAN:  First the jury was divided according to juror number ten. JUROR 10: Believe it or not, it was a split vote. MORAN: 6-6. JUROR 10: 6-6. MORAN: That was the first vote? JUROR 10: That was the first vote.     “So, you didn't buy the notion that for those few days around the purchase of the gun, he wasn't abusing drugs?” Moran pressed Juror 10. “No, not at all,” the juror responded. “But after sleeping on it, they decided there was enough evidence to prove that Hunter was abusing drugs in the critical timeframe, including from his own text messages; especially one sent the day after he bought the gun saying he was waiting for a dealer name Mookie,” Moran admitted. Contrast Moran’s interaction with that of CBS’s Weijia Jiang, who apparently interviewed Juror 10 on a sidewalk. “We spoke to juror number 10. who asked not to be identified,” she said, the interview was conducted with the juror’s back to the camera. Over on NBC, Capitol Hill Correspondent Ryan Nobles and more of a sit-down interview with Juror 10. “Juror number 10 telling NBC, Hunter's powerful family played no role in their decision-making process. He asked us to conceal his identity,” he said. Nobles’ interview with him also had the camera pointed at the back of Juror 10’s head and took the added step of blurring his form. It would be bizarre for Juror 10 to give ABC permission to show his face but deny it for the others. It seems as though ABC may not have disclosed that protecting his identity was an option.

Bionca Ellis, 32, was just charged with the aggravated murder of three-year-old Julian Wood after allegedly stabbing him to death in the parking lot of the North Olmsted Giant Eagle store in Cleveland, Ohio. When Ellis’ charges were being read she had a menacing grin on her face. Little Julian and his mother, Margot Wood were headed back to their vehicle last week after going grocery shopping when Ellis allegedly ran up to them with a knife that she’d just stolen from a thrift store. Both individuals were stabbed in what appears to be a random act of violence as reports indicate the suspect and victims hadn’t had any prior interaction. Police responded to multiple 911 calls regarding the incident, but unfortunately, it was too late. Ms. Wood was injured, but her son, at just three-years-old, died at a local hospital after he was stabbed twice.  Ellis was charged with murder and attempted murder by a Cuyahoga County grand jury. The jury also indicted Ellis on aggravated murder, endangering children, tampering with evidence, aggravated theft and two counts of felonious assault. What’s really jarring, other than the fact that this lady is suspected of stabbing a three-year-old child, is that when the charges were being read, Ellis had a grin on her face. As a matter of fact, she looked directly at the camera and gave it a little smile and eyebrow raise. Ellis looked completely unfazed at what was happening. Ellis even looked like she let out a little chuckle or laugh a few times. ❗??? - Bionca Ellis appeared in court with an evil smile as she was charged with the murder of 3-year-old Julian Wood. Ellis is accused of ambushing the child and his mother, Margot Wood, in a parking lot, stabbing Julian to death and seriously injuring Margot, who is… pic.twitter.com/Ebeaf6XwUO — ??The Informant (@theinformant_x) June 10, 2024 The judge, after reading the indictment, asked Ellis if she wished to enter a plea of not-guilty. “Si,” Ellis replied confidently before the judge asked her to clarify whether she meant yes or no. “Yes,” Ellis said while starting to smile again. Moments later, Mr. Wood entered the room and noted that “one week ago, she [Ellis] took everything from us.” He added that nothing could “ever replace” his sweet son, Julian. Mr. Wood pleaded with the judge, “just do whatever you can to keep this monster behind bars.”  He looked like he was on the verge of a breakdown, as any man who just lost his son, and almost lost his wife, would be. The bond was set for $5 million, which is $4 million more than it was initially set at on Friday before Julian passed away, the judge said in a video detailing the events. Mr. Wood was right. If it’s true that Ellis killed innocent Julian, she is a monster.

On what could be the eve of the Supreme Court deciding multiple First Amendment cases that will shape the future of our republic, MRC Free Speech America warns of the consequences of the justices perverting the Constitution.       Media Research Center Vice President of Free Speech America Dan Schneider and Senior Counsel for Investigations Tim Kilcullen have written a piece for The Washington Times on the stakes in the Supreme Court’s upcoming Murthy v. Missouri, NetChoice v. Paxton and Moody v. NetChoice decisions. The op-ed was first published on June 11, 2024. Schneider and Kilcullen warn that if the Court makes the wrong choice, it will have inverted the First Amendment, guaranteeing extra-constitutional protections for government and Big Tech censorship while stifling Americans’ free speech rights.    A link to the article can be found here. The Supreme Court will next announce decisions tomorrow, June 13, 2024, at 10:00 a.m. E.S.T.