Ïîïóëÿðíûå ñîîáùåíèÿ

суббота

Tens of thousands of anti-austerity demonstrators marched through the streets of London and other U.K. cities that they claim is the start of a broader program of protests and civil disobedience to force the Conservative government to reverse its program of deep spending cuts.

Protests march through Liverpool in opposition to austerity. #EndAusterityNow #EndAusteriy pic.twitter.com/2JNH1glwZX

— Scal Capone (@ScalCapone) June 20, 2015

Larry Miller, reporting from London for NPR, says that organizers have promised their campaign will continue "until austerity is history."

The Independent writes: "The march is intended to highlight how homelessness, inequality and child poverty have increased in the past five years. The New Policy Institute (NPI) estimates as much as 29 percent of children have fallen into poverty after housing costs."

This is the view from the stage right now - wow! #EndAusterityNow pic.twitter.com/6Uer6bh0qb

— Unite the union (@unitetheunion) June 20, 2015

The London march began in the financial district and ended at Parliament Square.

"We want a more equal society," said organizer Jack Hazeldine. "We know that austerity has really taken us in the wrong direction."

Larry reports that Prime Minister David Cameron's government is unlikely to be swayed by the protest after just winning reelection. Instead, the government plans to cut welfare and related benefits by $19 billion.

anti-austerity protests

London

A Greek minister is hinting that Athens will bring a new plan to the table at an emergency European Union summit next week to keep the country from defaulting on its sovereign debt and exiting the Eurozone.

"We will try to supplement our proposal so that we get closer to a solution," State Minister Alekos Flabouraris told Greek Mega television in a morning news show, according to Reuters. "We are not going there with the old proposal. Some work is being done to see where we can converge, so that we achieve a mutually beneficial solution."

The European Central Bank gave Greece more than $2 billion on Friday to prop up the country's banking system and to stave off a collapse as fearful Greeks withdrew more than $1 billion in a single day.

According to The Guardian: "If Greece does not receive a fresh bailout from its creditors by 30 June, it will be unable to meet the next repayment of €1.6bn ($1.8 billion) to the International Monetary Fund and could be turfed out of the single currency completely."

And, Reuters notes:

"It was not immediately clear how far Greece's leftist government, which won a January election vowing to lift its people out of austerity, is willing to bend in order to secure an agreement or what kind of additional offers it could make.

"While Greece has dug in its heels over demands for pension cuts and some tax rises, its leaders have continued to sound upbeat about the chances of reaching a deal — optimism that is not widely shared among Europe's leaders."

Meanwhile, German Chancellor Angela Merkel "has warned there must be a deal between Greece and its creditors ahead of Monday's summit. Otherwise, she said, the summit would not be able to make any decision," the BBC writes.

Greece financial crisis

European Union

euro zone

Germany

пятница

Shigeru Miyamoto is the creator of many of Nintendo's iconic video game franchises, including Mario Bros., Donkey Kong and The Legend of Zelda. NPR's Laura Sydell interviewed the 62-year-old designer at the Electronic Entertainment Expo in Los Angeles this week.

Miyamoto spoke, through an interpreter, about the origins of his famous characters, how his life experiences inspire his creations and why Nintendo's latest console, the Wii U, failed to take off.

Laura Sydell: There's a new version coming out of Mario. I'm sure a lot of people who have played it wonder about the origin of Mario — how you first came up with the idea of a plumber named Mario.

Shigeru Miyamoto: The gameplay of Mario games originated early on with Donkey Kong. Donkey Kong was a game where you were running on platforms and jumping over things — that came to be called a "platformer" style of video game (the genre was called "platforming"). Then it evolved from there, and we decided to try to incorporate more settings — things like the open air, the open sky, underwater and things like that. And to do that, we incorporated a side-scrolling mechanic where you scrolled sideways through the screens, and that became the base for the game that was Super Mario Bros. So that's the origin of the game play.

And so I think that Mario became so popular because the actions in the Mario game are something that are innate to humans everywhere. Everyone is afraid of falling from a great height. If there is a gap that you have to cross, everyone is going to try to run to jump across the gap. These are things that are uniquely human and are a shared experience across, really, all people. And I think because of the simplicity of these experiences as well as the interactive nature of controlling the character and seeing the response on the game screen — that's what really resonated with people and made Mario such a popular character.

The plumber role of Mario is actually a different story. In Donkey Kong, Mario was actually a carpenter, and he was working on a building, and then the next game we made after that was a game called Mario Bros., and that was a game that was set in the sewers, and the pipes were green, and there were turtles coming out of the pipes. And so we thought, in this game, it would make sense that Mario would be a plumber because of all the pipes. And so that's where the plumber came from. But my vision of Mario has always been that he's sort of representative of everyone. He's kind of a blue-collar hero. And so that's why we chose these roles for him that were things like carpenters and plumbers.

Mario, I think of as an Italian name, and you're a Japanese game maker. How did you think to name him Mario?

So that's also an interesting story. When I was younger, I used to enjoy comics and drawing comics as well. And among the comics that I read, some were Italian comics. And if you think about it, the big nose and the mustache is not a facial feature that's characteristic of Japanese people. And so I think that my connection to those Italian comics — probably I drew on that inspiration when we first drew the character.

And so when we first drew the character in Donkey Kong, he was drawn using pixel dots in a 16x16 grid. So it was a very small space in which to draw the character, and it was a very small character on the screen. And so in order to emphasize the unique characteristics of the character, we made the big nose and the mustache and the overalls to make it easy to understand what the character was doing on the screen. When we sent the game to the U.S. to sell the Donkey Kong arcade games in America, in the warehouse that the Nintendo was operating out of in America at that time, there was somebody related to that warehouse whose name was Mario. And the staff at Nintendo in America said that the character looked like the individual named Mario. So they started calling the character Mario, and when I heard that I said 'oh, Mario's a great name — let's use that.' "

And he has a hat.

He wears a hat because as I mentioned we had very few dots available to us to draw the character, and trying to draw hair that moves while you run would've been very complicated. So we gave him a hat to make it easier to draw but make him still look realistic.

Many people always talk about how inventive your games are, and I have heard that your childhood — the sense of wonder you bring — comes from growing up in Japan. I heard a story about once you stumbled upon a lake when you were a child and that sense of wonder is what you try to bring to all of your games. Is that a true story?

That's correct. When I was younger, I grew up in the countryside of Japan. And what that meant was I spent a lot of my time playing in the rice paddies and exploring the hillsides and having fun outdoors. When I got into the upper elementary school ages — that was when I really got into hiking and mountain climbing. There's a place near Kobe where there's a mountain, and you climb the mountain, and there's a big lake near the top of it. We had gone on this hiking trip and climbed up the mountain, and I was so amazed — it was the first time I had ever experienced hiking up this mountain and seeing this big lake at the top. And I drew on that inspiration when we were working on the Legend of Zelda game and we were creating this grand outdoor adventure where you go through these narrowed confined spaces and come upon this great lake. And so it was around that time that I really began to start drawing on my experiences as a child and bringing that into game development.

When you work on updating games now, do you still bring your life experience into the game?

Yes, it happens very naturally. After I turned 40, I took up swimming and became very enthusiastic about swimming as a way of exercise. And right after that was when we made Super Mario 64, and I drew on a lot of my experience swimming in creating the underwater swimming scenes with Mario in that game.

In the latest game, you are letting people create worlds of their own. How did you come up with the idea to add this to Mario?

This is a very good question, and when people ask me what do I think makes the Mario games unique, of course there's creativity that goes into the creation of those games, but what I always answer is, the creativity of the player is what really makes the Mario games fun. And particularly with an interactive video game, what's very important is that the player thinks about, "What is it that I want to try to do?" And that I try it, and that I see that feedback and I see that reaction on screen, and that gives me an emotion and response. It's this cycle of thinking and experimenting in the gameplay and getting that reaction that is unique about the Mario games, and is the core of what makes video games and interactive games fun. And that to me is a very important part of Mario games in general.

And so we think that with this idea of creative play being such an important element of the Mario games — that having a system where the players themselves can create the levels and play the levels themselves or create a level and have someone else play it and then immediately edit the level they've just created — really ties in well to the notion of creative play. And we felt that with this being the 30th anniversary of Super Mario Bros. and that sort of marking a delineation point in the Mario life cycle that this would be a very good time to release a product of this nature and introduce this style of creative creation alongside the creative play that's always existed in the Mario games.

How did you come up with the idea of "Super" Mario Bros.?

In the original Mario Bros., Mario and Luigi were rather small in size and they would play and battle against each other in that game. And in the Super Mario Bros. game, those same small characters are in the game, but when they get a mushroom they get big. So we decided to call the big version of them "Super Mario" and "Super Luigi" because they got super-sized.

How did you come up with idea for the mushrooms?

Well of course getting an item and growing big is sort of a mysterious thing to have happen. And so we thought, what's the most mysterious item that we could make this so it makes sense why they're getting bigger? And if you think of stories like Alice in Wonderland and other types of fairy tales, mushrooms always seem to have a mysterious power, and so we thought the mushroom would be a good symbol for why they get it and get big.

Many people have commented on the things you've invented in video games — like the camera angle. You're not an engineer, so how did you come up with these different angles on Mario and using the camera when nobody had really done that before?

So when I was younger I used to draw my own comics, and in school I studied industrial design. So from both of those past experiences, I was always thinking about what's the right angle to draw a picture from or to view something from and was constantly thinking about perspective in that sense.

When were first making games and we were making them in 2-D, creating games in two dimensions is a lot like drawing pictures. But when 3-D technology came along, and we began to create games using polygonal models, we were no longer just creating pictures — we had objects that we were having to show. And in order to show those 3-D solid objects, you had to begin worrying about where the camera would be placed, how it would maneuver around the object. And we stopped creating pictures and we instead started creating story flows for the flow of scenes in the game and things like that. And as we were working through that process, it dawned on me that, yes there's a main character in the game, but there's also the camera. And we need people to understand why the camera is moving — so the camera itself is almost like a character.

So we came up with this idea that there was Mario, and there's a character who's carrying the camera and that they're going on an adventure together. And so then what we did — if you look up, we have a poster here, and there's a character there whose name in English is Lakitu, and he's a turtle who flies around on a cloud from the Super Mario Bros. games. We thought he was the perfect character to be holding the camera as he floats around on his cloud and follows Mario on this adventure. And then I realized that nobody in the world had hit upon this idea, and I got very excited about it and put a lot of effort into conveying this in the game, and we finalized the game with this idea attached to it.

Many game makers always mention that you were first to do this when you talk to them, so they give you credit. I read that — I think it was with Donkey Kong — you wrote the music?

Well, there are two versions of Donkey Kong, and the version on the Nintendo Entertainment System I did only a very little bit of the music. But in the arcade version, I did the opening music and then the end of it as well.

How come you did the music?

I grew up watching a lot of cartoons and anime, so I just had this image that at the beginning there's always this dramatic music to start things off — that's where the dramatic (sings tune) came from. And then for the ending, I play guitar a little bit, and so the end song I put together as a bit of a parody of a song I used to play on guitar.

You started out as an artist; you went into industrial design. Do you ever feel like you should have been an artist? Do you ever feel like video games were meant for you — like you fell into the thing that was just right for your talents?

I actually feel incredibly fortunate that I found video games because when we started, I had originally as a kid wanted to be a manga artist, a comic artist. But I gave that up because there were so many other manga artists who were at such a high quality that I felt I couldn't compete with them. And even in industrial design, I felt that there were so many industrial designers that were so talented that I wouldn't be able to compete with them. So my thought was that after studying industrial design, I would want to make toys.

But then, when I found video games, it was interesting because I kept finding that video games kept coming across all of the things that I had loved when I was younger, from drawing the comics to being very similar to industrial design from an approach perspective and then music and things like that that I've loved (having to oversee music and approve the music in the games — it tied into that). And then we came to the 3-D era of video games, and when I was younger I used to enjoy creating puppets and doing puppet shows, so this was like doing puppet shows in a 3-D video game space. So I found that even as time progressed in my career as a video game designer, I still kept encountering all the things that I loved when I was younger. So I truly feel fortunate to have found them.

Your work has a sense of inventiveness. How do you come up with ideas? Do you sort of lie around and things just emerge in your mind — like, oh, I'm going to do this now with Mario?

Well, when we first started we were starting with arcade games where you would put in a quarter and play a game — we needed to design the game in a way that you would want to put in the next quarter to keep playing. From there it changed to where we were creating worlds, and we were trying to create worlds that people would want to immerse themselves in, the way you immerse yourself in a book or in a movie.

And then, after that, as I got older I began to realize the things that I was doing in my life at that point as I was older — things like swimming or sports or when I got a dog — that these were experiences that I could take and apply the mechanics and the system of a video game and turn those experiences into something that others could enjoy and experience. So it really has been a process of how to take my experiences and find ways to apply them to video games, and that's evolved over time.

So is Nintendog your dog?

That's right.

At this conference, there's a lot of virtual reality. Have you seen virtual reality? What do you think of it?

Yes, I've seen virtual reality, and we experiment with virtual reality and different technologies. We're quite interested in it, but at the same time, Nintendo's philosophy is that we create products that are going to be played with everyone in the living room. And we don't feel that virtual reality is a good fit for that philosophy. And so, while I can't say whether there will be a technology in the future that's a virtual-reality-type experience that fits with that or not, we're here at this conference to showcase the products that we're going to be selling in the next year or so. We don't have anything in the near future that fits that, and so that's why we're not showing anything in the virtual reality space this year.

One of the things about Nintendo that's always been interesting is you've never tried to make a more powerful console with better graphics, and all the stuff that the Xbox has done. Can you explain a little why you've kind of stuck with that?

So unfortunately with our latest system, the Wii U, the price point was one that ended up getting a little higher than we wanted. But what we are always striving to do is to find a way to take novel technology that we can take and offer it to people at a price that everybody can afford. And in addition to that, rather than going after the high-end tech spec race and trying to create the most powerful console, really what we want to do is try to find a console that has the best balance of features with the best interface that anyone can use.

And the reason for that is that, No. 1, we like to do things that are unique and different from other companies, but we also don't want to just end up in a race to have the highest-tech specs in a competition to try to find how we get these expensive tech specs to the lowest price of the other systems. And so there's different ways that we can approach it, and sometimes we look at it just from the sense of offering a system that consumes less power and makes less noise and generates less heat, or sometimes we may look at the size of the media and the size of the system and where it fits within the home.

But really what's most important to us is, how do we create a system that is both unique and affordable so that everyone can afford it and everyone can enjoy it.

What's the most important thing about making a successful game to you?

For us, the most important thing in making a game is that we make a game that's unique — something that no one else has created, and something that no one else can create, something that's uniquely Nintendo. That, for us, is what's most important in creating a game.

The first Wii sold really well; the Wii U, not so much. Do you think part of it is the price that the Wii has not sold so well?

So I don't think it's just price, because if the system is appealing enough, people will buy it even if the price is a little bit high. I think with Wii U, our challenge was that perhaps people didn't understand the system. But also I think that we had a system that's very unique — and, particularly with video game systems, typically it takes the game system a while to boot up. And we thought that with a tablet-type functionality connected to the system, you could have the rapid boot-up of tablet-type functionality, you could have the convenience of having that touch control with you there on the couch while you're playing on a device that's connected to the TV, and it would be a very unique system that could introduce some unique styles of play.

I think unfortunately what ended up happening was that tablets themselves appeared in the marketplace and evolved very, very rapidly, and unfortunately the Wii system launched at a time where the uniqueness of those features were perhaps not as strong as they were when we had first begun developing them. So what I think is unique about Nintendo is we're constantly trying to do unique and different things. Sometimes they work, and sometimes they're not as big of a hit as we would like to hope. After Wii U, we're hoping that next time it will be a very big hit.

So this with Super Mario Maker and being able to design levels on the touchscreen in your hand while watching on the big screen, and with games like Star Fox Zero where the big screen represents sort of a movie-like experience, but with the gamepad and the gamepad screen in your hands, you're able to play a video game simultaneously with the excitement of these cinematic scenes happening on the TV. And I think that's going to give people a lot of excitement, and I'm hoping that people will be looking forward to playing those games on Wii U in the fall.

Did I hear correctly that now some of the Nintendo characters will move to other devices?

It's not exactly that. Really what we're thinking about is, outside of Nintendo hardware, there's other media where there are opportunities for people to come in contact with Nintendo characters and Nintendo properties. So we're looking at how we can leverage those other types of media like mobile to help people encounter our characters and to develop that relationship. But what we're not going to be doing is taking the same games that are playable on our devices and making those games playable on mobile devices.

So you'll be able to do something that's designed for a mobile device that is a different game, right?

So yeah, if we were to make anything it would be a different experience design for that device.

How do you and (Nintendo's Takashi Tezuka) work together? Who comes up with the ideas?

The way that it often works is, I'll think up a unique idea, and he'll think up a crazy idea that can't possibly be turned into a video game. And together we'll massage those ideas into one that can finally be realized as a game. Over the last 30 years, one of the things I've been trying to do is help him with coming up with ideas that are still unique but can still be easily transformed into a video game.

It seems like there are a lot of international references in your game. How do you come up with those?

So it is true that both of us read not just things from Japan, but we try to read things and topics from all over the world. But what we do that's different perhaps from other creators in Japan is we don't look at what's currently popular in Japan and try to replicate that to try to make a game more popular with the Japanese market.

From the very beginning, my first job was to try to make a game for the overseas market, and since that very time I've always thought that we need to not just look at what's popular in Japan — because what's popular in Japan won't necessarily be popular overseas. So what we do instead is, if we are drawing on something that's based in Japanese tradition, we'll tend to look at, for example, Japanese folktales. Or we'll draw on things that are more innately a shared experience of all people regardless of where you're from, and draw on those types of ideas and use those to influence our games, rather than trying to look at what's popular in Japan right now.

I heard that people thought Donkey Kong was going to be a failure at the time.

Yes, we were told that everyone thought that it wouldn't succeed. But because the game did so well, even today based on that experience, when somebody tells me, "oh, that name is too strange, it won't work," I get very convinced and say: "Yes, I've thought of something that is very unique! This is going to do well."

You've been working together for over 30 years. I think about Nintendo's future — your stamp is so strong on this company. Do you feel like the company has enough of what you've taught, what you've learned over the years to keep it going after you're gone?

Before we created Super Mario Maker, what we had done is we had created these tools that allowed us to create Mario levels. And what Mr. Tezuka had done is use these tools to hold courses within the company over several months to explain his approach to course design.

And so we've had a lot of opportunity to train the staff that we have, and we have a lot of examples of new projects, like the game that we just released, called Splatoon. Splatoon is a very good example because it used to be that I had many different teams that I could go to when I had an idea for a game that I wanted to make, and I would bring that idea and they would make the game. But Splatoon was an example of one of those younger teams coming up with an idea of a game they wanted to make and the senior leadership supporting them in making the game they wanted to make. And so we're at a point where we're starting to see that transition and seeing the benefits from that.

I read that when you first came and were hired by Nintendo, they didn't think much of you at the time. You were a young kid, right out of college, and that it was kind of like, "what do I do with this kid?" Is that true? Can you tell the story of how you ended up there?

Forget that story because that's not the right one. I wanted to create things that would surprise people, so I thought that I had wanted to make toys. And so I applied to Nintendo wanting to be a designer, but what I was told is that they weren't hiring any designers at the time.

Fortunately a friend of my father's knew the president of Nintendo, Mr. [Hiroshi] Yamauchi, so my dad's friend said, "I'll at least try to get you an interview."

So I gathered together my portfolio of things that I had made and went to my interview. Mr. Yamauchi saw the things I had made and brought with me ,and he seemed to like them and he seemed to like me, and so they decided to hire me, and I became the first industrial designer in Nintendo. And at the time, I think they had only three graphic designers even.

And I think the one story that may be surprising is, one of the things I had brought and shown to Mr. Yamauchi, I found out later he had submitted a patent on without me realizing it. So that's how I know that the story that you said is maybe not true. It's funny, isn't it? I found that out about three years after I joined the company. The head of our general affairs and our IP team in Japan knew me from the moment I joined the company, and I had always wondered, how did he know who I was even though I had just joined the company?

Many people consider you a rock star in the game world. You stayed in the same company for 30 years. In the U.S., people might have run off and gone elsewhere. Do you think it's been good to stay at the same company?

When I first decided to go to work for a company, I wanted to create things, so I wasn't looking for a company to work for — I was looking for a company to sponsor me so that I could create the things that I wanted. Because as an artist, that's really what you want — you want someone to sponsor you as an artist.

The best situation is, as an artist, the company gives you the freedom to create what you want, and the company is able to generate profit off of what you create, and you've got the freedom to use as much of that profit as you want to create your next thing. So I've never had a reason to leave the company.

video games

Nintendo

четверг

For several years, Democrats have gleefully watched as Republicans threatened to eat their own at the ballot box. Trying to enforce a rigid orthodoxy, groups such as the Senate Conservatives Fund, the Club for Growth and others have funded primary challengers if Republicans didn't fall in line on certain votes on taxes, spending cuts and other conservative issues.

Now, it's Democrats' turn to try and manage intra-party turmoil — also rooted in a similar economic populist strain to the fight on the right — over President Obama's trade legislation. The fight could spill over into the next election, with labor groups threatening primaries against members — even those who sit in swing districts — who sided with the president.

Last Friday, the fast-track authority the president wanted to negotiate the Trans-Pacific Partnership failed in the House after Democrats blocked a key part of the bill that would provide job-training assistance to those who could lose jobs if the Trans-Pacific Partnership, or TPP, a massive Pan-Asian trade deal, is finalized.

Part of that fast-track authority — with the job-training assistance stripped out — passed the House Thursday narrowly, 218-208. But it still has to get through the Senate before the president can sign it. The challenge for President Obama now is how to get enough Democrats on board in the Senate without the job assistance in the bill or if there will be a supplementary bill that puts it back in.

Labor groups — a well-funded and powerful Democratic stronghold — waged a massive campaign against the bill and claimed victory after it went down last week. Several Democrats found themselves targeted by unions and progressive groups, warning consequences if they backed the trade bill.

"Democrats who allowed the passage of Fast Track Authority for the job-killing TPP, should know that we will not lift a finger or raise a penny to protect you when you're attacked in 2016," said Jim Dean, chairman of Democracy for America after the House vote Thursday. "We will encourage our progressive allies to join us in leaving you to rot, and we will actively search for opportunities to primary you with a real Democrat. ... Make no mistake, we will make certain that your vote to fast track the destruction of American jobs will be remembered and will haunt you for years to come."

Some have already put their money where their mouth is, too — even if that means inadvertently helping a Republican win next November. The AFL-CIO launched a six-figure ad buy in the expensive New York City media market slamming freshman Democratic Rep. Kathleen Rice for switching her position to back the deal. The freshman congresswoman won her Long Island seat just 52 to 47 percent in 2014.

A Rice spokesman shot back telling Vox, "I wouldn't want to be a labor leader and have to explain to my hardworking nurses or truck drivers or tradesmen why we're wasting hundreds of thousands of their families' dollars attacking a progressive Democrat who's with them on nearly every issue but this bill. And I certainly wouldn't want to have to explain to those workers that if their money is successful, they'll get a staunch anti-union representative as their reward."

The labor group also aired a TV ad against California Democratic Rep. Ami Bera, charging he will "do anything to keep his job, including shipping your job overseas."

In total, just 27 Democrats voted yes on both the Trade Promotion Authority, TPA, and Trade Adjustment Assistance, TAA, measures last week. Most of those members come from centrist districts and are facing tough reelection fights. That includes Bera, who is among the most vulnerable members of Congress after only narrowly winning reelection last November. He has claimed the groups are trying to "bully" him into changing his position and that he's voting for what is best for his district.

But labor groups don't seem fazed by the prospect a Republican who would be at odds with them even more could win the seat.

"Ami Bera won off the support of working families' boots in the district, knocking on doors for him," AFL-CIO spokesperson Amaya Smith told Politico. "But no one's saying, 'Let's not call him out, because we're scared of a Republican taking him out.'"

Another California Democratic lawmaker is already seeing rumblings of a primary challenge. Labor groups are urging Assemblyman Henry Perea to challenge Democratic Rep. Jim Costa, according to Roll Call. Costa also only narrowly won reelection last year.

In California, especially, unions and progressives backing another Democrat could have an impact. The state has a "top-two" party primary system, with the top-two finishers advancing regardless of party. An anti-trade candidate could push past the incumbent in a primary and be favored over the GOP nominee, or a split among Democrats could help two Republicans make it to the general.

Some are starting to see shades of the advent of the Tea Party in the aggressive tactics. New York Times columnist David Brooks certainly thinks so, writing in a column this week raising the idea that "the Republican Tea Partiers are suspicious of all global diplomatic arrangements. The Democrats' version of the Tea Partiers are suspicious of all global economic arrangements."

Other groups say that the biggest threat is that their members won't be helping with grassroots efforts. But if it comes to using the same tactics they decry in conservatives, some Democrats are embracing that moniker.

"To the extent that the Tea Party puts pressure on the Republican Party, then yes, we're also putting pressure on Congress to behave a certain type of way," MoveOn.org Action campaign director Justin Krebs told NPR.

MoveOn.org has already put another top lawmaker on notice over trade. Oregon Sen. Ron Wyden, the top Democrat on the Senate Finance Committee, faced backlash for his support for the bill, with the group saying there is support for a primary challenger, though no alternative has yet emerged.

Earlier this year, the group Fight for the Future began following Wyden around to town-hall meetings in Oregon with a 30-foot blimp, urging him to oppose the trade deal.

The divide isn't just manifesting itself in Congress, though. With progressives like Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren and Vermont Independent Sen. Bernie Sanders — who's surging in the Democratic presidential primary race — leading the charge, it's an issue that's spilling out into the presidential race, too.

Leading Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton has expressed skepticism about the current deal, but has yet to take a concrete position either for or against the proposal. Previously, as secretary of state, she was in favor of it.

Progressives are promising this will be a defining issue for them next election cycle and beyond — one they will use as a stringent litmus test for candidates.

"We know that our members are deeply committed to this issue," Krebs said. "I think you will see that leading into the 2016 discussion even more."

trans pacific partnership

Ron Wyden

trade

Democrats

Congress

Hillary Clinton

Tea Party

David Brooks

Barack Obama

Pick up a romance novel and you'll often get more than just a pleasant read – many fans of historical romance say their favorite books have given them a new grounding in history and geography by bringing long-lost people and places to life.

So I'd hazard a guess that few Americans under the age of 30 know much about Napoleon Bonaparte, beyond the fact that he was short and had a complex, unless they study history — or read romance.

But Napoleon was possibly the single most influential person in Europe during the early years of the 19th century, a man who came close to subjugating the entire continent — until he met his final defeat at the battle of Waterloo, exactly 200 years ago today.

And of course, the Battle of Waterloo forms a powerful backdrop to many Regency romances — so I thought I'd check in with some fabulous Regency authors and see how they felt this pivotal historical event affected the romance genre.

Loretta Chase

Miss Wonderful

by Loretta Lynda Chase

Paperback, 352 pages | purchase

Purchase Featured Book

TitleMiss WonderfulAuthorLoretta Lynda Chase

Your purchase helps support NPR Programming. How?

Amazon

iBooks

Independent Booksellers

Romance

Historical Fiction

Fiction

More on this book:

NPR reviews, interviews and more

Like a great many other writers who started in the traditional Regency genre, I was acutely conscious of the Napoleonic Wars in general (inspiration for all manner of spy stories) and Waterloo in particular. I've read about the battle, in detail, many times, and I always end up crying, as I do usually when studying any battle anywhere, for all that's lost, on both the winning and the losing sides.

Waterloo is probably the one single historical event that gave me a visceral understanding of heroism — the men forming their squares and filling in the gaps as their fellows were cut down; the men defending Hougoumont. Images form in my mind's eye of men falling in battle, and of the ugly aftermath which has been described time and again, and of the Duke of Wellington's grief. I think these images are at work, somewhere in the back of my mind, whenever I'm thinking about bravery and heroic behavior (of men and women), and that remarkable British sang-froid.

This notion of courage has fed into my characters, whether Waterloo is relevant to the story or not. But I did use Waterloo directly at least once, creating a hero suffering from PTSD, in Miss Wonderful. I think any writer who's spent time learning about Wellington, or who's studied the battle in any way must absorb and be inspired by a deep understanding of the bravery and desperation and hellishness of that long day.

Sabrina Jeffries

Surrender

by Amanda Quick

Paperback, p. cm. | purchase

Purchase Featured Book

TitleSurrenderAuthorAmanda Quick

Your purchase helps support NPR Programming. How?

Amazon

iBooks

Independent Booksellers

Romance

Historical Fiction

Fiction

More on this book:

NPR reviews, interviews and more

Read an excerpt

Everything I know about the personal cost of Waterloo, I learned from Regency-set historical romances. Tales of wounded heroes finding love in the bleak aftermath of that battle were always more compelling to me than a dry history book describing the strategies of the campaign. And in reality, there were lots of wounded to go around — 10,000 from that battle alone.

Regency historicals are filled with heroes disabled both physically and psychologically by the horrors of that battle, of heroines who lost brothers, husbands, fathers, and cousins, coping with a very different landscape than the one they were taught to navigate in.

One of my favorite romances, Amanda Quick's Surrender, has a hero who lay for hours on the battlefield, wounded and unable to move, while human vultures looted the bodies of the dead. Regency historicals often make powerful statements about the cost of war, but in the end it's the stories of love triumphing over the horrors that stay with me.

Katharine Ashe

War veterans are a staple of romance, and in historical romance no other battle figures more prominently than Waterloo. The great battle hardens some heroes, honing their strengths and preparing them for the challenges that civilian life might throw at them (including the love of a feisty heroine). Vanessa Kelly's How to Plan a Wedding for a Royal Spy, which features a military intelligence officer, begins on the battlefield just after the French are routed, setting him up him to rout other villains back home.

An Infamous Army

A Novel of Love, War, Wellington and Waterloo

by Georgette Heyer

Paperback, 492 pages | purchase

Purchase Featured Book

TitleAn Infamous ArmySubtitleA Novel of Love, War, Wellington and WaterlooAuthorGeorgette Heyer

Your purchase helps support NPR Programming. How?

Amazon

Independent Booksellers

Historical Fiction

Literary Fiction

Fiction

More on this book:

NPR reviews, interviews and more

Read an excerpt

Waterloo damages other fictional heroes, leaving them with emotional and physical scars that they carry into new sorts of combat at home (with the help of a feisty heroine). The hero in Caroline Linden's It Takes a Scandal heads off to war for glory and adventure but is wounded at Waterloo and returns home to face the devastation of his family and estate.

But Waterloo isn't always relegated to backstory. Romance novelists don't often throw heroes and heroines onto the fields of actual battles, but some of the genre's greatest writers have done so with Waterloo, to spectacular effect. Mary Jo Putney's Shattered Rainbows reveals the brittle glitter of the weeks before the battle, as officers and their wives in Brussels danced at balls up to the very eve of the fight, and also includes a thrilling description of the actual battle. The mother of the Regency sub-genre, Georgette Heyer, wrote such a fine treatment of the battle in An Infamous Army that it ended up on a reading list for students at Sandhurst, the British military academy.

In a snippet of dialogue between two officers in the midst of the fighting, Heyer sums up the glory, the horror, and the human reality of Waterloo:

"Well, I'm glad I was in it, anyway. To tell you the truth, I haven't liked it as much as I thought I should. It's seeing one's friends go, one after the other, and being so hellish frightened oneself."

"I know."

"Do you think we can hold out, Charles?"

"Yes, of course we can, and we will."

Honor, sacrifice, heroism, love that triumphs despite all: This is the stuff of wonderful historical romance. Epically huge and dramatic, Waterloo is the fiery inferno out of which great romance heroes stride, changed profoundly, but ultimately for the best.

battle of waterloo

Summer of Love

On the bicentennial of the Battle of Waterloo, Napoleon Bonaparte's most celebrated statement about food and warfare – "An army marches on its stomach" – is worth recalling.

Except there is no record of him saying it. Just as there is no record of Marie Antoinette saying, "Let them eat cake."

If he did say it, the words would have been as hollow as the stomachs of his soldiers. Though one of the greatest military generals of all time, Napoleon was surprisingly negligent about feeding his army.

His orders for the Grande Arme's rations were ample enough: "Soup, boiled beef, a roasted joint and some vegetables; no dessert." But bad roads and poor weather often prevented supply wagons from reaching campsites in time.

During the Italian campaign, in which the 27-year-old Napoleon made his name as a general by defeating a much larger Austrian army and its allies, his men simply foraged off the land or plundered nearby villages — a common military practice then.

Even while fighting the Russians in a poor country like Poland, conditions, though difficult, still allowed for humor. The French soldiers learned the Polish words: "Kleba? Niema." Meaning, "Bread? There's none." One day, as Napoleon passed a column of infantry, a hungry solider cried out, "Papa, kleba." "Niema," he shot back. "The whole column burst into shouts of laughter," his valet Louis Constant Wairy wrote in his memoirs, "and no further request was made."

But the suffering Napoleon's army underwent on his hottest and coldest campaigns – in Egypt and Russia – was no laughing matter.

The 1798 Egyptian misadventure was launched with such speed and secrecy, writes historian Philip Dwyer in Napoleon, The Path the Power, there was no time even to issue water canteens. As a result, the 55,000-strong army had to endure a three-day march from Alexandria to Cairo through burning sands, in thick European uniforms and carrying heavy armor. Thinking they would be able to forage like they had in Italy, many had thrown away their hard biscuits. Scores died of heat and thirst, while others, driven mad by hunger, thirst, sandstorms and Bedouin attacks, simply put a bullet through their own brains. When the army reached the Nile, there was water and food, but, furious and embittered, the men went on a killing and looting rampage.

i

Napoleon's last grand attack at Waterloo. Life of Napoleon Bonaparte by William M. Sloane hide caption

itoggle caption Life of Napoleon Bonaparte by William M. Sloane

Napoleon's last grand attack at Waterloo.

Life of Napoleon Bonaparte by William M. Sloane

Despite this harrowing tutorial in thirst, Napoleon embarked the very next year on an even more foolhardy 10-day march from Cairo to Syria. Again, there wasn't enough food. Water, carried in goatskins on camel back, was, according to one sergeant, "hot, disagreeable and dirty, like water from a cobbler's tub." And soldiers began to commit suicide. A stampede at a solitary well killed 30. The desperate men dug sea sorrel, ate it and developed dysentery.

And all for nothing. In Syria, the plague awaited them, and at the small but stubborn fortress at Acre (now in Israel), a coalition of Ottomans and English gave Napoleon his first taste of defeat, forcing him to retreat.

Equally grotesque was the 1812 Russia campaign. The Grande Arme was annihilated more by starvation and cold than by the Cossacks. With absolutely no food supplies and temperatures at 20 below zero, the ravenous men ate horseflesh seasoned with gunpowder, often fighting over a fallen horse's flank to tear out its liver, sometimes even before ascertaining whether the animal had died. Through the campaign, flocks of buzzards feasted on corpses of soldiers on the roads and battlefields.

The buzzards were not the only ones who ate well.

The late French historian Andre Castelot wrote in Napoleon that through the famine, Napoleon continued his daily repast of "white bread, Chambertin, beef or mutton, and his favorite rice with beans or lentils." But the valet Louis Wairy claimed that his distraught master, who ranted at his officers for not securing enough rations, ate like an ordinary soldier.

True, Napoleon was an indifferent eater (though fastidious about bread). He often skipped meals, eating only when hungry — usually calling for roast chicken, a dish he seems to have enjoyed. In the kitchens of his Tuileries Palace at Paris, chickens were constantly roasted on spits to suit his erratic hunger pangs. When he rode out of Cairo on Christmas Eve to survey the Suez isthmus, the only provisions he took were three roast chickens wrapped in paper.

He had a soldier's impatience for fussy dinner rituals and "lacked much of eating decently; and always preferred his fingers to a fork or spoon," writes his valet. Nor did he have a nose for fine wine, being perfectly content to drink Chambertin diluted with water. At camp at Boulogne, he asked a marshal at his table what he thought of the wine being served. The marshal replied with tactful candor, "There is better," making the Emperor and other guests smile.

Only after his defeat at Waterloo, when he'd been permanently stripped of power, did Napoleon seem to revel in its meal-time trappings. On the island of St. Helena, as a prisoner of the British, he was served dinner every night by a uniformed butler who announced, "His Majesty is served." As footmen served soups, entrees, roasts, side-dishes and sweets on rare porcelain and silver plate, Napoleon – surrounded by a small group of officers in full dress uniform, with their wives in dcollet dresses – played the part of the emperor he no longer was.

What a change from the man who had bolted his breakfast in eight minutes, and dinner in 12. He normally ate his breakfast alone, but on that fateful, rain-soaked morning of June 18, 2015, he called what came to be known as his Breakfast Conference.

As the Duke of Wellington's redcoats waited outside the village of Waterloo, in present-day Belgium, Napoleon summoned his generals to the farmhouse where he had spent a sleepless night. Wellington, he told them with trademark bravado, was "a poor general." The English were "poor troops." His officers were unconvinced. But the Emperor assured them it would all be over by lunchtime.

Nina Martyris is a freelance journalist based in Knoxville, Tenn.

army food

Napoleon

food history

Napoleonic wars

Waterloo

On the bicentennial of the Battle of Waterloo, Napoleon Bonaparte's most celebrated statement about food and warfare – "An army marches on its stomach" – is worth recalling.

Except there is no record of him saying it. Just as there is no record of Marie Antoinette saying, "Let them eat cake."

If he did say it, the words would have been as hollow as the stomachs of his soldiers. Though one of the greatest military generals of all time, Napoleon was surprisingly negligent about feeding his army.

His orders for the Grande Arme's rations were ample enough: "Soup, boiled beef, a roasted joint and some vegetables; no dessert." But bad roads and poor weather often prevented supply wagons from reaching campsites in time.

During the Italian campaign, in which the 27-year-old Napoleon made his name as a general by defeating a much larger Austrian army and its allies, his men simply foraged off the land or plundered nearby villages — a common military practice then.

Even while fighting the Russians in a poor country like Poland, conditions, though difficult, still allowed for humor. The French soldiers learned the Polish words: "Kleba? Niema." Meaning, "Bread? There's none." One day, as Napoleon passed a column of infantry, a hungry solider cried out, "Papa, kleba." "Niema," he shot back. "The whole column burst into shouts of laughter," his valet Louis Constant Wairy wrote in his memoirs, "and no further request was made."

But the suffering Napoleon's army underwent on his hottest and coldest campaigns – in Egypt and Russia – was no laughing matter.

The 1798 Egyptian misadventure was launched with such speed and secrecy, writes historian Philip Dwyer in Napoleon, The Path the Power, there was no time even to issue water canteens. As a result, the 55,000-strong army had to endure a three-day march from Alexandria to Cairo through burning sands, in thick European uniforms and carrying heavy armor. Thinking they would be able to forage like they had in Italy, many had thrown away their hard biscuits. Scores died of heat and thirst, while others, driven mad by hunger, thirst, sandstorms and Bedouin attacks, simply put a bullet through their own brains. When the army reached the Nile, there was water and food, but, furious and embittered, the men went on a killing and looting rampage.

i

Napoleon's last grand attack at Waterloo. Life of Napoleon Bonaparte by William M. Sloane hide caption

itoggle caption Life of Napoleon Bonaparte by William M. Sloane

Napoleon's last grand attack at Waterloo.

Life of Napoleon Bonaparte by William M. Sloane

Despite this harrowing tutorial in thirst, Napoleon embarked the very next year on an even more foolhardy 10-day march from Cairo to Syria. Again, there wasn't enough food. Water, carried in goatskins on camel back, was, according to one sergeant, "hot, disagreeable and dirty, like water from a cobbler's tub." And soldiers began to commit suicide. A stampede at a solitary well killed 30. The desperate men dug sea sorrel, ate it and developed dysentery.

And all for nothing. In Syria, the plague awaited them, and at the small but stubborn fortress at Acre (now in Israel), a coalition of Ottomans and English gave Napoleon his first taste of defeat, forcing him to retreat.

Equally grotesque was the 1812 Russia campaign. The Grande Arme was annihilated more by starvation and cold than by the Cossacks. With absolutely no food supplies and temperatures at 20 below zero, the ravenous men ate horseflesh seasoned with gunpowder, often fighting over a fallen horse's flank to tear out its liver, sometimes even before ascertaining whether the animal had died. Through the campaign, flocks of buzzards feasted on corpses of soldiers on the roads and battlefields.

The buzzards were not the only ones who ate well.

The late French historian Andre Castelot wrote in Napoleon that through the famine, Napoleon continued his daily repast of "white bread, Chambertin, beef or mutton, and his favorite rice with beans or lentils." But the valet Louis Wairy claimed that his distraught master, who ranted at his officers for not securing enough rations, ate like an ordinary soldier.

True, Napoleon was an indifferent eater (though fastidious about bread). He often skipped meals, eating only when hungry — usually calling for roast chicken, a dish he seems to have enjoyed. In the kitchens of his Tuileries Palace at Paris, chickens were constantly roasted on spits to suit his erratic hunger pangs. When he rode out of Cairo on Christmas Eve to survey the Suez isthmus, the only provisions he took were three roast chickens wrapped in paper.

He had a soldier's impatience for fussy dinner rituals and "lacked much of eating decently; and always preferred his fingers to a fork or spoon," writes his valet. Nor did he have a nose for fine wine, being perfectly content to drink Chambertin diluted with water. At camp at Boulogne, he asked a marshal at his table what he thought of the wine being served. The marshal replied with tactful candor, "There is better," making the Emperor and other guests smile.

Only after his defeat at Waterloo, when he'd been permanently stripped of power, did Napoleon seem to revel in its meal-time trappings. On the island of St. Helena, as a prisoner of the British, he was served dinner every night by a uniformed butler who announced, "His Majesty is served." As footmen served soups, entrees, roasts, side-dishes and sweets on rare porcelain and silver plate, Napoleon – surrounded by a small group of officers in full dress uniform, with their wives in dcollet dresses – played the part of the emperor he no longer was.

What a change from the man who had bolted his breakfast in eight minutes, and dinner in 12. He normally ate his breakfast alone, but on that fateful, rain-soaked morning of June 18, 2015, he called what came to be known as his Breakfast Conference.

As the Duke of Wellington's redcoats waited outside the village of Waterloo, in present-day Belgium, Napoleon summoned his generals to the farmhouse where he had spent a sleepless night. Wellington, he told them with trademark bravado, was "a poor general." The English were "poor troops." His officers were unconvinced. But the Emperor assured them it would all be over by lunchtime.

Nina Martyris is a freelance journalist based in Knoxville, Tenn.

army food

Napoleon

food history

Napoleonic wars

Waterloo

среда

On a recent morning at Sakuma Brothers Farm, eight Latino workers sat on a bench seat behind a tractor, planting strawberry roots that will bear fruit in a few years. Dust masks and goggles covered their faces.

Sakuma Brothers runs fruit operations in Washington state and in California, selling berries to top brands like Driscoll's, Haagen-Dazs and Yoplait. The four-generation family farm is an institution in this part of the state.

But the farm lately has faced lawsuits, worker strikes and consumer boycotts, which have largely yielded victories for its workers. The disputes have caught the attention of farm owners and labor groups across the county. And a pending Washington State Supreme Court ruling on how Sakuma handles rest breaks could prompt farm workers to bring similar lawsuits against their employers elsewhere.

Some workers at Sakuma Brothers say that what's needed is a union contract. They're asking for a legally binding agreement on wages, and for a flat rate of $15 per hour for all harvesters, instead of the current system that pays workers by the pound for how much they pick — what's called a piece rate.

The Salt

Why Picking Your Berries For $8,000 A Year Hurts A Lot

They also want the contract to define a grievance system, medical coverage and payment of transportation costs for seasonal workers who migrate every year from California.

Ramon Torres, president of Familias Unidas Por la Justicia (Families United for Justice), says about 460 current and former Sakuma workers have joined this movement.

"We have families that have worked 10 to 11 years for Sakuma. Season after season, the same families come back to work here," Torres says. Those families want to keep working here – but with a guarantee of fair conditions and wages, he says.

Rosalinda Guillen, a longtime labor organizer, grew up in these fields and has helped Torres's group push for a contract.

The labor unrest flared up a few years back, when, for the first time, Sakuma brought in guest workers through the federal H-2A visa program. Local workers claimed the foreign crew displaced them and was paid better. The company disagreed. But the relationship became fraught, and longtime workers said they wanted to lock in some job security.

Flats of blueberries from Sakuma Brothers Farms are seen at Ballard Market in Seattle in 2013. Liz Jones/KUOW hide caption

itoggle caption Liz Jones/KUOW

"This company has ruined a lot of the trust and the goodwill that they used to have," Guillen said. "In order to build trust with workers again, they have to sign a union contract."

Historically, farm worker contracts are difficult to achieve. Only about 2 percent of farm workers in the county are part of a union. California is the only major farm state that offers a legal framework for this type of union to operate. Which means that Familias Unidas in Washington state is charting an unusual path.

Torres and Guillen say they're hopeful Sakuma will eventually come around.

"They say that they are a good neighbor and have been here as part of the Skagit Valley for five to six generations," Guillen says. "So have we."

Danny Weeden, Sakuma's new CEO, has inherited this labor dispute at Sakuma and says he's heard the workers' message. As the first non-Sakuma ever at the helm, he's one of the biggest changes at the farm this season. He came on to help the company at a turbulent time.

"For the most part we were doing the right things," Weeden says. "We needed to change some things, too. And we've done that. And we've addressed that. And we're going to continue to get better and better and better."

They fired some managers and intensified training workshops. They added new benefits, including a housing stipend for workers who don't live on the farm. They also plan to bring in more mobile health clinics and expand recreational programs. And – here's the big one – they revamped how field workers get paid.

Weeden said Sakuma will still pay based on production, but more than before. Everyone will earn at least $10 an hour; faster berry pickers could make up to $27 an hour. They will also now pay for rest breaks, which is an issue in yet another pending court decision.

"Our most valued resource on our farm are our people and our workers," Weeden says. "So that's why our mantra is caring and compliance. That's what's going to get us for the long-term success of this company."

Legal action prompted some of these changes. A federal class-action lawsuit forced Sakuma to pay out workers who said the farm shorted their wages. That settlement last year cost $850,000 and marked a rare win for farm labor. Familias Unidas has also won legal victories on claims that Sakuma retaliated against them in the company housing and in hiring practices.

As for the union, Weeden appears uninterested in further talks. He said that hit a dead end. And he says he believes the company is headed in a good direction.

Walking through the berry fields, Weeden and other managers say they rely heavily on the bilingual supervisors to help with worker issues. But they aim to get more directly involved, too.

On the walk, Rich Brim, company vice president, pulls out his phone.

"We believe in caring and compliance," he says, parroting a company mantra.

The phone interpreted into Spanish: "Creemos en el cuidado y el cumplimiento."

"I'll practice that one," Brim says. "And that's a guarantee."

Liz Jones is a reporter for NPR member station KUOW in Seattle. A version of this story first appeared on KUOW's website.

agriculture workers

labor

The marijuana industry has a pesticide problem. Many commercial cannabis growers use chemicals to control bugs and mold. But the plant's legal status is unresolved.

The grow room at Medical MJ Supply in Fort Collins, Colo., has all the trappings of a modern marijuana cultivation facility: glowing yellow lights, plastic irrigation tubes, and rows of knee-high cannabis plants.

"We're seeing a crop that's probably in it third or fourth week," says Nick Dice, the owner.

The plants are vibrantly green, happy and healthy. And Dice says that's because the company's taken a hard line on cleanliness.

"We have people who that's their only job is to look for any infections or anything that could cause potential damage to the crop," he says.

Shots - Health News

Looks Good Enough To Smoke: Marijuana Gets Its Glamour Moment

Shots - Health News

Chemical Change In Synthetic Marijuana Suspected Of Causing Illnesses

Around the Nation

'This Is Going To Be Too Hard': Keeping Kids From Using Pot

As any farmer will likely say, damage to the crop equals damage to the bottom line. Dice's employees used to spray the crop with mild chemicals. They would switch between multiple pesticides and mildew treatments, treating anywhere from every three to four days.

Dice says he's seen other operations crumble as their cannabis succumbs to mildew or bugs. Pest controls ensure a good yield. And when it comes to cannabis, yields really matter.

Dice estimates the grow room is worth as much as $180,000. Protecting that yield is hard work. That's why many growers in states that have legalized recreational or medical marijuana use chemicals. But it's the federal government that tells farmers which pesticides are safe to use. And so far, the feds wants nothing to do with legalized marijuana. Colorado State University entomologist Whitney Cranshaw says that's left growers to experiment with little oversight.

"In the absence of any direction the subject of pesticide use on the crop has just devolved to just whatever people think is working or they think is appropriate," he says.

Tobacco farmers, for example, have a stable of pesticides the government says are safe to use. But Cranshaw says marijuana growers have none.

"Sometimes they've used some things that are inappropriate, sometimes unsafe," he says.

Brett Eaton is a plant expert with American Cannabis Company, a Denver-based consulting group. He's concerned about what the pesticides are doing to the product as well as the consumer.

"Anybody can get their hands on harmful chemicals, and they can just spray away all the way up until the last day of harvest," he says.

Safety concerns led Denver officials to place a hold on tens of thousands of marijuana plants earlier this year, pending an investigation. Colorado doesn't require growers to test the crop for traces of pesticides before being sold. But state agriculture officials did recently release a list of pesticides deemed appropriate for use on cannabis. Washington state, Nevada and Illinois have similar lists. Eaton says regulators are only playing catch up.

"Other agricultural industries already have policy in place for the safe use of spraying certain pesticides and fungicides," he says. "This being a new industry, it hasn't been addressed yet."

And with more states turning marijuana into a legal commodity crop, it'll take a mix of policy, science and industry self-regulation to figure out what's appropriate, and what's not.

legalizing marijuana

pesticides

medical marijuana

agriculture

Colorado

marijuana

Denver

If the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal isn't revived in the next few days, labor unions will have helped defeat one of President Obama's main foreign policy goals. But what will defeating the TPP, an agreement that covers 12 nations along the Pacific Rim, do for labor?

Thea Lee, deputy chief of staff at the AFL-CIO, has had a front-row seat to the trade negotiations on Capitol Hill.

She opposes many of the provisions in the new trade deal, but she can't tell you exactly which.

"We are sworn to secrecy, so we can't talk about it — not to our colleagues, not to our members, not to the press, and so that's frustrating," she says. "If I talked to you specifically about what I think the shortcomings of the labor chapter are, I could lose my security clearance. I don't know if I'd go to jail, but ..."

So she's left talking in generalities.

"These deals make it easier for multinational corporations to move jobs overseas," Lee says.

She, as well as other union leaders, point first and foremost, to the North American Free Trade Agreement that took effect 21 years ago.

Roland Zullo, a University of Michigan labor and employment policy researcher, says that for organized labor, NAFTA's wounds still linger.

"Labor has enough of a institutional memory to know what happened with NAFTA," he says. "There was a theory behind NAFTA; there was a theory that by integrating Canada, U.S. and Mexico, there would be a sort of overall net economic benefit."

But that didn't happen for U.S. workers in sectors like manufacturing. Michigan auto workers, for example, lost more than 100,000 jobs in the years that followed NAFTA's passage.

But it's not a clear case of cause and effect. This is the period when Japanese automakers were setting up shop in the U.S. and taking market share away from General Motors, Ford and Chrysler.

Other industries, and consumers, did benefit from NAFTA.

Related Stories

U.S. House Looks To Buy Time For Obama's Trade Agenda

It's All Politics

Obama Says China Could Join Already Huge Asia Trade Deal

The Two-Way

Dealing Blow To Obama, Efforts To Pass Trade Plan Fail In The House

It's All Politics

Clinton Walks Delicate Line On Trade, Economy In First Press Conference

Matt Slaughter, associate dean of the Tuck School of Business at Dartmouth, says he understands labor's concerns about a new trade deal. But, he adds, labor faces a paradox in opposing the TPP.

"A lot of the academic research and policy work shows companies and their workers that are connected to the dynamism in the global economy tend to pay higher wages and create better jobs than do the purely domestic companies," he says.

He says labor should stop trying to kill the new trade pact, and instead push for a more robust 21st century social safety net for dislocated workers.

But that idea was torpedoed last week by House Democrats, who, ironically, support the idea. It was a political maneuver to scuttle the entire bill.

Slaughter also questions what kind of victory labor would gain by torpedoing the TPP. After all, the U.S. already has free-trade agreements with a handful of countries in the TPP talks.

"Even for countries in the TPP negotiations with whom we don't have a free-trade agreement already, we are already relatively open to those countries for bringing in imports of almost all of their goods and services," he says.

Tim Waters, the national political director for the United Steelworkers, strongly disagrees with talk like this.

"For us to just say, 'Oh well, it's inevitable, we shouldn't try to stop it, we shouldn't try to stand up, we should just try to get in there and cut some kind of deal that made it less sickening,' doesn't make any sense," he says.

Waters adds that unions aren't anti-trade; they want fair trade. He says trade deals need to put the concerns of American workers first.

And, he says, this new agreement, yet again, doesn't do that.

labor unions

trans-pacific partnership

trade agreement

House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Paul Ryan, (R-Wis.) says approving a massive trade package sought by President Obama will allow the U.S. to "write the rules" of the global economy. Parts of the package are now in limbo in the House.

Ryan spoke with NPR's Morning Edition host Steve Inskeep about the trade deal and about Trade Promotion Authority, also known as fast-track, which would allow the president to negotiate the trade agreement with Pacific Rim nations known as the Trans-Pacific Partnership and then have Congress pass it with an up-or-down vote.

On what the trade package does for the U.S.:

"What we're requiring in these negotiations, as we direct in our trade promotion authority legislation, is that these other countries level the playing field — they treat us like we treat them, they open their markets reciprocally to ours to our exports, and they raise their standards to our standards. Play by our rules with respect to things like intellectual property protection, rule of law, those kinds of things that are very important to make sure that we set the standards for the global economy.

"So if it goes like people like myself hope it goes, then America along with our allies are writing the rules of this global economy at the beginning of this 21st century. If we chose not to engage, if we say America shouldn't bother negotiating trade agreements ... then we're simply saying, 'We forfeit the leadership role in the world to write the rules' and we let other countries such as China write the rules instead of us."

On arguments that deals such as the Trans-Pacific Partnership will cost American jobs:

"Since ... 2007, there have been 100 trade agreements struck around the world without America. And that means other countries are already doing this, getting better access, getting better market access, and we're not, and that means we lose jobs."

On arguments from some Democrats that the trade deal will allow other nations to effectively lower U.S. wages and standards for financial rules, labor regulations, and the environment:

"There really isn't any justice in that claim, it's really kind of a straw man or what I'd call a red herring argument, because we make it extremely clear in our trade promotion authority that only Congress can change laws. You can't enter into an agreement that Congress doesn't approve that changes our laws.

"We make it very clear that the goal of this is to have other countries raise their standards to our levels and not degrade their standards. That's one of the criticisms from agreements back in the 20th century. So we want modern agreements that raise high standards to get other countries to play by our rules, and we do not allow other countries through any mechanism to require or force changes in U.S. laws."

On whether the treaty would mean foreign trading partners can challenge U.S. policies and regulations that they think adversely affect them:

"No. They can get monetary damage penalties, they can't challenge or change regulations at any level of our government."

On criticism that the treaty is being written in secret:

"It's one of the reasons why we're trying to pass trade promotion authority, so that we can guarantee that the public gets to see any trade agreement that is reached. We do not have trade promotion authority in place right now, and ... as a result of that, the kind of transparency that occurs is whatever the administration wants.

"What we are demanding and insisting on in our trade promotion authority is not only that members of Congress have full access to anything that's classified for the moment, but once an agreement is actually reached between countries, that agreement must be made public ... for 60 days for the public to see before a president can even sign an agreement, and when he signs it he simply sends it to Congress and then Congress spends a minimum of 30 days ... considering the agreement.

"The reasons some things are classified right now is it's in negotiations. You don't want to go into negotiations at any level, whether it's transactions or government-to-government with all your cards face up."

trans pacific partnership

Paul Ryan

The Federal Reserve's policymakers Wednesday held steady on interest rates – and gave no specific time frame for when they might change course.

That was the expected outcome of their two-day meeting.

But this changed: The policy makers seemed a bit more optimistic about the U.S. economy. Their statement said that while inflation is very low, "economic activity has been expanding moderately."

At a press conference, Fed Chair Janet Yellen said, "We have seen some progress." Still, rate hikes won't come until the Fed sees "more decisive evidence" that growth really is sustainable.

Overall, her words struck most analysts as a sign the Fed will start to nudge up interest rates, probably once in September and again before Dec. 31.

"After that, it will take its time and will only gradually tighten monetary conditions further," Nariman Behravesh, chief economist for IHS, said in a statement.

But for now, it's still groundhog day, with no changes. The Fed has not had a rate hike since June 2006 — so long ago that the housing bubble was still inflating and Shakira was assuring us that "Hips Don't Lie."

So here's what the Fed decision means for you:

The nation's central bank is going to continue holding down interest rates to encourage you to borrow money for a new car or a home rehab or some other purchase. The goal is to stimulate a recovering economy.

Some economists say that extra help isn't needed anymore. They point to signs of an improved economy. For example, the Bertelsmann Foundation's International Non-profit Credit Rating Agency just upgraded its U.S. assessment from AA+ to AAA, saying that the "United States promises to be a more reliable driver of the global economy in coming years — with expected growth of 1.5 to 3 percent in 2015, and 2.5 to 3 percent in 2016."

But the Fed noted lingering problems, saying that "business fixed investment and net exports stayed soft."

Although the Fed statement didn't mention it, there's another worrisome factor hanging over the economy. It's the trouble in Greece, which owes more money to creditors than it can afford to pay.

Because Greece belongs to the European Union, its debt crisis is a big problem. European leaders are meeting next week and will try to sort out that debt mess. But it's possible there are no solutions and Greece might have to leave the EU. That would open up all sorts of unknowns that could upset markets.

"The one and only reason the Fed chose not to act this time was because of Greece," Bernard Baumohl, chief global economist for The Economic Outlook Group, said in a statement.

"The Fed couldn't comfortably pull the interest trigger this time until it got past the potential fallout of a Greek default," he added.

Fed policymakers have been keeping its benchmark federal funds rate at near zero since December 2008.

Translation: your cost of borrowed dollars has been at historically low levels for a long time now.

Cheap loans might sound good, but there are downsides. For one thing, it's hard on savers who need to earn more interest on their money. Also, a lot of economists worry that super low interest rates make it too easy to borrow, leading to dumb spending decisions by both individuals and businesses.

So most economists would like to see interest rates rising gradually to more normal levels amid a strengthening economy.

Fed officials worry that if interest rates go up while the economy is still fragile, consumers might stop shopping and home sales could stall. Better to keep rates low as a precaution, goes the thinking.

Janet Yellen

Economy

Federal Reserve

The Obama administration finds itself in the rare position of fighting alongside House Republicans this week as it tries to overcome Friday's stinging defeat to its massive trade package, the Trans-Pacific Partnership.

The defeat came when Speaker John Boehner split the president's agenda that passed the Senate in May into two parts: one was Trade Promotion Authority, also known as fast-track — a law that allows Obama to negotiate the deal, then have Congress pass it with an up-or-down vote, with no debate. The other was Trade Adjustment Assistance, a safety net aimed at retraining any U.S. workers who might lose their jobs as a result of the new trade package.

The simplified version of what happened is this: Democrats really like TAA. Republicans like TPA. Boehner split them into separate votes, hoping Dems and Republicans would vote for the respective parts they liked. The Obama administration really needs TPA to negotiate the trade deal, and so to torpedo the whole deal, Democrats voted down the worker assistance package in huge numbers.

So now, there's nothing to do but wait. The House voted today to give themselves until July 30 to get the votes they need to get the package passed. And by the numbers, it's clear that Obama and the House GOP have their work cut out for them in procuring those votes.

In an extremely polarized Congress, that's an unusually haphazard-looking mix of votes. To understand exactly who voted how and why, we've broken the vote down into four groups.

No on both: 143 Democrats, 49 Republicans

Who they are: Liberal democrats (including House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi) and conservative Republicans.

What it means: The Democrats that have tended to be against TPP have also tended to be more liberal Dems — like Maryland's Donna Edwards and Minnesota's Keith Ellison — who have no problem breaking with President Obama. This group of House Dems are so against TPP that they were willing to sink TAA, a policy Dems tend to like. The other thing that makes this group notable? It's huge — 143 Democrats voted no on both parts of a deal the administration badly wants to pass. The question is how many (if any) Obama can peel away from this group, given that Rep. Pelosi herself, House minority leader, was willing to break with him.

The Republicans on this side, meanwhile, include many members of the House Freedom Caucus, the group of lawmakers trying to swing their leadership's agenda even further to the right, like Idaho's Raul Labrador and Michigan's Justin Amash. These Republicans who voted against the trade agenda have given a mix of reasons — they're concerned about jobs, they think the deal is too secretive, and they simply don't want to give Obama more power, for example.

Yes on both: 27 Democrats, 81 Republicans

Who they are: Pro-TPP Republicans, Obama allies, and members in centrist, contested districts.

What it means: This group includes Republican Rep. Paul Ryan, one of the loudest supporters of TPP over the last few months. Among the few Democrats was Debbie Wasserman Schultz, chair of the Democratic National Committee, falling in line behind Obama, and more centrist Dems like Texas' Henry Cuellar and California's Jim Costa. It also notably contains a few lawmakers facing tough reelection challenges from the other party next year — Nebraska Democrat Brad Ashford and Republicans Carlos Curbelo of Florida, Iowa's Rod Blum, and Illinois' Bob Dold. Voting for both TPA and TAA may be a way for these lawmakers to show they're capable of reaching out across the aisle.

This group also notably includes some Democrats — Kathleen Rice of New York and Ami Bera of California — who took heat from labor for their support. Labor ran ads in those states slamming those lawmakers, even saying they didn't mind if a Republican won in Bera's district, as Politico reported.

No on worker assistance, yes on fast-track: 1 Democrat, 109 Republicans

Who they are: John Boehner and the largest chunk of Republicans.

What it means: There's a reason virtually no Democrats (save Texas' Ruben Hinojosa) voted this way — this is the vote for what Republicans wanted and against the Democrat-friendly portion of the bill. Republicans have in the past viewed TAA as an expensive, ineffective, necessary evil for getting trade deals passed, as AEI's Alex Brill wrote after the vote. These are the lawmakers who took the opportunity to make it clear they see TAA as unnecessary.

Yes on worker assistance, no on fast-track: 13 Democrats, 5 Republicans

Who they are: Minority Whip Steny Hoyer and a dozen other Dems, plus a few moderate Republicans.

What it means: This tiny, Democrat-dominated group did what Boehner had expected many Dems would do — they took the opportunity to vote for worker assistance and against Trade Promotion Authority, thinking that even if a trade deal they didn't like passed, they would at least be supporting the policy they do like.

—-

Now, there's potentially a month and a half for Obama and pro-TPP Republicans to try to get the votes they need on TAA. But not everyone is optimistic. As Maryland Democratic Rep. and Minority Whip Steny Hoyer told reporters on Tuesday, "There's more time now. Now, whether there's – six weeks, that's what we're talking about, six, seven weeks approximately – whether there's sufficient time to bridge the gaps is probably questionable."

Saying that the United States can no longer beat its international competition, Donald Trump announced his candidacy to be the country's next president.

"Our country needs a truly great leader, and we need a truly great leader now," Trump said. He said that rather than being a cheerleader for America, President Obama has been "a negative force."

We need somebody that can take the brand of the United States and make it great again," Trump said. At one point, he also said the country needs a leader who has written The Art of the Deal — his 1987 book.

"I will be the greatest jobs president that God ever created," Trump said after stating his intentions.

Listing the trillions of dollars the U.S. owes to countries such as China and Japan, Trump asked, "How stupid are our leaders?"

After taking the stage to a sustained ovation as the song "Rockin' in the Free World" blared in Trump Tower in New York City, Trump laid out a list of things he would fix if he were in charge, from immigration and America's military and energy strategies to the economy.

"Our enemies are getting stronger and stronger by the day, and we as a country are getting weaker," Trump said.

Taking a shot at the current administration, Trump said, "We have been sold the big lie: Obamacare."

He added that he would replace the plan with something better.

To learn more about Trump's background and his politics, check out the post 5 Things You Should Know About Donald Trump by our pals at It's All Politics.

Earlier Tuesday, Trump repeatedly promoted his announcement on Periscope, the live-streaming service that specializes in mobile devices.

2016 Republican presidential nomination

Donald Trump

House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Paul Ryan, (R-Wis.) says approving a massive trade package sought by President Obama will allow the U.S. to "write the rules" of the global economy. Parts of the package are now in limbo in the House.

Ryan spoke with NPR's Morning Edition host Steve Inskeep about the trade deal and about Trade Promotion Authority, also known as fast-track, which would allow the president to negotiate the trade agreement with Pacific Rim nations known as the Trans-Pacific Partnership and then have Congress pass it with an up-or-down vote.

On what the trade package does for the U.S.:

"What we're requiring in these negotiations, as we direct in our trade promotion authority legislation, is that these other countries level the playing field — they treat us like we treat them, they open their markets reciprocally to ours to our exports, and they raise their standards to our standards. Play by our rules with respect to things like intellectual property protection, rule of law, those kinds of things that are very important to make sure that we set the standards for the global economy.

"So if it goes like people like myself hope it goes, then America along with our allies are writing the rules of this global economy at the beginning of this 21st century. If we chose not to engage, if we say America shouldn't bother negotiating trade agreements ... then we're simply saying, 'We forfeit the leadership role in the world to write the rules' and we let other countries such as China write the rules instead of us."

On arguments that deals such as the Trans-Pacific Partnership will cost American jobs:

"Since ... 2007, there have been 100 trade agreements struck around the world without America. And that means other countries are already doing this, getting better access, getting better market access, and we're not, and that means we lose jobs."

On arguments from some Democrats that the trade deal will allow other nations to effectively lower U.S. wages and standards for financial rules, labor regulations, and the environment:

"There really isn't any justice in that claim, it's really kind of a straw man or what I'd call a red herring argument, because we make it extremely clear in our trade promotion authority that only Congress can change laws. You can't enter into an agreement that Congress doesn't approve that changes our laws.

"We make it very clear that the goal of this is to have other countries raise their standards to our levels and not degrade their standards. That's one of the criticisms from agreements back in the 20th century. So we want modern agreements that raise high standards to get other countries to play by our rules, and we do not allow other countries through any mechanism to require or force changes in U.S. laws."

On whether the treaty would mean foreign trading partners can challenge U.S. policies and regulations that they think adversely affect them:

"No. They can get monetary damage penalties, they can't challenge or change regulations at any level of our government."

On criticism that the treaty is being written in secret:

"It's one of the reasons why we're trying to pass trade promotion authority, so that we can guarantee that the public gets to see any trade agreement that is reached. We do not have trade promotion authority in place right now, and ... as a result of that, the kind of transparency that occurs is whatever the administration wants.

"What we are demanding and insisting on in our trade promotion authority is not only that members of Congress have full access to anything that's classified for the moment, but once an agreement is actually reached between countries, that agreement must be made public ... for 60 days for the public to see before a president can even sign an agreement, and when he signs it he simply sends it to Congress and then Congress spends a minimum of 30 days ... considering the agreement.

"The reasons some things are classified right now is it's in negotiations. You don't want to go into negotiations at any level, whether it's transactions or government-to-government with all your cards face up."

trans pacific partnership

Paul Ryan

Just how much is Donald Trump worth?

"I'm really rich," Trump declared during his presidential announcement Tuesday in New York at Trump Tower, one of the many buildings around the world donning his name.

But just how rich has always been a question. It was one before the real-estate mogul declared for president and, well, it remains a big question afterward, too, despite Trump holding up a one-page form declaring he is worth roughly $9 billion.

Trump has never liked to get specific about his wealth, but presidents and presidential candidates have no choice. Federal ethics law requires them to file annual disclosure reports, including a financial disclosure form 30 days after officially announcing.

"A lot of pundits on television said he'll never run," Trump boasted. "He's too private, and he's probably not as successful as everybody thinks."

And with that, he brandished his answer: a one-page "Summary of Net Worth," which he said was produced­ by his accounts and a "big accounting firm, one of the most highly respected."

The summary puts Trump's assets at $9.24 billion and his liabilities at just $503 million, giving him a net worth of just over $8.7 billion.

That's more than double an estimate from the Forbes list of billionaires, which pegged it at $4.1 billion. But, particularly at this level of personal wealth, the numbers released hardly tell the whole story. The one-page summary makes it difficult to unravel how the math is calculated. Specific buildings, real estate and holdings are not itemized, like they are required to be in a more detailed candidate financial disclosure.

The properties Trump owns can be assessed at book value — roughly speaking, the initial cost minus depreciation — or they can be assessed at fair-market value. The real-estate market can be volatile, and sometimes there are big gaps, especially if the real estate is Trump Tower and the Grand Hyatt hotel in midtown Manhattan.

Trump appears to be leaving millions of dollars on the table, a real-estate investment adviser said, by paying off his mortgage debt rather than using low-interest loans to leverage the real estate for reinvestment.

Another questioned whether the real-estate values might be overstated. Both advisers asked to speak on the condition on anonymity.

Donald Trump Jumps Into GOP Presidential Race

4:04

Playlist

Download

Embed

Embed

"There's not enough information to really understand it," said Frederick Chinn, an advisor at the Atalon Group in Henderson, Nev. "There are a lot of questions I would have just looking at the statement."

Then there's the value of the Trump brand. Trump's statement judges his "real estate licensing deals, brand and branded developments" to be worth $3.3 billion.

But to Forbes, the brand is worth less than $300 million, said Anand Chokkavelu, managing editor of the Motley Fool investing website Fool.com.

"I side with Forbes," Chokkavelu said. "I don't see any reason to take his self-reported net worth at face value."

Trump has a July 16 deadline for filing the official disclosure. He said he would do it on time.

"Everything will be filed eventually with the government," Trump declared at his announcement, "and we don't [need] extensions or anything. We'll be filing it right on time. We don't need anything."

There are legal liabilities for misreporting. Although the feds can grant deadline extensions, Fox News might not. It has a Republican debate scheduled Aug. 6, and candidates must file if they want to participate.

But even when a candidate files a more detailed disclosure, accuracy is hard to nearly impossible to enforce, watchdogs warn. Newt Gingrich in 2011, for example, filed a disclosure that did not list his paid speeches or television analyst contract. They were lumped in with income from Gingrich Productions, obscuring the details.

"Once you throw your hat in that ring, there's a bunch of laws that are supposed to apply to you, not all of them are enforced with the same level of rigor," Bill Allison, a senior fellow at the Sunlight Foundation, told NPR's Joel Rose. "And the financial disclosure is one of those areas where candidates have a lot of leeway to fudge the numbers."

financial disclosure

2016 Presidential Race

Donald Trump

Republicans

Eighteen months have elapsed since Parvez Henry Gill first began tackling one of the more unusual and sensitive assignments that anyone, anywhere, is ever likely to receive.

Now he is close to completing the task: the construction of a 140-foot tall Christian cross in the middle of Karachi, the business capital of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan.

Wrapped in bamboo scaffolding, the cross juts into the sky above this turbulent port city, where Sunni Islamist militants frequently target religious minorities — usually Shia Muslims, but sometimes Christians too.

Gill says the order to embark upon this ambitious project came from on high — from God, in fact, who encouraged him to build the cross as a way of raising the spirits of Pakistan's downtrodden Christian minority.

"The idea came from God in a dream," explained Gill, 58, a life-long devout Christian, as he stood proudly beside his cross, during a typically steamy June afternoon on the edge of the Arabian Sea. "I promised God I will build a cross soon," he said.

He was as good as his word.

i

The cross is being built at the entrance to the main Christian cemetery in Karachi. Phil Reeves/NPR hide caption

itoggle caption Phil Reeves/NPR

The cross is being built at the entrance to the main Christian cemetery in Karachi.

Phil Reeves/NPR

Related NPR Stories

The Two-Way

More Than 100 Charged In Mob Killing Of Christian Couple In Pakistan

The Two-Way

Suicide Bombers Target Sunday Services At 2 Pakistani Churches

Built In A Cemetery

Gill started building his cross in December 2013, planting it just inside the gate of Karachi's largest Christian cemetery, where many hundreds lie beneath white marble gravestones, including English colonialists from the former British Empire.

The cross dominates the immediate neighborhood, dwarfing the scruffy homes and alleys around the edge of the cemetery and the huge billboards emblazoned with burgers and mobile phones along the highway running past the cemetery gates.

It is the same height as a high-rise apartment block and is the highest Christian cross in Asia, according to Gill.

This addition to Karachi's skyline is built from concrete, steel and iron, and stands on 20-foot deep foundations.

The Two-Way

Death Toll In Pakistan Church Attack Reaches 85

Gill laughs at the suggestion that this makes his cross bullet-proof. It is not meant "as a challenge to anyone," he says. It is simply a "symbol of peace and hope for Christians who are worried and hopeless."

Christians in Pakistan have reason to worry. They account for just a tiny percentage of the 190 million population and tend to be on the bottom rung of the economic scale, performing jobs like street sweeping and trash collection.

Attacks On Christians

They often face discrimination and, at times, outright persecution. This includes being accused falsely of blasphemy — a crime that can carry the death penalty — by rivals who wish to acquire their property or settle a feud.

One of the worst recent atrocities took place last November, when a mob forced a young Christian couple into a brick kiln and burned them alive.

Occasionally Islamist extremists bomb Christian churches and congregations. In 2013, they killed more than 80 people at a church in the northwestern city of Peshawar. In March, the militants struck again, by dispatching suicide bombers to the eastern city of Lahore, where they attacked two churches, killing 15 people.

Gill is happy to talk about why he's building his cross, but he imparts little personal information.

He says he's a businessman, who, with his family, is bankrolling the construction of the cross. He declines to reveal much more than that, apparently because of security concerns. There have been "so many threats," he remarks.

Such is the sensitivity and fear that surround the issue of religion in Pakistan that initially Gill decided not to tell his Muslim laborers what they were building. They only realized it was a giant Christian cross when it began to look like one. More than 20 of them promptly downed their tools and walked off the job.

No such concerns seem to trouble a knot of Muslim men, who are whiling away the day in a nearby alley, smoking and gossiping. For many months, they've been watching the cross steadily rising higher and higher, yet they insist they have no grievances with their Christian neighbors.

"It's their religion. It's in their graveyard. We have no problem with it," says Salman Shareef, an off-duty policeman, while others nod in agreement.

The cross hasn't turned out quite as he anticipated.

"I wasn't expecting it to be so tall. We thought it would be, like, 10- or 12-feet high," says Shareef.

However, evidence of Karachi's underlying communal tensions is easily found nearby. The cemetery wall bears one of the Islamist extremists' favorite slogans: "The punishment for blasphemy is death!" it says, in big black letters.

Within the graveyard, a woman's tomb from the British colonial era stands amid a sea of trash, tossed at it from the homes next door. A few yards away, a gravestone is covered with graffiti.

Gill waves away questions about whether he finds all this alarming. He simply states that he trusts in God: "Everything comes from God. God, he will save us."

There's only one moment when, just for a second or two, there's a flicker of anxiety in his eyes.

"Pray for me," he says suddenly, "I request to all. Just pray for me."

When the finishing touches on the cross are finally complete, Gill wants to hold a grand opening ceremony. He says he plans to invite Pope Francis, Britain's Queen Elizabeth and Hillary Clinton.

Let's not forget — he's a dreamer.

Karachi

Pakistan

Blog Archive