Latest news with #SwarthmoreCollege
Boston Globe
01-07-2025
- Entertainment
- Boston Globe
In Gary Shteyngart's latest, a wise child trying to survive a near-future New York
'Vera, or Faith' is told from the perspective of 10-year-old Vera, who lives in an anonymous incarnation of New York City with her Russian immigrant father Igor Shmulkin and her Boston Brahmin stepmother Anne Bancroft, whom she calls Anne Mom. The child believes her Korean biological mother left because she was a 'tough baby,' and, like many kids of divorce, feels responsible for keeping her current parents happily together. Vera suffers 'intense anxiety,' partly because of her demanding Upper East Side elementary school and partly because her overbearing parents micromanage her every emotion and interaction, trying to ensure her likability by hammering into her juvenile head the importance of 'knowing your audience.' Absorbing these pressures without possessing the ability to process them, the girl is laser-focused on pleasing her parents by becoming a 'woman in STEM' who attends Swarthmore College. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up Vera's parents do love her and her younger half-brother, but don't necessarily love parenting. Anne Mom acts perpetually put-upon by the demands of childrearing and is additionally frustrated by Vera's unconditional adoration of her often absent father, someone who is, even when present, absentminded, at best good for an encouraging bromide thrown out while staring into his phone. Bloomberg News once considered Daddy someone who 'might need to [be taken] seriously,' but these days, the controversial lefty intellectual is focused on trying to resurrect an 'old magazine people had completely forgotten about,' even if it means selling — or selling out — to a Rhodesian billionaire. Related : Advertisement Aside from the challenges of home life, Vera is growing up in a world where 'Cycle Through' states stop women and girls to monitor their menstrual cycles and city streets routinely resound with the rage of MOTHs, or Marches of the Hated, put on by aggrieved, working-class white people who feel they've been left behind. This downtrodden majority bemoans their cruel fate despite a proposed constitutional amendment, known as Five-Three, that would give weighted votes to the 'new marginalized class,' defined as anyone who can trace their ancestry to 'those who landed on the shores of our continent before or during the Revolutionary War but were exceptional enough not to arrive in chains.' (Shteyngart's inversion of the Constitution's original Three-Fifths clause is a deplorable but creatively inspired invention.) Anticipating the upcoming constitutional conventions, Vera's school schedules a mock debate on Five-Three, with Vera and her classmate Yumi, the daughter of Japanese diplomats, assigned to argue the amendment's merits. While always eager to excel academically, Vera is more thrilled at the opportunity to befriend someone besides Kaspie, her Korean-made chess computer. (The novel's technological prognostications, which feel less imminent than its political changes, include AI devices that provide genuine — if still godforsaken — friendship and autonomous cars that navigate urban grids and cross-country trips.) Related : Advertisement As should be clear, Vera is preternaturally precocious, fueled by logging unfamiliar words and facts into her 'Things I Still Need to Know' diary, an ingenious plot device that allows Shteyngart to write a novel for adults from the point of view of a child by putting in quotes anything Vera is parroting from grown-ups, be it individual words, esoteric concepts, euphemisms, or curse words. He also brilliantly apes the agile, almost hyperactive, sponge brain of a child, peppering Vera's thoughts with continual callbacks and recapitulations. Anybody familiar with Shteyngart's writing, or even his social media or Substack, knows that he has a clever wit, which is on full display here, despite operating within a world that feels drawn from the sweaty fantasies of those who authored 'Project 2025.' Along with winking allusions to cultural titans like Mike Nichols and Vladimir Nabokov, whose indispensable wife Vera gets a shoutout as 'a genius herself,' there are innumerable nods to New York City esoterica, my favorite of which is the fact that Daddy pays Vera to inspect copies of 'The Power Broker' in other people's homes to see if the tome has a cracked spine or is just for show. Vera, like too many children with comparatively much less privileged lives in our real world, is forced to grow up much too quickly, but what Shteyngart does by the end of the novel, and perhaps does better than any other current American author, is pinpoint a glimmer of hopefulness in the seemingly impenetrable gloom. His canny fiction doesn't make me any happier to be living through the times he is memorializing, but it does provide commiseration and amusement, maybe even a bit of faith in the possibility of something better on some distant horizon. Advertisement VERA, OR FAITH By Gary Shteyngart Random House, 256 pages, $28 Cory Oldweiler is a freelance writer.
San Francisco Chronicle
27-06-2025
- Politics
- San Francisco Chronicle
Trump's attack on long-standing principle of birthright citizenship stands, as Supreme Court sidesteps constitutional issue − for now
(The Conversation is an independent and nonprofit source of news, analysis and commentary from academic experts.) Carol Nackenoff, Swarthmore College and Julie Novkov, University at Albany, State University of New York (THE CONVERSATION) One of President Donald Trump's first executive orders relating to immigration and immigrants is a direct attack on the long-standing constitutional principle of birthright citizenship. That's the declaration in the 14th Amendment to the Constitution that anyone born on U.S. soil is a U.S. citizen, regardless of their parents' nationalities or immigration status. Specifically, Trump's order says the federal government will stop issuing federal identification documents such as Social Security cards and passports to infants born in the U.S. unless at least one of their parents is either a U.S. citizen or a 'lawful permanent resident.' So it would deny paperwork to infants born to people who are in the U.S. by other, legal means, such as work, tourist or student visas, as well as to undocumented people. Several states have filed suit to block the move. Federal courts blocked Trump's order from taking effect across the U.S. But on June 27, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court paused these blocks, ruling that the injunctions had to be reviewed to ensure that only the parties specifically named in suits who have standing are receiving relief. The court's ruling will likely trigger a wave of class action lawsuits seeking to extend protective orders to cover larger groups of individuals. But for now, the Trump administration has a green light to begin planning for its implementation of the order in 30 days. The justices did not rule on whether ending birthright citizenship is constitutional. This first step down a path to deny citizenship to some individuals born in the United States reflects a conflict that's been going on for nearly 200 years: who gets to be an American citizen. Debates in American history over who gets citizenship and what kind of citizenship they get have always involved questions of race and ethnicity, as we have learned through our individual research on the historical status of Native Americans and African Americans and joint research on restricting Chinese immigration. Nonetheless, even in the highly racialized political environment of the late 19th century, the U.S. Supreme Court endorsed an expansive view of birthright citizenship. In an 1898 ruling, the court decreed that the U.S.-born children of immigrants were citizens, regardless of their parents' ancestry. That decision set the terms for the current controversy, as various Republican leaders, U.S. Sens. Tom Cotton of Arkansas and Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee, as well as Vice President JD Vance, have claimed that they will possess the power to overturn more than a century of federal constitutional law and policy and deny birthright citizenship. Citizenship by birth Most citizens of the U.S. are born, not made. Before the Civil War, the U.S. had generally followed the English practice of granting citizenship to children born in the country. In 1857, though, the Supreme Court decided the Dred Scott v. Sandford case, with Chief Justice Roger Taney declaring that people of African descent living in the U.S. – whether free or enslaved, and regardless of where they were born – were not actually U.S. citizens. After the Civil War, Congress explicitly rejected the Dred Scott decision, first by passing legislation reversing the ruling and then by writing the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, which specified that ' [a]ll persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.' This broad language intentionally included more than just the people who had been freed from slavery at the end of the Civil War: During legislative debate, members of Congress decided that the amendment should cover the children of other nonwhite groups, such as Chinese immigrants and those identified at the time as 'Gypsies.' Still barring some people from citizenship This inclusive view of citizenship, however, still had an area judges hadn't made clear yet – the phrase 'subject to the jurisdiction thereof.' In 1884, the Supreme Court had to interpret those words when deciding the case of a Native American who wanted to be a citizen, had renounced his tribal membership and attempted to register to vote. The justices ruled that even though John Elk had been born in the U.S., he was born on a reservation as a member of a Native American tribe and was therefore subject to the tribe's jurisdiction at his birth – not that of the United States. He was, they ruled, not a citizen. The text of the 14th Amendment also became an issue in the late 19th century, when Congress and the Supreme Court were deciding how to handle immigrants from China. An 1882 law had barred Chinese immigrants living in the U.S. from becoming naturalized citizens. A California circuit court, however, ruled in 1884 that those immigrants' U.S.-born children were citizens. In 1898, the Supreme Court took up the question in United States v. Wong Kim Ark, ultimately ruling that children born in the U.S. were, in the 14th Amendment's terms, 'subject to the jurisdiction' of the United States, so long as their parents were not serving in some official capacity as representatives of a foreign government and not part of an invading army. Those children were U.S. citizens at birth. This ruling occurred near the peak of anti-Chinese sentiment that had led Congress to endorse the idea that immigration itself could be illegal. In earlier rulings, the court had affirmed broad powers for Congress to manage immigration and control immigrants. Yet in the Wong Kim Ark ruling, the court did not mention any distinction between the children of legal immigrants and residents and the children of people who were in the United States without appropriate documentation. All people born in the United States were automatically simply citizens. Since the Wong Kim Ark ruling, birthright citizenship rules haven't changed much – but they have remained no less contentious. In 1900 and 1904, leaders of several Pacific islands that make up what is now American Samoa signed treaties granting the U.S. full powers and authority to govern them. These agreements, however, did not grant American Samoans citizenship. A 1952 federal law and State Department policy designates them as ' non-citizen nationals,' which means they can freely live and work in the U.S. but cannot vote in state and federal elections. In 2018, several plaintiffs from American Samoa sued to be recognized as U.S. citizens, covered by the 14th Amendment's provision that they were born 'within' the U.S. and therefore citizens. The district court found for the plaintiffs, but the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed, ruling that Congress would have to act to extend citizenship to territorial residents. A new debate has ignited over whether Congress has the power to alter birthright citizenship, and even over whether the president, either through an executive order or through directing the State Department not to recognize some individuals as citizens, can change the boundaries around who gets to be a citizen. Efforts to alter birthright citizenship have already provoked legal challenges. Trump is just the latest in a long line of politicians who have objected to the fact that Latin American immigrants who come to the U.S. without legal permission can have babies who are U.S. citizens. Most legal scholars, even those who are quite conservative, see little merit in claims that the established rules can be altered. At least until now, the courts have continued to uphold the centuries-long history of birthright citizenship, dating back to before the Constitution itself and early American court rulings. The question seems likely to reach the Supreme Court again, with the fundamental principle hanging in the balance. This article, which includes material previously published on Jan. 15, 2020, was updated to include the June 27, 2025, U.S. Supreme Court ruling.
Yahoo
23-06-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
What does regime change mean? Trump comments on Iran leadership
Hours after the United States military bombed three Iranian nuclear sites on June 21, President Donald Trump floated the possibility of a regime change in Iran. 'It's not politically correct to use the term, 'Regime Change,' but if the current Iranian Regime is unable to MAKE IRAN GREAT AGAIN, why wouldn't there be a Regime change??? MIGA!!!,' Trump wrote in a Truth Social post on June 22. Trump's post also came on the heels of Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio each saying on June 22 that regime change in Iran was not the United States' objective. "We don't want a regime change," Vance told NBC's Meet the Press. "We want to end the nuclear program, and then we want to talk to the Iranians about a long-term settlement here." Rubio echoed the sentiment on CBS's Face the Nation, saying, "in this particular case, what we are focused on is not the changing of the regime.' Here's what to know about the term "regime change" and why it's a point of focus after U.S. airstrikes on Iran nuclear facilities. Live updates: What is Iran's next move? World awaits response to U.S. bombing Regime change refers to the replacement of a nation's leadership, dictionary definitions agree. In the context of foreign affairs, the phrase can refer to an external party taking action or using military force to complete the change. According to Britannica, the phrase refers to the "overthrow of a government considered illegitimate by an external force and its replacement with a new government according to the ideas or interests promoted by that force." The Global Nonviolent Action Database at Swarthmore College notes that some scenarios exist where a leader steps aside but "continues to rule from behind the scenes" or the oligarchy that backed the leader remains intact. Where the United States is concerned, the government has been involved in several notable regime changes throughout history. For example, in the Iraq War, the U.S. overthrew the regime of Saddam Hussein just three weeks after military forces entered Iraq, per the Defense Technical Information Center. On April 9, 2003, U.S. forces pulled down a statue of Hussein in Baghdad's Firdos Square, symbolizing the end of his reign. The war continued for eight years after that. Trump said on June 21 the U.S. strikes were intended to 'stop to the nuclear threat posed by the world's No. 1 state sponsor of terror." Days before, though, Trump threatened Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, writing on Truth Social, "UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER!" "We know exactly where the so-called 'Supreme Leader' is hiding," he said in another June 17 post. "He is an easy target, but is safe there - We are not going to take him out (kill!), at least not for now." "Our patience is wearing thin," he added. After the U.S. carried out airstrikes on three Iranian nuclear sites on June 21, Trump took to Truth Social the following day to signal his openness to new leadership in Iran, breaking from comments made by his vice president and secretary of state earlier that day. 'It's not politically correct to use the term, 'Regime Change,' but if the current Iranian Regime is unable to MAKE IRAN GREAT AGAIN, why wouldn't there be a Regime change??? MIGA!!!,' Trump wrote. Melina Khan is a national trending reporter for USA TODAY. She can be reached at This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: What is a regime change? Explaining the meaning after Trump's comment
USA Today
23-06-2025
- Politics
- USA Today
What does regime change mean? Trump comments on Iran leadership
Hours after the United States military bombed three Iranian nuclear sites on June 21, President Donald Trump floated the possibility of a regime change in Iran. 'It's not politically correct to use the term, 'Regime Change,' but if the current Iranian Regime is unable to MAKE IRAN GREAT AGAIN, why wouldn't there be a Regime change??? MIGA!!!,' Trump wrote in a Truth Social post on June 22. Trump's post also came on the heels of Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio each saying on June 22 that regime change in Iran was not the United States' objective. "We don't want a regime change," Vance told NBC's Meet the Press. "We want to end the nuclear program, and then we want to talk to the Iranians about a long-term settlement here." Rubio echoed the sentiment on CBS's Face the Nation, saying, "in this particular case, what we are focused on is not the changing of the regime.' Here's what to know about the term "regime change" and why it's a point of focus after U.S. airstrikes on Iran nuclear facilities. Live updates: What is Iran's next move? World awaits response to U.S. bombing What is a regime change? Regime change refers to the replacement of a nation's leadership, dictionary definitions agree. In the context of foreign affairs, the phrase can refer to an external party taking action or using military force to complete the change. According to Britannica, the phrase refers to the "overthrow of a government considered illegitimate by an external force and its replacement with a new government according to the ideas or interests promoted by that force." The Global Nonviolent Action Database at Swarthmore College notes that some scenarios exist where a leader steps aside but "continues to rule from behind the scenes" or the oligarchy that backed the leader remains intact. Where the United States is concerned, the government has been involved in several notable regime changes throughout history. For example, in the Iraq War, the U.S. overthrew the regime of Saddam Hussein just three weeks after military forces entered Iraq, per the Defense Technical Information Center. On April 9, 2003, U.S. forces pulled down a statue of Hussein in Baghdad's Firdos Square, symbolizing the end of his reign. The war continued for eight years after that. What has Trump said about a regime change in Iran? Trump said on June 21 the U.S. strikes were intended to 'stop to the nuclear threat posed by the world's No. 1 state sponsor of terror." Days before, though, Trump threatened Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, writing on Truth Social, "UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER!" "We know exactly where the so-called 'Supreme Leader' is hiding," he said in another June 17 post. "He is an easy target, but is safe there - We are not going to take him out (kill!), at least not for now." "Our patience is wearing thin," he added. After the U.S. carried out airstrikes on three Iranian nuclear sites on June 21, Trump took to Truth Social the following day to signal his openness to new leadership in Iran, breaking from comments made by his vice president and secretary of state earlier that day. 'It's not politically correct to use the term, 'Regime Change,' but if the current Iranian Regime is unable to MAKE IRAN GREAT AGAIN, why wouldn't there be a Regime change??? MIGA!!!,' Trump wrote. Melina Khan is a national trending reporter for USA TODAY. She can be reached at
Japan Today
07-06-2025
- Entertainment
- Japan Today
A Sikh Captain America? Why religious diversity matters in the comics universe
Vishavjit Singh, who educates youth about Sikhism through his Captain Sikh America character, poses for a portrait in costume at home, in New York's Harlem neighborhood, on May 30. By DEEPA BHARATH 'Captain America doesn't wear a beard and a turban, and he's white.' Vishavjit Singh looked at the boy who uttered those words, and then he looked at himself — a skinny, bespectacled, turbaned, bearded Sikh in a Captain America suit. 'I wasn't offended, because I knew that this kid was going to have this image of me, a Sikh Captain America, forever in his mind,' Singh said. 'This image has so much power to it that it opens up conversations about what it means to be American.' Representation of non-Abrahamic religions and spiritual traditions, particularly in the mainstream comics universe, is minimal. Even when they are portrayed in comics, their presentation, as Singh and others in the field point out, is often inauthentic and sometimes negative. Recently, however, comic book writers and academics who study the intersection of religion and comics observe a renaissance of sorts, which they say is happening because people close to these faith traditions are telling these stories with a reverence and sincerity that resonate with a wider audience. Singh's journey to make that connection began after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, triggered anti-Sikh hate incidents. Having faced hate and exclusion throughout his life, he decided to spread his message of kindness and inclusion by capitalizing on the appeal of comics and superheroes — an area where he found Sikh representation to be 'virtually zero.' He suited up as Captain Sikh America in Manhattan for the first time in summer 2013 — one year after a self-proclaimed white supremacist opened fire inside a Sikh temple in Oak Creek, Wisconsin, killing six and injuring four others. New York's reaction to Captain Sikh America was joyous. 'Strangers came up and hugged me,' Singh said. 'Police officers wanted photos with me. A couple wanted me to be part of their wedding ceremony. I felt I had a certain privilege I'd never had before.' In 2016, Singh gave up his full-time job to travel around the country to schools, government agencies and corporations to share his story and educate youth about his culture and faith. He doesn't speak directly about religion but rather the core values of Sikhism. 'I talk about equality, justice and about the universal light being present in every speck of creation,' he said. Marvel's Black Panther heralded better representation for Africana religions in the U.S., according to Yvonne Chireau, a professor of religion at Swarthmore College in Pennsylvania. However what is seen in Black Panther or other comics is a synthesis of different African religions and cultural practices, she said. For example, one page might talk about the Orishas, divine spirits that play a key role in the Yoruba faith of West Africa, while another might feature Egyptian gods. One of the first superheroes with African roots, Chireau said, was Brother Voodoo, created in the 1970s by Marvel publisher Stan Lee, writer Len Wein and artist John Romita. He was the first Haitian superhero. The turn of the last century was a time of revival for Black-centric comics, she said, adding that immigration from African and Caribbean countries, including Haiti, led to increased understanding of religious practices originating in those places. 'It's definitely gotten a lot better and much more authentic because the people who are telling these stories care about those religious practices,' she said. Brooklyn-born Haitian American comic book writer Greg Anderson Elysée said he didn't learn about African and Caribbean religious traditions until he was a teenager. Elysée was raised Catholic, but he now considers himself agnostic. For the past decade, he's written comics about Is'nana, the son of Anansi the Spider, the god of wisdom, knowledge and mischief in the Akan religion of West Africa. What drives his vision and his creativity, Elysée said, is the need to see more Black mythology, deities and spirituality showcased with the same level of respect as European fairy tales and Greek mythology. 'When I went looking for anything on African spirituality in the bookstore, I found it in the occult section as opposed to the religion or mythology section,' he said. Common depictions of African faith as voodoo and witchcraft are colonialist narratives aimed at demonizing Indigenous spiritual practices, he added. 'When I started going to ceremonies and rituals, I saw how much power there is in it. When we know who we are — whether you believe in the religion or not — it fills you with joy, a purpose and a sense of being.' Elysée is excited and relieved by the reaction to his work. 'While this is entertainment, you also don't want to offend those who believe in it and truly get so much power from it,' he said. 'Some of my portrayals of these religions in my comics may not be 100% authentic, but there is a level of research and respect that goes into every piece of it.' Zen Buddhism has informed much of John Porcellino's work. For over three decades, he has produced and self-published King-Cat Comics and Stories, a largely autobiographical mini-comic series. Porcellino was drawn to Buddhism in his 20s after what he describes as a period of intense mental suffering and health problems. As a punk rock fan, Porcellino saw commonalities between punk and Zen because 'they are both concerned with the essence of things rather than appearances.' Both are ways of life — simple yet nuanced. He gave the example of a wordless story titled 'October,' featured in King-Cat's 30th issue, that shows him as a high school student walking home one night from school. When he gets home, his mom asks him to take the dog outside; as he steps out, he sees the stars. 'It's the experience of being in everyday, mundane life ... and then suddenly breaking through to some kind of transcendence,' he said. Porcellino views these comics as a healing presence in his life. 'They are an important part of my spiritual practice,' he said. 'Any time I have a major crisis in my life, my first reaction is to sit down and start making comics and put my focus into that. It just helps ground me.' Teresa Robeson, who wrote a graphic novel about the 14th Dalai Lama, said that even though her mother was Catholic and raised her in the faith, her grandmother was Buddhist. She grew up in Hong Kong, with memories of relatives praying to Buddhist gods, taking in the fragrance of burning incense and the sound of Buddhist chants. Though she practices neither Catholicism nor Buddhism at this time, Robeson jumped at the opportunity to tell the story of the Dalai Lama in graphic novel form because the book focused on a pivotal moment in the spiritual leader's life, when he fled Tibet for India after the Chinese occupation. Robeson liked the idea of representing a religion and culture that do not get much attention in media. 'Children's books are like mirrors and windows for kids,' she said. 'It's helpful especially for children of immigrants who don't often see themselves in mainstream literature. They don't see anyone who looks like them or prays like them. At the same time, it also helps kids who are not Asian or Buddhist to learn something about those communities.' Amar Chitra Katha was a comic book company started by the late Anant Pai in Mumbai in 1967 as a way to teach Indian children about their own mythology and culture. The first title was 'Krishna,' an important god in Hinduism and protagonist of the Bhagavad Gita, one of the religion's main sacred texts. Pai was an engineer turned comic books seller who used varied marketing techniques, including walking around with planks, nails and hammers in his bag so he could build shelves for bookstores that refused to display his comics because they lacked shelf space, said Reena I. Puri, the company's managing director and a 35-year veteran of the business. Pai started with Hindu mythology and gods but soon expanded to other faiths, releasing a globally successful comic titled 'Jesus Christ' and others about Buddha, Sikh gurus and Mahavira, who founded Jainism. Later came secular comics about historical figures and folktales. But religion remains the mainstay of Amar Chitra Katha, and books that teach children about faith, history and culture are also the most popular in the diaspora, Puri said. 'Most recently we've also portrayed (Indigenous) religions and have gathered folktales relating to these traditions from all over India,' she said. Amar Chitra Katha comics faced criticism in the past for their portrayal of gods as fair-skinned and 'asuras' — often the antagonists to the gods — as dark-skinned with demonic facial features. But that has changed, Puri said. 'We've educated ourselves and realized that our ancient texts were not as racist or colorist as we may be today,' she said. 'We're correcting those misconceptions now.' British comic book writer Mike Carey is known for his 2000-2006 DC Comics series 'Lucifer,' which depicts the titular character's adventures on Earth, in Heaven and in various realms after abandoning Hell. Carey counts himself an atheist who went to Sunday school only 'for the fun, stories and chocolate.' Carey portrayed Lucifer as the 'son of God, but as a rebellious disobedient son who wants to find himself as distinct from his father.' He has also explored pagan themes, particularly what he called the 'weird interface between British folklore and British religious traditions.' Carey delved into the concepts of faith, God and morality in a series titled 'My Faith in Frankie,' which tells the story of a teenager with a personal god called Jeriven who gets jealous of her boyfriend. Even though many of his comics and novels explore religion and ethics, Carey said, he has never 'felt any temptation whatsoever to believe.' 'I've become more and more entrenched in that position, because organized religions are like any organization that sustain themselves, amass power, wealth and authority,' he said. 'So I've never really grappled with religious issues. What I do sometimes is explore, play with and tease out moral issues that were important and meaningful to me.' © Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.
