The UK’s EU Referendum

LONDON — Members of the Driscoll family tend not to fight. If they do, it is over whose turn it is to vacuum.

Leslie Driscoll, 55, sells hot cross buns in an English bakery in London and addresses her customers with “love” or “darling”; her husband, Peter, 54, works as a floor layer; their daughter, Louise, a 19-year-old with dyed blue hair, is a barista in a hip coffee shop.

But last week, the Driscolls fell out. Badly. They had an argument so big they did not speak to one another for days, Leslie Driscoll said. Shortly afterward, her husband went off in a huff to see friends up north, in Derby.

The source of the family drama: whether Britain should remain part of the European Union, a process often referred to as “Brexit.”

With only days to go until the referendum on membership in the bloc on Thursday, polls suggest that the country is deeply split along socioeconomic and regional lines, with many older and working-class voters in England favoring leaving, and younger and better-educated Britons, and a majority of those in Scotland and Northern Ireland, favoring staying.

As the consequences of the choice come into focus for voters, tensions are bubbling. In the case of the Driscoll family, they are boiling over.

“I completely disagree with her,” Louise Driscoll said on a recent afternoon, looking at her mother squarely in the face as they sat in a cafe. “We shouldn’t be leaving, like, an organization that has helped us more than we could ever help ourselves if we were to go it alone.”

Louise is the only one in her family who wants Britain to remain. Her parents and her 80-year-old grandfather want out.

“This is a little island,” her mother said matter-of-factly, lighting up a cigarette and letting the ash fall on her glittery sneakers. “We should look after our own first. Charity begins at home.”

“But we are all people!” Louise said. “We should help each other.”

“It don’t work that way, darling,” her mother replied, shaking her head. “If you’re born here, you pass as English. I don’t care whether you’re black, white, green or blue, or purple with pink spots on — you’re English.”

Those born abroad, Leslie Driscoll said, “have got their own governments, their own parliaments, whatever.”

Up and down the country, the debate over Europe is pitting husband against wife, children against parents, sisters against brothers, divisions unlikely to be healed easily after the referendum is decided.

The debate over Britain’s continued membership in Europe has touched on issues as varied as immigration, terrorism, the economy, London’s housing shortage and the fate of the National Health Service.

Some of these issues, like immigration, are directly related to the European Union. Others, like the shortage of affordable housing, have little to do with it.

Yet those distinctions are blurring. For many, the referendum is as much a chance to register displeasure with the country’s direction as it is an opportunity to reject or embrace Europe. The stance of some voters is being shaped by personal experience and anecdote.

There is, for example, a widespread perception that European citizens are flocking to Britain, especially from Eastern Europe, to take advantage of its social welfare system. But Britain’s welfare system is not as generous as those of many other European nations, and fewer than 7 percent of immigrants receive benefits.

Louise Driscoll voted for the Green Party in last year’s general election and was appalled that her mother, traditionally a Labour voter, had opted for the anti-Europe, anti-immigration U.K. Independence Party. (“Sorry, I know I’m a bit antiquated — can’t help it, love,” Leslie Driscoll replied, somewhat sheepishly, after her daughter uttered an expletive.)

Louise Driscoll said she understood the pressures that immigration placed on schools and hospitals. But leaving the EU worried her, she said, because it risked wrecking the economy and making it hard for young people to secure employment. It took her eight months to find work as a barista, she said.

“If I wanted to work abroad, it would be a lot easier if England was in the EU,” Louise said.

Her mother suggested that Louise move to New York, possibly unaware of the paradox that this would make her an immigrant herself.

In what sounded like a final plea, she said: “At the end of the day, the EU is going to affect my generation more than it will affect your generation. So shouldn’t it be down to us to decide whether or not to stay?”

Her mother fell silent and was thoughtful.

“I am 55 years of age,” she said slowly. “I know — I appreciate that in 50 years’ time, you’ll be here and I won’t, and you’ll have to put up with whatever’s happened.”

She paused.

“But I still want out,” she said. “Sorry.”

http://cn.nytstyle.com/international/20160622/britain-eu-referendum-families/en-us/?_ga=1.225379929.230442792.1483887339

Structure of the Lead：

     WHO- England

     WHEN- 2016.06.22

     WHAT- go or stay in E.U.

     WHY- Freedom

     WHERE- England

     HOW- Vote

Keywords:

1. majority 大部分

2. tension 緊張

3. cigarette 香菸

4. parliament 議會

5. division 分配

6. welfare 福利

7. barista 咖啡店店員

8. plea 懇求

9. thoughtful 貼心的

10. appreciate 感謝

White helmets

BEIRUT, Lebanon — Eyes watering, struggling to breathe, Abd al-Mouin, 22, dragged his nephews from a house reeking of noxious fumes, then briefly blacked out. Even fresh air, he recalled, was “burning my lungs.”

The chaos unfolded in the Syrian town of Sarmeen one night this spring, as walkie-talkies warned of helicopters flying from a nearby army base, a signal for residents to take cover. Soon, residents said, there were sounds of aircraft, a smell of bleach and gasping victims streaming to a clinic.

Two years after President Bashar Assad agreed to dismantle Syria's chemical weapons stockpile, there is mounting evidence that his government is flouting international law to drop cheap, jerry-built chlorine bombs on insurgent-held areas. Lately, the pace of the bombardments in contested areas like Idlib province has picked up, rescue workers say, as government forces have faced new threats from insurgents.

Yet, the Assad government has so far evaded more formal scrutiny because of a thicket of political, legal and technical obstacles to assigning blame for the attacks — a situation that feels surreal to many Syrians under the bombs, who say it is patently clear the government drops them.Two years after President Bashar Assad agreed to dismantle Syria's chemical weapons stockpile, there is mounting evidence that his government is flouting international law to drop cheap, jerry-built chlorine bombs on insurgent-held areas. Lately, the pace of the bombardments in contested areas like Idlib province has picked up, rescue workers say, as government forces have faced new threats from insurgents.

“People are so used to it, they know from the sound,” said Hatem Abu Marwan, 29, a rescue worker with the White Helmets civil defense organization, a note of exasperation creeping into his voice when asked to explain. “We know the sound of a helicopter that goes to a low height and drops a barrel. Nobody has aircraft except the regime.”

Prodded by the United States, the U.N. Security Council is discussing a draft resolution that would create a panel, reporting to the secretary-general, to determine which of the warring parties is responsible for using chlorine as a weapon, according to Council diplomats.

Syrian state media dismiss the allegations as propaganda, and the council remains divided and hamstrung. That leaves people like Abu Marwan, who has responded to nine suspected chlorine attacks, feeling abandoned.

“There is no law to defend us as human beings, this is what we understand from the Security Council,” said Abu Marwan, a law school graduate, weeping as he recalled holding a dying child in Sarmeen. “I didn't see in humanitarian law anything that says `except for Syrians.”'

In contrast to stronger toxins like nerve agents and mustard gas, chlorine is lethal only in highly concentrated doses and where medical treatment is not immediately available, making it more an instrument of terror than of mass slaughter. It is typically dropped in barrel bombs containing canisters that explode on impact, distributing clouds of gas over civilian populations, and is distinguishable by its characteristic odor.

So it falls under a kind of loophole. With many civilian uses, like purifying water or disinfecting hospitals, it is not banned under international law and thus was not on the list of chemicals Assad promised to destroy — though using chlorine as a weapon is forbidden.

The Security Council did condemn the use of chlorine as a weapon in Syria, in February. But with Russia, the Syrian government's most powerful ally, wielding a veto, there was no Council agreement to assign blame.

The Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, which monitors agreements on toxic arms, found that chlorine had been used “systematically and repeatedly” in three Syrian villages in 2014, and mentioned witness accounts of helicopter-borne chlorine bombs in its report. But it, too, lacked authorization to say who used them.

Alistair Hay, a toxicologist at the University of Leeds who has trained Syrians to collect environmental samples, called the attacks a “slap in the face” to the international chemical weapons convention that Syria had joined less than a year earlier. Syria signed under a Russian-American deal to avoid U.S. military strikes after sarin, a nerve agent, killed more than 1,000 people in insurgent-held areas near Damascus.

Frustrated with the Security Council's impasse over the issue, rescue workers and doctors are now working to bring evidence of chlorine gas attacks directly to the French, British and U.S. governments for testing. The aim is to give states a solid basis for action against the attacks, in the 

Security Council or through quieter diplomatic pressure, said James Le Mesurier, the British director of a nonprofit group, Mayday Rescue, which trains and equips the White Helmets, Syrian volunteers supported by the British, Danish and Dutch governments.

But investigators face difficulties. Chlorine dissipates quickly in the atmosphere and does not last in blood or urine, and residue stays in soil for just 48 hours, leaving little time to transport samples across borders. Also, Le Mesurier said, the Organization for Prohibition of Chemical Weapons differentiates evidence they collect themselves from evidence collected by rescue workers, categorizing the latter as circumstantial.

Three other Syrian doctors said the organization's rules resulted in valuable evidence they collected going unexamined.

One, who protects his identity with the nickname “Chemical Hazem” for his safety, said he reached one of the April 2014 attack sites, Tal Minnes, within hours, smelling bleach in the air. He smuggled samples from two victims to Turkey without waiting for border clearances. But he said the OPCW refused to accept an unexploded canister, which remains in Syria.

“The ultimate evidence of the regime's use of chemical weapons is gone,” he said, adding that no one seemed very interested in getting samples out of Syria. “We can't blame anyone who wants to follow the legal channels — but do any exist?”

http://cn.nytimes.com/world/20150507/c07syria/en-us/

Structure of the Lead：

     WHO- The Syrians

     WHEN- 2015.05.07

     WHAT- War

     WHY- ISIS

     WHERE- Syria

     HOW- 

Keywords:

1. chaos 混亂

2. aircraft 飛機

3. insurgents 叛亂者

4. allegation 指責

5. council 委員會

6. toxicologist 毒物學

7. dissipate 始逐漸消失

8. circumstantial 間接的

9. evidence 證據

10. regime 政府

Unmanned aerial vehicle

At China's biennial air show in Zhuhai this month, an imposing fleet of unmanned aerial vehicles was on display - drones bearing a striking resemblance to the American aircraft that have proved so deadly in attacks on insurgents in Pakistan and Afghanistan.

Israel, Britain and the United States have pretty much had a corner on the global drone market, but the recent Chinese air show and a Pentagon report have exploded that notion.

"In a worrisome trend, China has ramped up research in recent years faster than any other country," said the unclassified analysis published in July by the Defense Science Board. "It displayed its first unmanned system model at the Zhuhai air show five years ago, and now every major manufacturer for the Chinese military has a research center devoted to unmanned systems."

The report, which said "the military significance of China's move into unmanned systems is alarming," suggested that China could "easily match or outpace U.S. spending on unmanned systems, rapidly close the technology gaps and become a formidable global competitor in unmanned systems."

Two Chinese models on display at the Zhuhai show - the CH-4 and the Wing Loong, or Pterodactyl - appeared to be clones of the Reaper and Predator drones that are fixtures in the U.S. arsenal. A larger drone, the Xianglong, or Soaring Dragon, is a long-range, high-altitude model that would seem to be a cousin of the RQ-4 Global Hawk.

Huang Wei, the director of the CH-4 program at the China Aerospace Science and Technology Corporation, told the state-run newspaper Global Times that his lightweight drone can carry cameras, ground-searching radar, missiles and smart bombs.

"As the Americans say," Mr. Huang said, "the U.A.V. is fit for missions that are dirty, dangerous and dull."

The paper reported that the drone's range of 3,500 kilometers, or about 2,200 miles, made it "ideal to conduct surveillance missions" over a small group of islands in the East China Sea known as the Senkakus in Japan and the Diaoyu in China. The islets are claimed by Beijing, Tokyo and Taipei.

My colleague Scott Shane, in an article on drone warfare last year, posed a few of the tough questions about the spread and use of drone warfare:

"If China, for instance, sends killer drones into Kazakhstan to hunt minority Uighur Muslims it accuses of plotting terrorism, what will the United States say? What if India uses remotely controlled craft to hit terrorism suspects in Kashmir, or Russia sends drones after militants in the Caucasus? American officials who protest will likely find their own example thrown back at them."

"'The problem is that we're creating an international norm' - asserting the right to strike preemptively against those we suspect of planning attacks, argues Dennis M. Gormley, a senior research fellow at the University of Pittsburgh and author of 'Missile Contagion,' who has called for tougher export controls on American drone technology. 'The copycatting is what I worry about most.'"

Dozens of countries have bought or built their own unmanned aircraft, primarily for surveillance, but as Scott points out, "adding missiles or bombs is hardly a technical challenge."

There were no drone flights or demonstrations reported this year at Zhuhai, although the Global Times suggested that 20 red stars and 15 rocket outlines painted on the fuselage of a Pterodactyl indicated 20 airborne missions and 15 missile firings.

And a Japanese military plane recently took photos of a drone circling some Chinese naval vessels on a training exercise near Okinawa. The Pentagon believes the drone had been deployed from one of the Chinese ships.

There was no sign this year of Anjian, or the Dark Sword, part of a rumored new generation of Chinese stealth drones. The Pentagon study said the Anjian "represents the aspirations of the Chinese to design something even the Western powers don't have - a supersonic drone capable of air-to-air combat as well as ground strikes."

Defense News reported recently from Zhuhai that there was a change in tone in how the Chinese were marketing their drones. At the show in 2010, videos and publicity material showed unmanned aircraft attacking American naval vessels, "swarming over aircraft carrier battle groups like angry bees," Defense News said. This year, however, "a stealthy Blue Shark" drone was shown attacking a Russian carrier. 

Michael Schiffer, the deputy assistant secretary of defense for East Asia, said last summer that Beijing's broad and rapid military buildup is "potentially destabilizing" in the Pacific, as my colleague Elisabeth Bumiller reported. That buildup was detailed in this Pentagon report.

"The scope and speed of unmanned-aircraft development in China is a wake-up call that has both industrial and military implications," said the report by the Defense Science Board. "U.S. exports of unmanned systems are highly constrained. China, with no such constraints, has made U.A.V.s a new focus of military exports."

The analysis recommended that U.S. military planners and the Defense Intelligence Agency should "aggressively" incorporate drones and drone warfare into their war games, simulations and exercises.

Structure of the Lead：

     WHO- People in China

     WHEN- 2012.11.29

     WHAT- Recruiting

     WHY- Needed

     WHERE- China

     HOW- 

Keywords:

1. impose 推行

2. notion 觀念

3. worrisome 令人著急的

4. classified 機密的

5. surveillance 監視

6. rumor 謠言 

7. carrier 事業

8. constrain 限制

9. implications 暗示

10. drone 嗡嗡聲

Paris climate change conference

PARIS — There was a pair of shoes from Pope Francis and sneakers from the United Nations secretary general, Ban-Ki Moon. Most were from ordinary citizens, like Gloria Montenegro, a 65-year-old Parisian, who left two pairs.

All together, 11,000 pairs of shoes were on display in the Place de la République on Sunday morning in a silent demonstration – in place of canceled marches and other events – of support for action against climate change.

The installation represented “a collection of millions of steps marching toward the same direction,” Ms. Montenegro said.

But the meaning extended beyond support for the climate negotiations about to begin here on Monday and run through Dec. 11. For people like Ms. Montenegro, the shoes also represented her will to find an alternative way to be heard after the French government banned a march and other planned demonstrations in the capital in the name of security following the terrorism attacks on Nov. 13 that killed 130 people.

“The COP has changed,” Ms. Montenegro said, referring to the climate change conference. “It starts with an atmosphere that is not the atmosphere of freedom we usually find in Paris.”

The “Marching Shoes” installation was meant to show the commitment of French people on climate issues, said Emma Ruby-Sachs, deputy director of Avaaz, a global organizing movement that began the shoe collection.

The pairs, laid out side by side, were displayed near the 31-foot bronze statue of Marianne, the central monument of the square where flowers, candles and messages have been left in tribute to the victims of the attacks.

Some of the pairs were decorated with flowers, and others wore messages such as “Stop to ecocide” and, “If we have to fight for something, let’s fight for climate.”

Mr. Ban sent a message, too. “As the world gathers in Paris to stand up for climate action, let us also stand in the shoes of all the victims of terrorism, war and persecution,” he wrote on a piece of paper displayed next to his shoes.

The installation was one of several demonstrations organized worldwide after the French minister of foreign affairs, of Laurent Fabius, announced on Nov. 18 that the Climate March would be canceled.

CoalitionClimat21, a group of 130 nongovernmental organizations, started March4Me, a platform that allowed Parisians to connect with people abroad so they could march in their stead. Marches took place on Sunday in places like Berlin, London and Melbourne, Australia.

In Paris, Françoise Ploquin said shoes represented an appropriate symbol of sustainable development. “People should walk more, take the car less,“ Ms. Ploquin said. “We’d stop the global warming much more quickly and efficiently.”

The shoes were removed at noon, shortly before skirmishes broke out in the square between pockets of demonstrators and the police.

Structure of the Lead：

     WHO- People in Paris

     WHEN- 2015.11.30

     WHAT- Using shoes to protest

     WHY- Climate change

     WHERE- Paris

     HOW- Protest

Keywords:

1. ordinary 平凡的

2. display 展示

3. march 抗議遊行

4. against 反對

5. extend 提供

6. lay sth out 鋪開

7. nongovernmental 非政府

8. sustainable 可持續的

9. skirmish 小衝突

10. demonstrator 示威者

Leonardo DiCaprio

It was a big night at the 2016 Oscars for Leonardo DiCaprio, who joined the ranks of Oscar winners by the end of the telecast. Kicking off his night, Leonardo made headlines walking the red carpet with fellow Oscar nominee Kate Winslet, giving fans a Titanic reunion. The biggest highlight of the night for the six-time Oscar nominated actor: making history by finally winning his first Oscar! Leonardo won Best Actor in a Leading Role for his performance in The Revenant, and his Oscar acceptance speech was certainly one for the record books.

Making The Revenant was about man's relationship to the natural world. A world that we collectively felt in 2015 as the hottest year in recorded history. Our production needed to move to the southern tip of this planet just to be able to find snow. Climate change is real, it is happening right now. It is the most urgent threat facing our entire species, and we need to work collectively together and stop procrastinating. We need to support leaders around the world who do not speak for the big polluters, but who speak for all of humanity, for the indigenous people of the world, for the billions and billions of underprivileged people out there who would be most affected by this. For our children’s children, and for those people out there whose voices have been drowned out by the politics of greed. I thank you all for this amazing award tonight. Let us not take this planet for granted. I do not take tonight for granted. Thank you so very much.

http://oscar.go.com/news/oscar-news/leonardo-dicaprio-wins-his-first-oscar-for-best-actor

Structure of the Lead：

     WHO- Leonardo DiCaprio

     WHEN-2016.02.29

     WHAT-Best actor

     WHY-His hard working

     WHERE- America

     HOW-

Keywords:

1. rank 等級

2. telecast 節目

3. fellow 同伴的

4. nominate 提名

5. acceptance 接受

6. urgent 緊急的

7. species 物種

8. underprivileged 貧困的

9. greed 貪心

10. take sth for granted 視...為理所當然

Paris Attack

PARIS — The news channel France Info quoted a witness as saying that he saw the episode from a nearby building in the heart of the French capital.

“About a half an hour ago, two black-hooded men entered the building with Kalashnikovs,” the witness, Benoît Bringer, told the station.

“A few minutes later, we heard lots of shots,” he said, adding that the men were then seen fleeing the building.

President François Hollande was headed to the scene of the shooting, in the 11th Arrondissement. He said the shooting was “undoubtedly a terrorist attack” and ordered the nation’s terror alert status raised to the highest level.

He also said that several terrorists attacks had been thwarted in recent weeks.

The French authorities added security at houses of worship, news media offices and transportation hubs.

The cabinet was set to meet in an emergency session at 2 p.m., officials said.

The newspaper, Charlie Hebdo, has been attacked in the past for satirizing Islam and the Prophet Muhammad. Its offices were firebombed in 2011 after publishing a cartoon of the prophet on its cover promising “100 lashes if you don’t die laughing!”

http://cn.nytimes.com/world/20150107/c07paris/en-us/

Structure of the Lead：

     WHO-people in Paris

     WHEN-2015.01.07

     WHAT-attack

     WHY-religion

     WHERE-Paris

     HOW-attack

Keywords:

1. hood 頭套

2. witness 目擊者

3. flee 逃跑

4. undoubtedly 無疑

5. raise 增高

6. thwart 反對

7. security 安全

8. cabinet 內閣會議

9. session 會議

10. lash 鞭打

European Refugees

BRUSSELS — European Union ministers approved a plan Tuesday that would compel member countries to take in 120,000 migrants seeking refuge on the Continent — but only after overruling four countries in Central Europe.

The plan to apportion the migrants, still only a small fraction of those flowing into Europe, was approved by home affairs and interior ministers of the member countries after a vigorous debate.

In a departure from normal procedures that emphasize consensus, particularly on questions of national sovereignty, the ministers took a formal vote. The Czech Republic, Hungary, Romania and Slovakia voted no. Finland abstained.

The plan will be discussed further Wednesday by leaders from across the 28-member bloc, who will gather here for an emergency summit meeting. It is not clear if the dissenting countries, which have vigorously opposed mandatory quotas, will comply.

The crisis has tested the limits of Europe's ability to forge consensus on one of the most divisive issues to confront the union since the fall of communism. It has set right-wing politicians, including those who govern Hungary, against pan-European humanitarians, who have portrayed the crisis in stark moral terms.

“We would have preferred to have adoption by consensus, but we did not manage to achieve that,” Jean Asselborn, the foreign minister of Luxembourg, said after the meeting. He urged the countries that had voted no to comply with the decision. “I have no doubt they will implement these decisions fully,” he said.

But there were early signs of resistance to the plan. The Czech prime minister, Bohuslav Sobotka, said his government would “reject any attempt to introduce some permanent mechanism of redistributing refugees.”

The idea behind the plan — backed by Germany and France, the dominant powers in Europe — is to relieve the pressure on front-line nations like Italy and Greece, which migrants from the Middle East, Afghanistan and Africa have been flooding.

If EU leaders ratify the plan Wednesday, despite a lack of broad agreement, it could exacerbate disharmony in Europe that has already led to the reintroduction of border controls by some countries.

http://cn.nytimes.com/world/20150923/c23migrants/en-us/

Structure of the Lead：

     WHO-UN

     WHEN-2015.09.23

     WHAT-refugees

     WHY-too many refugees

     WHERE-Europe and America

     HOW-law

Keywords:

1. compel 強迫

2. overrule 駁回

3. fraction 小部分

4. vigorous debate 激烈的辯論

5. particularly 尤其

6. summit meeting 高峰會

7. consensus 共識

8. implement 實施

9. redistribute 公平重新分配

10. ratify 正式批准