My Pleasure Reading. Pride and Prejudice by Jane Austen. Summary (pages 202 - 325)

     On June, Elizabeth goes on another journey with the Gardiners, who are relatives of the Bennets. They decide to go to Pemberley, Darcy’s estate. Lizzy visits Pemberley, after making sure that Darcy is away, but he suddenly arrives and behaves very polite towards her and her relatives. He also invites Elizabeth to meet his sister.

     After a while, a letter comes, saying that Lydia has eloped with Wickham, so Elizabeth and the Gardiners are forced to return home, at Longbourn.  However, all attempts to find the couple fail. Nevertheless, Darcy finds Lydia and Mr. Wickham in London. Darcy convinces Wickham to marry Lydia, gives him ten thousand pounds, pays up his debts, and persuades him to settle in the North of London. After that Darcy asks the Gardiners not to reveal his help to the Bennet family. Elizabeth, however, finds out the truth about that. She is impressed with his kindness.

     When Darcy arrives with Bingley for a visit at Longbourn, Elizabeth tries to talk to him but doesn't get a chance. It seems to her also that Darcy has talked to Bingley about Jane, because Bingley eventually makes a proposal to Jane, which she accepts.

     After a while, arrives Lady Catherine and threatens Elizabeth with bad consequences if she marries Darcy, but Elizabeth refuses, saying she is not engaged to Darcy, but she will not promise anything against her own happiness.  A few days later, Darcy visits Lizzy and makes a second proposal to her, which she happily accepts. The two couples, Jane and Bingley and Elizabeth and Darcy, are married on the same morning. Mrs. Bennet is happy at having three of her daughters married, two of them to very rich young men. Thus, the life of the Bennets family changes completely, bringing them what they deserve and love.

Rendering №8

     The editorial published on the website of the newspaper "The New York Times" on October 4 is headlined "Peace Talks With the Taliban". The article reports at length that though American military commanders long ago concluded that the Afghan war could only end in a negotiated settlement with the Taliban,  now the generals and civilian officials say even this hope is unrealistic before 2015 — after American and coalition troops are withdrawn. In resolute terms the author of the article expresses the view that though  persuading militants to negotiate a peace deal was always a daunting challenge, however, the Obama administration has not been persistent enough in figuring out how to initiate talks with a resilient, brutal insurgency that continues to carry out deadly attacks against American and NATO forces.

     It was revealed that  during the 2010 surge, when the United States added 33,000 troops to the 68,000 in Afghanistan and put maximum military pressure on the Taliban, top generals resisted negotiations, saying the focus should be only on military gains. Speaking of this situation, it's interesting to note that the talks between the United States and the Taliban began early this year but soon collapsed when the administration, faced with bipartisan opposition in Congress, could not complete a proposed prisoner swap. It is an open secret that the Taliban are internally divided and unwilling to meet Washington’s demands to sever all ties to Al Qaeda, renounce violence and accept the commitments to political and human rights in Afghanistan’s Constitution.

     There is every reason to believe that  the United States has not and should not give up completely on a negotiated solution or at least some movement toward reconciliation. The correspondent gives a warning that although there are no formal talks under way, there are contacts between the Taliban and Afghans and others. Besides, it is necessary to emphasize that Pakistan recently urged the insurgents to join the political process and agreed to help Washington vet potential new Taliban interlocutors. It's hard to predict the course of events in future, but there is some evidence that the 2014 presidential election is an interim agreement under which the Afghan opposition, the Taliban and others might endorse minimum objectives rejecting Al Qaeda and supporting an inclusive political system.

     In conclusion the author suggest that though it is hard to be optimistic, but with  American troops leaving Afghanistan, there should be an interest in advancing a political system that insurgents might see as an alternative to armed conflict. As for me, I think peace talks with the Taliban are impossible. They are terrorists and do not share the views of other people, especially Americans. Besides, I believe that the Taliban consider the USA as their main enemy, they are defending their interests, values and lives against a foreign invader. So this problem cannot be solved only by negotiations.

My Pleasure Reading. Pride and Prejudice by Jane Austen. Summary (pages 100 - 201)

     When Elizabeth rejects Mr. Collins, he proposes to her friend Charlotte Lucas, who, to everyone’s shock, accepts him. Mrs. Bennet is disappointed with Elizabeth’s rejection of Mr. Collins, because it is the only one opportunity for them to keep the Longbourn estate in the family. At the same time, a letter arrives for Jane from Miss Bingley, informing her that they have left for London and that Mr. Bingley is in love with Darcy's sister. However, Jane decides to go to London with her aunt and uncle, hoping to return Mr. Bingley back. Jane makes many attempts to get in touch with Mr. Bingley, but his sister Caroline does not even inform her brother about Jane’s presence in London. Though Jane is heartbroken she accepts her rejection.

     Elizabeth also leaves home to visit the newly married Charlotte. During her visit, Elizabeth receives a dinner invitation to Lady Catherine's estate, Rosings Park. There she meets Mr. Darcy, who tries to build a relationship with her. One day, he makes a shocking proposal of marriage, which Elizabeth refuses, mentioning his fault in Jane’s depression and Mr. Wickham’s problems. The next day, Darcy gives Elizabeth a letter, containing the truth about Mr. Wickham (he tried to elope with Mr. Darcy’s sister); and also explaining to her that he has not believed that Jane has been really in love with Bingley. The letter makes Lizzy to change her mind towards Mr. Darcy. She returns home and acts coldly towards Mr. Wickham. After a while, she finds out that her another sister Lydia is invited to follow the officers to their next station in Brighton. Elizabeth disapproves of the plan, but, in spite of it, Mr. Bennet allows Lydia to go.

Rendering №7

       The article published on the website of the newspaper "The National Security" on September 10 is headlined "Three wars on terror". The author of the article reports at length that one of Barack Obama's earliest acts as president was to discard the phrase "war on terror," yet he has been waging just such a campaign these past four years -- with a skillful mix of subtlety and ferocity.
     In resolute terms, the author of the article John Arquilla makes it clear that in the history of the USA there were 3 different wars on terror which were lead by Ronald Reagan, by George W. Bush and by Barack Obama.
     There is a lot of comment on the difference in the approaches taken by American two most recent presidents Barack Obama and George W. Bush. Speaking of these differences. it is interesting to note that Bush chose to attack other nations in his attempt to create a less permissive international environment for terrorist networks, and Obama has decided to take the more direct approach: going straight after the networks. As a result, it was revealed that Bush's strategy proved exceptionally costly and highly problematic in Iraq, and even his initial success in "going small" in Afghanistan was all too soon overtaken by a stalemate-inducing impulse to send large numbers of troops there. Besides, there are indications that Obama's concept of operations, on the other hand, has been working well, and will never break the bank or exhaust our military -- especially in the wake of his realizing, and reversing, the folly of surging more troops into Afghanistan, as senior military leaders persuaded him to do early in his presidency.
     In addition, in vigorous terms John Arquilla expresses the view that the  campaign that Obama is now pursuing strongly resembles Reagan's after the October 1983 bombing of the Marine barracks in Beirut that killed 242 Americans. Speaking of this first war on terror, it is necessary to note that the signal success of  it came in a campaign against the Abu Nidal Organization -- the al Qaeda of the ‘80s -- which was conducting terrorist hits for hire on behalf of Iraq, Libya, and Syria. However, giving the appraisal of the situation it's necessary to point out that despite this success, and for all of Reagan's enthusiasm  little else came to pass. This was because many senior military leaders worried about the ethics of Reagan's war on terror, afraiding that it could lead to the deaths of innocents.
In this connection it is worth while mentioning the fact that  Barack Obama has done much better by hewing close to the concept that Reagan initially embraced. But, John Arquilla condemns, that as was the case with Reagan, there is now a similar battle going on for Obama's strategic soul. For all the nimble, networked operations he has overseen, Obama did allow senior military advisers to talk him into surging large numbers of conventional forces into Afghanistan -- at great cost and, at best, with mixed results.
     In the conclusion the author suggests that in the battle for Reagan's strategic soul, the conventional thinkers won out because they convinced him that there was far too much of the "dark side" in the  plan. In the battle for Barack Obama's strategic soul, the "overwhelming force" approach has not yet carried the day - and with luck it won't.
     As for me,   I think it is difficult to change the situation with terrorism unless some countries and their governments stop playing double, intruding into other countries' own affairs and when social disruption and bureaucracy will be reduced...I don't consider the USA is able to liquidate world terrorism and think that only collaboration of different countries together can change the situation for the better.

My Pleasure Reading. Pride and Prejudice by Jane Austen. Summary (pages 1-99)

     The garrulous and empty-headed Mrs Bennet has only one aim – to find a good match for each of her five daughters.  And when a wealthy Mr. Bingley moves into the neighborhood and becomes interested in her eldest daughter, Jane, Mrs. Bennet becomes happy and tries to push them together in every possible way. However, Mr. Bingley hasn’t come alone, but with his sisters and a close friend Mr. Darcy, who is rich and attractive, but too proud. He makes a comment on Lizzy that she is not handsome enough to tempt him. After a while, Mr. Bingley's sisters asked  Jane for a dinner. Jane, following the advice of her mother, rides over to the Bingley mansion in the rain, gets wet, falls ill, and has to remain in the Bingley house. Elizabeth arrives to nurse her sister and starts to communicate with Mr. Darcy, Mr. Bingley and his sisters. Darcy, to his surprise, finds himself attracted to Elizabeth.  Several days later Jane gets better and Mr. Bingley promises her mother and sisters Kitty and Lydia, who have come to visit Jane, to organize the ball in his house.

     Meanwhile, Mr. Collins, the only heir of the Bennet’s estate, arrives for a visit. Mr. Collins has decided that the nice thing to do is to marry one of the Bennet girls in order to preserve their home, and chooses Elizabeth as his future wife. One evening at the dinner, Lizzy is introduced to Mr. Wickham who tells her what an awful man Darcy is. Elizabeth believes Wickham's story, and also learns that Lady Catherine is Mr. Darcy's aunt. The next day, all the Bennet girls are invited to a ball at Netherfield. Elizabeth is excited to see Mr. Darcy and Mr. Wickham confront each other. Mrs. Bennet tells everyone that Bingley will propose to Jane, Mary shows her non-existent musical talent, and Lydia and Kitty flirt with the military officers. Next day after the ball Mr. Collins makes a proposal to Elizabeth, but she rejects him (she considers him to be repulsive and foolish).

Rendering №6 (new)

     The article published on the website of the newspaper "The Guardian" on October 3 is headlined "Russia accuses al-Qaida of "forest jihad" in Europe". The article reports at length that Russia's top security official Alexander Bortnikov has alleged that al-Qaida was waging "forest jihad" in Europe by sparking the wildfires that have ravaged the continent in recent summers. In this respect it is worth while mentioning the fact that fire outbreaks in forests across Europe have become a yearly phenomenon, often blamed on human negligence. This year tens of thousands of hectares of land were set ablaze across Spain Portugal, the Balkans and southern Europe.
     Speaking of this situation it's necessary to point out that Bortnikov cited talk of "forest jihad" on various extremist websites and forums as evidence of the strategy. Giving appraisal of the situation it's necessary to point out that Nikolai Shmatkov, a forest expert at the Moscow office of the World Wildlife Fund dismissed Bortnikov's claim, saying "how involved al-Qaida is in this, how much they need to focus their forces not against the Americans, but against the Greeks and Spaniards, I can't say. I'm sceptical."Besides, Anton Orekh, a journalist at the liberal radio station, Ekho Moskvy also reacted with shock: "And when Russia's forests and peat bogs were burning in 2010, what was that? Also al-Qaida? And this summer in Siberia – was that also part of this 'thousand cuts' strategy?"
In resolute terms the author mentiones the fact that while Bortnikov provided no proof, his theory reflects public discussions among Islamic extremists in the summer issue of Inspire, the online propaganda publication run by al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula.
     The author concludes the article with the quotation on al-Qaida representatives:"Fire is one of the soldiers of Allah," it said."Imagine that, after all the damage is caused, if a jihad organisation were to take responsibility for the forest fires," it said. "You can imagine the dread it would cause people in the United States, Europe, Russia, and Australia."
     As for me,  I think it is strange to blame only al-Qaida on their responsibility for the wildfires in Europe and Russia. I think that the key factor of wildfires in Mediterranean is the human one. In this case,  I agree with  Nikolai Shmatkov who says that it is strange that al-Qaida focuses their forces more againsts Greeks and Spaniards than against Americans who  made more harm to Muslims than the others. Finally, it is common knowledge that the real causes of forest fires in Russia (2010) were draught, heat and human factors.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/oct/03/russia-al-qaida-forest-jihad

Review №2

Rendition (2007)

Cast: 

Reese Witherspoon, Meryl Streep, Peter Sarsgaard, Alan Arkin, Jake Gyllenhaal and Omar Metwally.

Director: 

Gavin Hood

Synopsis:

 Anwar El-Ibrahimi (Omar Metwally) - Egyptian-born chemical engineer, but with  Lawful Permanent Residence in the USA, mysteriously vanishes on a routine flight from South Africa to Washington. His American wife Isabella (Reese Witherspoon), in her turn, embarks on an international search for her missing husband. At the same time, a CIA analyst (Jake Gyllenhaal) arrives at a clandestine detention facility outside of the United States, where he is forced to interrogate  El-Ibrahimi using unorthodox methods......

Review:

     The story centers on the covert arrest of Egyptian born chemical engineer and, at the same time, a football coach in the American school. On his way home to the USA he is captured by CIA agents on suspicion of implication in the terrorist suicide attack. Then he is sent to North Africa to  a secret detention facility near the location of that suicide attack, where he is tortured and interrogated. Meanwhile, his wife Isabella desperately tries to find him with the help of her old friend Alan Smith (Peter Sarsgaard) who is Senator Hawkins' aid. But what Alan does is just advises her to find a good lawyer who knows what to do in such cases. Isabella doesn't want to believe that her husband is involved in terrorist organizations and refuses. In fact, what Anwar is accused of is just supposed phone calls from the terrorists and his Egyptian origin, in spite of the fact, that most of his life he has spent in the USA and his examination on the lie detector showed him to be innocent. So, I think here we see an example of how the government's anxiety about its people in practice ruins them, and the "democratic" country shows its real face, using tortures to innocent people and telling everybody that they are the most tolerant nation in the world.
    Douglas Freeman is a CIA analyst who survives in the suicide bombing that kills his co-worker, and is roped into observing the torture of  Anwar El-Ibrahimi as a part of an investigation.Such job is new for him and soon he cannot stand it, uderstanding that Anwar is innocent. Douglas, at his own risk, releases Anwar and does what he can to return him back to a normal life (leaks the details of Anwar's detention to the American press, creating a scandal). Douglas shows us an example that even in such organizations like CIA can be people not indifferent to breaches of justice and who can be responsible for their decisions, not afraiding of the possible consequences.
     Another story line here is that of Abasi Fawal, his daughter Fatima and her boyfriend Khali. Abasi Fawal is  a high-ranking police official,who cooperates with CIA and interrogates Anwar, torturing him. Asabi himself is the target of the suicide attack.  Asabi founds his daughter Fatima a new husband, but being in love with Khali, she rans away from her home as a protest. Later she founds out that Khali belongs to the terrorist organization and his mission is to kill her father. She tries to stop him when it is too late and, as a result, the explosion takes place which kills them both. Here we see an example of how teenagers have become the victims of cruel, ruthless people and the strict political regime.
    As for the perfomance, I think that the cast is superb. Reese Witherspoon, in spite of that her heroine is pregnant ,can show her as a brave woman able to do everything to find her husband. Jake Gyllenhaal (one of my favourite actors) demonstrates us a CIA agent with a heart who is capable of not doing things under orders and can point out to his superiours that they are wrong.Omar Metwally deserves ovations for his portrayal of Anwar El-Ibrahimi. His suffering during the  torture makes you feel sympathy for his hero. Meryl Streep makes her work as brilliantly as usual. I think that such roles as in this film are her best ones. But the greatest impression on me has made the actress who performs Khali's grandmother (sorry I don't know her name). Watching her I couldn't help feeling that she reminds me of my own grandmother. Her emotions are the most realistic ones during the whole film. When she cried I cried with her.
   All in all, such films as "Rendition" make us think of different problems. The main one here is the problem of terrorism. There is no justification for it. Terrorism nowadays is assosiated with Islam, but I don't think that this religion as well as others allows to kill people and make suicides. To make it clear, I want to say that true Muslims are supposed to lead their lives according to the Qur'an and the Sunnah, which are the holy books for all Muslims. The real meaning of Islam is submission to almighty Allah and that means peace. From that point of view any terroristic act is a disgrace for a Muslim. As for Jihad, it means to strive and struggle for Allah, not to kill. And to strive and struggle for Allah, you should first correct yourself, learn Islam properly, become a good Muslim, help and be kind to people regardless of their religion, culture, values, race, etc. So there can't be a place to suicide attacks for Allah....Besides, this film shows us a real face of the USA, a country, where in fact, there is no place for democracy at all. A really democratic country cannot caught, torture and interrogate innocent people just because it has unchecked information about their supposed "crime".
I like this film, it makes me think of how much pain and grief people can bring to each other.

Rendering №6

   The article published on the website of the newspaper The Guardian on 15.04.2009 is headlined as Taliban execute eloping young lovers in Afganistan. The article reports at length that a young couple who tried to elope in one of the most lawless and conservative parts of Afghanistan have been publicly executed by Taliban gunmen after their parents handed them over to be tried by insurgents. Speaking of this situation it is necessary to note that the couple had fled to a nearby village and were planning to start a life together without the permission of their parents, but they were found by their parents and turned over to the Taliban, who held them for four days in Lokhi's mosque before putting them on trial. There is a lot of comment of different people on this situation. For example, Ghulam Dastageer Azad, the governor of Nimroz, said the couple's execution was "against Islam, against the law and against the constitution". In this connection it is worth while mentioning the fact that a recent report by a human rights group said the Taliban systematically terrorise civilians with threatening "night letters", executions and limb amputations in order to force communities not to support the government. Taliban commanders are even issued with manuals telling them what techniques to use and who to target. Analyzing this situation it's necessary to point out that although the provincial governor, chief of police and leader of the local council all claimed Taliban gunmen were responsible for the murders, a spokesman for the movement denied Taliban involvement, though he found the punishment rightful.
   All in all the author of the article doesn't express his own opinion - he just plainly describes the fact and opinions of other people. As for me, I find this situation impossible and disgusting. Of course, it was a very bad thing for these people to escape from their homes without permission, but they didn't deserve to die - to be murdered only because they were deeply in love with each other. There is no justification for Talibans who killed them. And I agree with Ghulam Dastageer Azad, the governor of Nimroz opinion that the couple's execution was "against Islam, against the law and against the constitution".  Talibans are not Muslims - they are terrorists. Even if the spokesman of the movement do not confirm it, he approves such actions. It is inhumane.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/apr/15/afghanistan-taliban-lovers-elope-nimroz

Rendering №5

   The editorial published on the website of the newspaper "The Telegraph" on the 1st of October is headlined as "The forgotten war".  The article takes a critical view of a strange forgetfulness of the current president of the USA  Barack Obama (he is also the candidate for the presidential elections) and Mitt Romney, the Republican challenger for the White House on the issue of the war conflict in Afganistan, which has already claimed life of  2,000 of Americans.
   The author of the article expresses the view that with the presidential election race now entering its final stages, Mr Obama appears strangely reluctant to address the Afghan issue, in spite of the fact, that  the Afghan conflict is supposed to be “Obama’s War” – a “war of necessity” against Islamist terrorists, as opposed to his predecessor’s war of choice in Iraq.Speaking of this situation it is interesting to note that Mitt Romney shows the same attitude towards Afganistan: in his keynote speech to the Republican convention, he failed to mention the war, or to pay the customary tribute to America’s forces overseas. The reporter gives a warning that  with the future of the Afghan campaign hanging in the balance, this is an inopportune moment for America’s political classes to be suffering from a collective bout of amnesia.
   In the conclusion the author suggests that the Taliban remains a force to be reckoned with and if the West’s fragile gains do indeed unravel in such a fashion, neither Mr Obama nor Mr Romney will be able to ignore the implications. As for me, I find the behaviour of the American political leaders on such a crucial issue for their country and its people to be really strange. If you ignore the problem it does not mean that there is no any and it is especially referred to the future American president. And if Obama and Romney want to become real leaders of their country they cannot just stay apart and show indifference. If you start something you should finish it and be responsible for your decisions and possible consequences. The same referred to Obama and Romney: the presidential elections are not the reason to ignore the real problems which you will have to solve sooner or later.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/telegraph-view/9579084/The-forgotten-war.html

My Pleasure Reading. Summary (pages 179 - 210)

  Organizing Gatsby's funerals, Nick tries to get in touch with Daisy. He finds that the Buchanas have gone and left no forwarding address. After a while Nick discovers that as well as the Buchanas Jay's enormous circle of acquaintances has suddenly vanished. Many of them have left the city while others, including Meyer Wolfsheim and Kilpspringer, refuse to attend the funeral.The only attendances on Gatsby's funerals are Henry C. Gatz (Gatsby's father) and Owl Eyes (the drunk who was so astonished by Gatsby's library).

   Then Nick meets with Jordan Baker and ends their affair, because Jordan suddenly claims to be engaged to another man.

   Several month later, Nick runs across Tom Buchanan on New York's Fifth Avenue. Tom admits that it was he who sent Wilson to Gatsby's and says that Jay Gatsby deserved to die. Nick reflects that Tom and Daisy are capable only of cruelty and destruction; they are kept safe from the consequences of their actions by wealth and privilege.

  Nick determines to return to the Midwest. He reflects that he, the Buchanas, Gatsby, and Jordan are all Westeners who came east; perhaps they all possess some deficiency which makes them unsuitable to Eastern life. After Gatsby's death, the East seems to nick haunted and grotesque; the Midwest, by contrast, as idyllic as on Christmas.

   Staring at the moon on his last night in West Egg, Nick compares the green light at the end of Daisy's dock with the green continent of America, beckoning its dreamers. Gatsby failed to realize that his dream was already dead when he began to dream it: his goals, the pursuit of wealth and status were empty and meaningless. Nick thinks that contemporary Americans are "boats against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past"; any attempt to progress, to move forward, is futile.