Woman Accuses Her Sister of Trying to Ruin Gift She's Making for Their Mom's Milestone BirthdayNew Foto - Woman Accuses Her Sister of Trying to Ruin Gift She's Making for Their Mom's Milestone Birthday

Shutterstock / AYO Production A woman has labeled her sister "a complete cow" for refusing to contribute to a gift she's making for their mom's milestone birthday Venting on Mumsnet, she explained that her sister "hasn't got time" to write a message and send photos for a family scrapbook Responses to the post were divided on whether she should go ahead with choosing her own selection of photos of her mom and sister to include in the homemade gift A woman is furious that her sister won't contribute to a gift she's making for their mom. The woman explained in a post on the U.K.-based forumMumsnetthat she asked everyone in her family to send her photos and messages to include in a scrapbook for her mom's 90th birthday gift. Despite having given everyone months to get the items together, her sister said she can't contribute to the sentimental present. "Pretty much everyone has, except my eldest sister, who tells me she 'hasn't got time' and that it's a gift from me, and she's already got her gift sorted! 🤦‍♀️ Kind of not the point!!" the woman wrote. The PEOPLE Appis now available in the Apple App Store! Download it now for the most binge-worthy celeb content, exclusive video clips, astrology updates and more! Getty She claimed not to be "that surprised" as her sister has rarely supported her when doing anything similar in the past. "What I want to do is send her a reply saying she's sort of missing the point, and how hard can it be to send a few photos & a message," the woman said. "But - am I right in thinking there's little point! "She's not stupid. She's doing it to try & sink my idea, simple as that. (She won't - I've got loads of other nice stuff to include!)," the woman continued. "AIBU [am I being unreasonable]  in thinking she's a complete cow??" she added, referring to her sister. Several commenters advised the woman to choose her own selection of photos of her sister and mom together to include in the scrapbook. However, others argued that the backstory of her sister and mom's relationship should be taken into consideration for why her sibling may be reluctant to contribute to the personalized gift. "I'm on your sister's side here. I hate when people turn their gift into a job for me," one person wrote. "It's happened several times and I wish I'd put my foot down and said no. It would be different if it was a group effort and everyone had agreed to it before starting. "She might not think that the gift is the same great idea that you think it is," the same person added, referring to the woman's sister. Getty Another said, "Surely you have some photos of you both to include. Yabu [you are being unreasonable], making an issue of this." Never miss a story — sign up forPEOPLE's free daily newsletterto stay up-to-date on the best of what PEOPLE has to offer​​, from celebrity news to compelling human interest stories. A third commented, "Or it could also be that your sister just thinks that whole photo book thing is a bit naff and doesn't want to contribute. I mean, respectfully, I wouldn't purchase that sort of thing for my mum, and my mum wouldn't really like that sort of thing either, she'd prefer a bottle of Chanel No 5. "Now your mum might love it and you're clearly excited to do it for her, which is lovely. But if your sister doesn't agree, I don't think that makes her a cow. Just leave her out of it," they added. Read the original article onPeople

Woman Accuses Her Sister of Trying to Ruin Gift She’s Making for Their Mom’s Milestone Birthday

Woman Accuses Her Sister of Trying to Ruin Gift She's Making for Their Mom's Milestone Birthday Shutterstock / AYO Production A woma...
Woman Says a Neighbor Walked into Her Home Uninvited to Ask a Question: "I Felt Really Uncomfortable"

Getty A woman says she felt "really uncomfortable" after a neighbor walked into her home without being invited She explained that while her 12-year-old son answered the door and called out to let her know that the neighbor was there, no actual adult had invited the other woman inside The woman detailed her experience on a popular community site, where a number of people said they thought she was overreacting A woman saysthat a neighborentered her home without being invited in by an adult, and she's wondering if she's "unreasonable" to "find this rude." The woman detailed her story in a forum on the U.K.-based community site Mumsnet.com, a place where women can seek advice about interpersonal dilemmas. In herpost, the woman says that her new neighbor has a son who her own 12-year-old son plays with in a communal garden area outside their homes. She says that recently, the other mom — whom she calls "Nadia" — came by "to ask me something." The woman explainsthat her sonwas the one who opened the door for Nadia, and that he then called out to let her know Nadia was there. Getty "By the time I'd got to the hallway, she was inside my home, almost in my lounge!" the original poster (OP) says, adding, "She entered my homewithout being invited, and I felt really uncomfortable, as I've only met her once before, shortly after they moved in a few weeks ago." The PEOPLE Puzzler crossword is here! How quickly can you solve it? Play now! "Am I being unreasonable to find this rude?" she asks at the end of her post, before asking for "advice" on "how to tackle this." A number of commenters said that they thought the OP was overreacting, and some even said that her instinct in the situation — aka, leaving a neighbor out on her doorstep — would have beenthe ruder scenario. "You might consider that it would have been rude of your son to leave the mother of a playmate outside as though she were an unwanted door-to-door salesman," one person said. Getty "I don't think that's rude," said someone else, adding, "If a child you know opens the door, you go in and shut the door behind you so the child is not hanging around the open doorway." Never miss a story — sign up forPEOPLE's free daily newsletterto stay up-to-date on the best of what PEOPLE has to offer​​, from celebrity news to compelling human interest stories. Someone else said, "Meh. It's not as if she opened the door herself and walked in. Your son opened the door. I mean, you could argue that it'sa teensy bit cheeky, but not to the point that you need to 'tackle' it." Others said that while they did find Nadia's behavior a bit forward, they also wouldn't bother doing anything about it. "Personally, yes, if I was 'Nadia', I would have waited for an adult to come to the door and invite me in. However, if I was the OP I would absolutely nottackleNadia (what the hell would you even say to her!) and I certainly wouldn't be steaming mad about the whole thing." Read the original article onPeople

Woman Says a Neighbor Walked into Her Home Uninvited to Ask a Question: "I Felt Really Uncomfortable"

Woman Says a Neighbor Walked into Her Home Uninvited to Ask a Question: "I Felt Really Uncomfortable" Getty A woman says she felt ...
He was at the center of a Supreme Court case that changed gay marriage. Now, he's worried.New Foto - He was at the center of a Supreme Court case that changed gay marriage. Now, he's worried.

WhenJim Obergefellwas sitting in the gallery at theSupreme CourtonJune 26, 2015, he was waiting to hear his name. The justices were preparing to rule on Obergefell v. Hodges, a case that became a landmark in the progress towardLGBTQ+ rights in the U.S.The case, which considered the rights of same-sex couples to marry, ultimately won favor with a majority of the justices, but for Obergefell, the moment wasn't, and could never be, totally complete. His husband, John Arthur, died years before the ruling was announced. Now, 10 years on, he sat down with USA TODAY to reflect on how their love for each other helped shape the fight for marriage equality in the U.S., and what progress there is to still be made in the fight for equality. Obergefell and Arthur met in 1992 and became engaged in 1993. That's when their journey asmarriage equalitypioneers first began – and for Obergefell, continues into the present. This conversation has been edited for length and clarity. Question: You got engaged with a traditional diamond ring, even though there was no formal option for marriage. What did that ring mean to you in 1993? Answer: You know, that diamond ring signified you're the person I choose. You're the person I want to spend my life with, and we don't have the ability to do anything legal, but at least you know that's how I feel. And from there, what was your journey to get married? John and I just built a life together. We bought our first house. We built a great circle of friends and family in Cincinnati, people who saw us and treated us as a couple, as a committed couple. It wasn't until 2011 that things really took an unexpected turn. John wasdiagnosed with ALS. Instead of seeing a few decades more together, we knew our time together was limited to two to five years or less. John progressed fairly rapidly, and by April of 2013 he started at home hospice care. We could have put him in a facility, but we had to think about things that other couples didn't have to think about. How would he be treated as a gay man in a facility? How would I be treated as his partner of almost 21 years? We had nothing legal, no rights and we made the decision: Let's do at-home hospice care because that meant I could keep him safe and comfortable. At what point did you really start to feel like you needed to fight for this for legal marriage recognition? On June 26, 2013, I was standing next to his bed holding his hand when news came out from theSupreme Courtthat with their decision in the United States v. Windsor, they struck down the federal Defense of Marriage Act. That was that law that defined marriage as between only one man and one woman. And we hadn't talked about marriage again since the mid-90s. But as that news was sinking in, I realized, wait, we've always wanted to get married. Here's our chance we could get married and at least have the federal government see us, recognize us, treat us as a married couple. So I spontaneously proposed and he said, yes. How did you go from this discussion to eventually suing the state and ultimately winding up in the Supreme Court? Because we lived in Ohio, which had its own state-level Defense of Marriage Act, we couldn't get a marriage license or get married at home. Through the generosity of our family and friends, they covered the cost of a chartered medical jet. And we flew from Cincinnati to Baltimore-Washington International Airport on July 11, 2013. We stayed in that medical jet (on the tarmac). And I got to take his hand, and we got to say "I do." A local civil rights attorney read about ourstory in the Cincinnati Enquirer, and he reached out through mutual friends to say, "hey, I would like to come talk to you because you have a problem you probably haven't thought about." Five days after we got married, Al Gerhardstein came to our home and he pulled out a blank Ohio death certificate. "When John dies, this document, his last record as a person, will be wrong," he said, "because here, where it says marital status at time of death, Ohio will fill this out and say that John was unmarried. In the space for surviving spouse name, Jim, your name won't be there." John and I knew Ohio wouldn't recognize our marriage. But that was abstract. That document, knowing that John's last record would be wrong, made that abstract understanding real. And it hurt. It made us angry. So when (Al) said, "Do you want to do something about it?" (John and I) talked about it for less than a minute and said yes. So that was Tuesday, five days after we got married. On Friday, eight days after we got married, we filed a lawsuit in federal district court suing the governor of Ohio, John Kasich, and the attorney general, Mike DeWine. Because of John's health, the federal judge had to clear his docket, and he heard arguments on the case on Monday, 11 days after we got married. And that very day, he ruled in our favor. And then John died three months later to the day, but he died a married man. So the record was correct at his time of death. And your name is on his death certificate, but the the fight didn't stop there. The judge ruled in your favor, but it went on to an appeal and got overturned. How did you decide at that point, once the record was correct in your paperwork, that you were going to keep on with the fight? When Al said, "do you want to keep fighting?" my immediate answer was, "of course I do." If I don't, I'm not living up to my promises to John. I promised to love, honor and protect him. And if I don't keep fighting this to make sure our marriage can't be erased, then I'm failing in my promises. How did gay marriage become legal?Civil unions in this state paved the way 25 years ago. I've seen in other interviews you've said that you never really considered yourself an activist. So how did you go from Jim from Ohio, to suing the state of Ohio and becoming a gay rights figurehead? It's because of John, because we loved each other and we wanted to exist. Learning that our right to call each other husband and to have it mean something wasn't going to be reflected on his death certificate, it broke our hearts, but I think the more important thing is it really made us angry. I loved John. He loved me back. We finally had the chance to say I do. But then understanding how our home state, the state where I was born and raised, would completely disregard us, made me angry, made us both angry. It's amazing what will happen when you love someone enough, when you're willing to fight for what you know is right. You were in D.C. the day the decision came down, like, what was that experience like, and what were you thinking about? I thought about John missing him, loving him. I thought about so many people who I had met over the course of the case, the people who were coming up to me and sharing photos and telling me stories and talking about what this potential decision meant to them and what it meant to the person they loved. And then just the unexpected realization that for the first time in my life as agay man, I actually felt like an equal American. I wasn't expecting to feel that, and that was a really beautiful realization. I feel equal. In case you missed:Portion of Americans satisfied with US stance on LGBTQ is lowest in decade And now you are in the history books. What does that feel like? When I really feel the the importance of this is every single time someone stops me, hugs me, starts crying, shares photos of their family, of their spouse, of their child, and tells me stories. It's a gift every single time it happens, because I see in their faces what marriage equality meant to them, to their family, to their loved ones. Are you nervous that Obergefell might be overturned one day? And what do you think the biggest fight our community faces right now is? Yes, I'm worried about marriage equality. If Obergefell is overturned, we go back to a time or a place where a queer couple in Ohio, where I live, might want to get married, but Ohio could refuse to issue a marriage license because Ohio still has a state level Defense of Marriage Act on the books. Our biggest challenge is making sure we don't lose the progress we have made. We have to be fighting together to make sure every marginalized community keeps the rights that they have gained. We can't do this alone. We have to be fighting for every marginalized community, not just ours. And unfortunately, right now, thetrans community, they're bearing the brunt of it. What do you tell young people now, given all of the challenges that we just discussed, what do you say to give them continued hope? The most important thing is they're not alone. There are countless people like me who are activists, who are involved, who care and are out there fighting on the street, in our state legislatures, in the halls of government. There are millions of people out there who believe in their humanity, in their dignity and their right to a future. Zach Wichter is a travel reporter and writes the Cruising Altitude column for USA TODAY. He is based in New York and you can reach him at zwichter@usatoday.com. This article originally appeared on USA TODAY:Jim Obergefell on LGBTQ+ rights 10 years after Supreme Court ruling

He was at the center of a Supreme Court case that changed gay marriage. Now, he's worried.

He was at the center of a Supreme Court case that changed gay marriage. Now, he's worried. WhenJim Obergefellwas sitting in the gallery ...
Illegal border crossings at record lows as crackdown spreadsNew Foto - Illegal border crossings at record lows as crackdown spreads

SUNLAND PARK, New Mexico ‒ The U.S.-Mexico border used to buzz with illegal migration at a scale President Donald Trump called an "invasion." Now soldiers surveil the desert from military vehicles, Border Patrol radios are silent and illegal crossings have fallen to record lows. Reaching far beyond the border, deep into the country's heartland, Trump insists America is under "invasion" and has continued to invoke wartime powers to stop it. He has transformed the borderland into a military base, made arrests by masked agents a common sight in America and packed detention centers with immigrants, the vast majority without criminal records. Trump's aggressive actions – and protestors'increasingly violent opposition– have touched off a furious national debate about civil rights, the rule of law and what the word "invasion" really means. Trump is known for his verbal flourishes, but declaring an "invasion" in numerous executive actions is one way to unlock extraordinary federal authorities, often reserved for wartime, said Jessica Vaughan, of the right-leaning Center for Immigration Studies. "It was not just meant to rile people up, or to just be used as a melodramatic description, but it was meant to trigger a certain response under certain authorities," she said. The word "invasion" appears in at least 12 of Trump's executive orders, proclamations and memoranda since he took office Jan. 20, according to a USA TODAY review. He has ramped up military rhetoric in official orders, even as his administration touts its success in stopping border crossings. In aMay 9 proclamation, after months of increased border security, Trump declared that he wants to "end this invasion, remove the illegal-alien invaders from the United States, and protect the American people." The mass arrival of migrants under PresidentJoe Bidenpushed the United States to its highest percentage of foreign-born people in a century. Trump's moves to reverse it by deporting millions is transforming the country again, redefining what it means for the United States to be a nation of immigrants. From immigration raids at construction sites in Florida, dairy farms in Vermont and restaurants in California; to the detentions of college students in Massachusetts and targeting of alleged gang members in Colorado apartment complexes, the Trump administration is sending a firm message to millions of immigrants: You aren't welcome here. The president's most vocal supporters see a chief executive delivering rapid results. Craig Johnson, 67, rallied for Trump ata campaign stop in Las Vegaslast year. The Navy vet supports the ramp-up in deportations – especially after the VA recently cut back his benefits, he said. He is appealing the cutback, but he also believes immigrants have drained resources. "There are so many people that were here illegally that were getting food stamps or medical," he said. "The impact it's had on citizens is just horrendous." But other Americans are growing increasingly concerned as the president's agents adopt aggressive, fear-inducing arrest tactics and widen their net to target otherwise law-abiding immigrants alongside murderers, rapists, and drug dealers. "They've created a war zone in our community for a war that's imagined," said Laura Lunn, director of advocacy and litigation for the Rocky Mountain Immigrant Advocacy Network. "It's making us all feel less safe. People are losing trust in law enforcement." Some migrant advocates are becoming militant in their opposition to Trump's agenda, in some cases adopting tactics commonly associated with resistance fighters, mapping the movement of ICE agents and increasingly engaging in physical confrontations. On June 6 and 7, hundreds of protestors clashed violently with federal agents in Los Angeles, after dozens of immigrant arrests were carried out by masked agents riding in armored vehicles. The Trump administration dispatched U.S. Border Patrol tactical agents to the city in response and deployed 2,000 members of the National Guard. L.A. Mayor Karen Bass condemned how agents carried out the detentions. "These tactics sow terror in our communities and disrupt basic principles of public safety in our city," she said in a statement. "We will not stand for this." Some former immigration agents and military personnel also have concerns about the new enforcement tactics. In California, retired Homeland Security Investigations special agent Patrick Comey dedicated three decades of his life to enforcing U.S. immigration laws. But the Trump administration's tactics – splashy arrests by agents in heavy tactical gear – are "becoming more and more distressing every day." "This is not the America that I was trained to serve," he told USA TODAY. Army veteran Jose Diaz was outside the Buona Forchetta Italian restaurant in San Diego on May 30, when immigration agents tried to drive their vehicles through an angry crowd and deployed two flash-bang grenades, one of which went off by his foot. Diaz said he had never seen soldiers overseas use such tactics on a crowd of unarmed civilians. "We had much stricter rules of engagement than these agents had," he said. On a morning in mid-May, near the rusted steel U.S.-Mexico border fence in southern New Mexico, soldiers surveilled the desert from inside an eight-wheeled Stryker vehicle. Hours went by without a single illegal crossing. Trump's aggressive new policies helped drive down illegal migration at the Mexican border, accelerating a sharp decline that began in the last year of the Biden administration. Citing the "invasion," Trump deployed troops to Texas, New Mexico, Arizona and California and declared a strip of land along the border a "National Defense Area." Migrants who enter that territory can be charged with illegal entry and trespassing on a military installation. The administration is already shifting its focus from the border to the country's interior. "The prior administration allowed unchecked millions of aliens to illegally enter the United States," Trump said in an April 28 executive order. "This invasion at the southern border requires the federal government to take measures to fulfill its obligation to the states." Stephen Miller, Trump's top immigration advisor, has long argued that vast government powers and the military should be deployed to combat the migrant "invasion." Miller, who as White House deputy chief of staff has helped shape Trump's muscular new approach to immigration enforcement, argues liberal Americans are more interested in sob stories about law-breaking immigrants than they are about protecting their country. On social media, hecalled the protests in Los Angeles"an insurrection against the laws and sovereignty of the United States," adding in a comment directed to Bass, the mayor: "You have no say in this at all. Federal law is supreme and federal law will be enforced." But Trump's reliance on the military to combat the "invasion" has some critics worried that a president who grows accustomed to using the military in one arena may be increasingly willing to deploy soldiers elsewhere inside the country. The border military build-up "is part of an effort to take on internal missions," said Adam Isacson, director of defense oversight for the left-leaning Washington Office on Latin America. "The authoritarian needs an enemy to start, to galvanize the population," he said. "You use the word invasion; it's immigrants for now." Courts around the country have put the brakes on some of Trump's efforts to reverse or combat the "invasion." Federal judges have been quick to thwart his more controversial efforts, from his invocation of the 1798 Alien Enemies Act to deport certain immigrants without due process; to his targeting of pro-Palestinian protesters because the White House didn't like what they said. Prof. Michael Kagan, who runs the Immigration Clinic at the University of Nevada-Las Vegas law school, said Trump's use of wartime language reflects the administration's deliberate effort to sway both the courts and public opinion by invoking national security. During war, he said, the courts and the general public have given the president broad deference to exercise powers that could never be justified during peacetime. Kagan cited the preemptive incarceration of Japanese-Americans during World War II as an example of a presidential action that was at the time endorsed by the courts but later widely deemed both unconstitutional and morally wrong. "They're hoping to tap into a broader norm in America, where the courts allow the executive to get away with a lot more during a war," he said. Kagan said current efforts targeting immigrants are akin to to the military testing new weapons systems: a small number of agents trying different tactics against a relatively small number of people to find the most effective path forward to meeting Trump's 1-million-per-year deportation goal. "They're seeing what can we get away with," said Kagan, adding the courts should block any effort to curb due process before the practice becomes widespread. Congressappears poised to pour$150 billion in new funding to back Trump's efforts, according to an analysis of a reconciliation budget bill by theAmerican Immigration Council. That's more than double the current Department of Homeland Security budget and would represent a dramatic expansion of the department's reach. "If you think bad things are happening now, wait till they get tons more money," said Matthew Soerens, vice president of advocacy and policy for World Relief, a Christian humanitarian organization. The organization has argued against deporting people who benefitted from Biden-era immigration programs and followed the rules at the time. Soerens says what happened wasn't an "invasion." "We want DHS to have enough money to deport violent criminals and ensure secure borders," Soerens said. "We don't want them to have enough money to deport people who came here under the rules we gave them." Contributed:Eduardo Cuevas This article originally appeared on USA TODAY:Trump claims new wartime powers to step up immigration crackdown

Illegal border crossings at record lows as crackdown spreads

Illegal border crossings at record lows as crackdown spreads SUNLAND PARK, New Mexico ‒ The U.S.-Mexico border used to buzz with illegal mig...
Iranian rapper Tataloo once supported a hard-line presidential candidate. Now he faces executionNew Foto - Iranian rapper Tataloo once supported a hard-line presidential candidate. Now he faces execution

DUBAI, United Arab Emirates (AP) — The tattoos covering Iranian rapper Tataloo's face stand out against the gray prison uniform the 37-year-old now wears as he awaits execution, his own rise and fall tracingthe chaos of the last decade of Iranian politics. Tataloo, whose full name is Amir Hossein Maghsoudloo, faces a death sentence after being convicted on charges of "insulting Islamic sanctities." It's a far cry from when he once supported a hard-line Iranian presidential candidate. Tataloo's music became popular among the Islamic Republic's youth, as it challenged Iran's theocracy at a time when opposition to the country's government was splintered and largely leaderless. The rapper's lyrics became increasingly political afterthe 2022 death of Mahsa Aminiand the subsequent wave of nationwide protests. He also appeared in music videos which criticized the authorities. "When you show your face in a music video, you are saying, 'Hey, I'm here, and I don't care about your restrictions,'" said Ali Hamedani, a former BBC journalist who interviewed the rapper in 2005. "That was brave." The Iranian Supreme Court last month upheld his death sentence. "This ruling has now been confirmed and is ready for execution," judiciary spokesman Asghar Jahangir told reporters at a press conference last month. Activists have decried his looming execution and expressed concern for his safety after he reportedly tried to kill himself in prison. From a music video on a warship to exile Tataloo began his music career in 2003 as part of an underground genre of Iranian music that combines Western styles of rap, rhythm-and-blues and rock with Farsi lyrics. His first album, released in 2011, polarized audiences, though he never played publicly in Iran, where its Ministry of Culture and Islamic Guidance controls all concerts. Tataloo appeared in a 2015 music video backing Iran's paramilitary Revolutionary Guard and Tehran's nuclear program, which long has been targeted by the West over fears it could allow the Islamic Republic to develop an atomic bomb. While he never discussed the motivation behind this, it appeared that the rapper had hoped to win favor with the theocracy or perhaps have a travel ban against him lifted. In the video for "Energy Hasteei," or "Nuclear Energy," Tataloo sings a power ballad in front of rifle-wielding guardsmen and later aboard the Iranian frigate Damavand in the Caspian Sea. The ship later sank during a storm in 2018. "This is our absolute right: To have an armed Persian Gulf," Tataloo sang. Tataloo even issued an endorsement for hard-liner Ebrahim Raisi in 2017. That year, the two sat for a televised appearance as part of Raisi's failed presidential campaign against the relative moderate Hassan Rouhani.Raisi later won the presidency in 2021, but waskilled in a helicopter crash in 2024. Fame in Turkey, prison back in Iran In 2018, Tataloo — who faced legal problems in Iran — was allowed to leave the country for Turkey, where many Persian singers and performers stage lucrative concerts. Tataloo hosted live video sessions as he rose to fame on social media, where he became well-known for his tattoos covering his face and body. Among them are an Iranian flag and an image of his mother next to a key and heart. Instagram deactivated his account in 2020 after he called for underage girls to join his "team" for sex. He also acknowledged taking drugs. "Despite being a controversial rapper, Tataloo has quite the fanbase in Iran, known as 'Tatalities,'" said Holly Dagres, a senior fellow at the Washington Institute for Near-East Policy. "Over the years, they've flooded social media with messages of solidarity for him and even campaigned for the rapper's release in the past when he was detained on separate charges." Tataloo's rebellious music struck a chord with disenfranchised young people in Iran as they struggled to find work, get married and start their adult lives. He also increasingly challenged Iran's theocracy in his lyrics, particularly after the death of Amini following her arrest over allegedly not wearing the hijab to the liking of authorities. His collaboration "Enghelab Solh" — "Peace Revolution" in Farsi — called out Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei by name. "We don't want tear gas, because there are tears in everyone's eyes," he rapped. But the music stopped for Tataloo in late 2023. He was deported from Turkey after his passport had expired, and was immediately taken into custody upon arrival to Iran. Death sentence draws protests Tehran's Criminal Court initially handed Tataloo a five-year sentence for blasphemy. Iran's Supreme Court threw out the decision and sent his case to another court, which sentenced him to death in January. The rapper already faced ten years in prison for a string of separate convictions, including promoting prostitution and moral corruption. "Tataloo is at serious risk of execution," Mahmood Amiry-Moghaddam, the director of advocacy group Iran Human Rights, said in a statement. "The international community, artists and the public must act to stop his execution." Tataloo earlier expressed remorse at a trial. "I have certainly made mistakes, and many of my actions were wrong," he said, according to the state-owned Jam-e Jam daily newspaper. "I apologize for the mistakes I made." Tataloo married while on death row, his uncle said. Last month, Tataloo reportedly attempted to kill himself, but survived. His death sentence comes at a politically fraught moment for Iran as the country is at it's "most isolated," said Abbas Milani, an Iran expert at Stanford University. The Islamic Republic is "desperately trying to see whether it can arrive at a deal with the U.S. on its nuclear program and have the sanctions lifted," he said. Drawing the ire of Tataloo's fans is "one headache they don't need," he added. ___ EDITOR'S NOTE — This story includes discussion of suicide. If you or someone you know needs help, the national suicide and crisis lifeline in the U.S. is available by calling or texting 988. There is also an online chat at 988lifeline.org. ___ Associated Press writers Jon Gambrell in Vienna and Amir Vahdat in Tehran, Iran, contributed to this report.

Iranian rapper Tataloo once supported a hard-line presidential candidate. Now he faces execution

Iranian rapper Tataloo once supported a hard-line presidential candidate. Now he faces execution DUBAI, United Arab Emirates (AP) — The tatt...

 

ALPHA MAG © 2015 | Distributed By My Blogger Themes | Designed By Templateism.com