Connect with us

WOW

The US needs to meet its moral obligation to Afghan refugees

Published

on

After the fall of Saigon in 1975, the US took in more than 100,000 Vietnamese refugees in less than a year, a policy the government desperately needs to learn from as it deals with the impact of withdrawing from Afghanistan.

With the Taliban regaining power, thousands of Afghans are poised to flee a regime that’s expected to be not only more repressive than the previous government but also more hostile to US allies in the country.

Advertisement

Already, roughly 88,000 Afghans are estimated to have applied for special immigrant visas (SIVs), an immigration channel open to individuals who worked with the US government as well as their family members. In addition to people pursuing SIVs, other Afghan residents are expected to apply for refugee status if they’re able to do so.

Earlier this week, the Pentagon announced that the US intends to resettle 22,000 Afghan SIV applicants in the coming weeks, though the number of people trying to leave is expected to be much larger. According to a July New York Times report, 30,000 Afghans were fleeing the country on a weekly basis earlier this year.

As was the case following the Vietnam War, many experts see the US as holding a responsibility to provide safe harbor for people whose safety has been threatened by a conflict the country engaged in for the past 20 years.

Advertisement

“There was a sense that we had a moral obligation to help people out after failing them during the Cold War,” says Phuong Tran Nguyen, a history professor at California State University Monterey Bay and author of the book Becoming Refugee American. “I think this is what we’re seeing right now, this same parallel.”

 

 

Afghan families attempt to board aircraft at Kabul’s international airport on August 16, 2021.
 

In bringing Afghans to the US — refugees and those with SIVs — the government needs to streamline its vetting processes to quickly move endangered people to safety. Nguyen notes that to be successful, resettlement should focus on preserving community while acknowledging the trauma that people have endured, instead of pushing assimilation.

Advertisement

Although there are notable differences between the two conflicts, some of the dynamics the US is navigating now are similar to those that existed when Vietnamese refugees were resettled in the 1970s. Nguyen spoke with Vox about the Vietnamese resettlement process; the xenophobia and political backlash that refugees experienced at the time; the logistics of resettling people in various communities; and the lessons the government can take today from how its approached this issue in the past.

This conversation has been edited for length and clarity.

Li Zhou

Comparisons have been made between the withdrawals of the US from Afghanistan in recent days and the fall of Saigon. Could you talk about any parallels that you see between the two?

Advertisement

Phuong Tran Nguyen

I think there’s a lot of comparisons to be drawn — the first of which is, I think, you have two regimes that lasted for 20 years. Although in the case of Vietnam, the US had a really strong military presence for only 10 of those 20 years. But those regimes just rapidly collapsed once international troops were withdrawn.

There was a lack of morale, there was a lack of munitions, lack of cash, a withdrawal not only of US forces but resources as well.

[There’s also a parallel in the] kind of chaotic nature that we’ve seen on television and social media, the images we’ve seen of people trying to get out as quickly as possible … the inability for whatever reason of the US to be able to evacuate people in a timely order.

Advertisement

 

 

Displaced families fleeing violence take shelter at a makeshift camp in Kabul on August 14.
 

 

 

South Vietnamese refugees from Hue and the northern provinces wait for the government to relocate them on March 28, 1975.
 

I think what’s more important, from my perspective and my research, is looking at getting [Afghans] into this country and where they’re going to be resettled afterward.

My study is about Vietnamese refugees and understanding how refugees are different from immigrants. One is that their conditions of departure were involuntary, whereas immigrants left of, mostly, their own free will. But also it’s the perception and social conditions that existed at the time.

During most of the Cold War, 80 to 90 percent of the people we defined as refugees were trying to flee communist countries. And so we had a special political and moral motivation to [admit] them into this country. Political, because the US wanted to show how bad communism was. So by admitting people fleeing communist countries, we could show that the US was winning the Cold War and people were voting with their feet to indicate that this was a better choice. They would rather put their lives at risk and flee than live under communism.

Advertisement

But also because the US was actively involved in a lot of these countries that fell, there was a sense that we had a moral obligation to help people out after failing them during the Cold War. And those conditions applied in the case of Vietnam, especially, because of that 20-year commitment.

And I think this is what we’re seeing right now, this same parallel, that we have a moral obligation to, as Viet Nguyen says, move heaven and earth. And Michelle Goldberg stated just as much in different words in the editorial page of the New York Times: that our first priority should be to get people out. And I think that is a big deal that needs to be talked about more.

Advertisement

Li Zhou

What was the initial policy for bringing Vietnamese refugees and other Southeast Asian refugees to the US in the 1970s? And what lessons can the US take from its strengths and shortcomings?

Phuong Tran Nguyen

Refugee policy, in general, has always been a very ad hoc process where we just kind of deal with it as we go. [Author’s note: President Gerald Ford established a task force dedicated to resettling 130,000 refugees from the Vietnam War in the months after Saigon fell.]

I think the lesson that we learned from Vietnam is that [evacuating 130,000 people] was not going to be enough. That was just the tip of the iceberg. There are 2 million Vietnamese Americans in the United States today. And that doesn’t include Vietnamese people who left the country who wound up in other places like Canada or West Germany. So we have a huge diaspora of people who left during the Cold War.

Advertisement

I know it’s difficult because it’s a political lift, not just a bureaucratic lift, to be able to get people out and resettle them. At the moment, we only have about half a billion dollars allocated to refugee resettlement, and it’s going to have to be a lot, lot more.

They have to find a way to really make sure that governors and local politicians take as little of a hit as possible. And that’s kind of the political angle that’s really hard to bypass. But the good thing about it is that a lot of this resettlement is not necessarily done by government officials. It’s done through churches, charities, and other voluntary organizations, which create, hopefully, what I call in my book, a sponsorship bubble, where people are exposed to, obviously a segment of the United States that’s much more welcoming to them.

We have to convince people — especially after the narrative that the Biden administration and the administration during the Vietnam War advanced that these people were not willing to fight for their own country.

Advertisement

The baser and more xenophobic elements of our society use that to their advantage to say, “Well, why do we want them in our country, then,” which was the kind of arguments that were used when Vietnamese entered this country as well.

Li Zhou

Do you feel like the political climate toward refugees has shifted more favorably since the ’70s?

Phuong Tran Nguyen

I don’t know if it’s any different. I think one of the most famous facts that gets regurgitated over and over following the Vietnam War is the Gallup poll in May 1975, that indicated 54 percent of Americans opposed the resettlement of Indo-Chinese refugees. And so people assume that America was kind of anti-refugee. But if you put that into context, that’s actually an improvement from the 1930s and ’40s, when 70 percent of Americans opposed the resettlement of Jewish refugees into the country. I don’t think there was ever going to be a majority of people who absolutely favor this.

Advertisement

The question is where we are at historically. So if we can get it to even 40 percent [support], that’s kind of a good number, historically speaking.

Li Zhou

Could you walk through what the resettlement process looked like for Vietnamese refugees?

Phuong Tran Nguyen

I can tell you what happened with the first wave, which is, I guess, a good way to anticipate what might happen with this wave. If it’s anything like 1975, they’re getting airlifted to US military installations nearby or installations operated by US allies. From there, they’re getting clothed, fed, and the most important part is being vetted.

Advertisement

And I think that is, you know, politically fraught territory. If there are enough people that want them in, fine. But … you have to be able to anticipate the backlash as well. And what happened in ’75 was that people were fleeing for their lives, but the US was still treating them like immigrants. [They were] doing background checks on them and asking really trivial types of questions to see if they were fit to be in the United States, as though this was a kind of immigration processing facility.

 

 

More than 3,000 refugees from South Vietnam were relocated to a tent city at Crote Point on the Guam Naval Base.
 

After that, in 1975, after all these processing procedures were taken care of, and [people] passed their vetting, they were then relocated to four military bases in the United States. That would be their last processing place before they were going to be resettled in the United States. That was the Cold War process. I think what’s going to happen instead is [Afghan refugees] are going to be processed overseas. And once they’ve passed all the vetting, they’ll be flown to the United States. Hopefully, the Biden administration can bypass that and get these people out as quickly as possible.

Li Zhou

What happened after refugees were fully processed?

Advertisement

Phuong Tran Nguyen

In 1975, people ended up in these four military bases, Camp Pendleton near San Diego, Fort Chaffee in Arkansas, Eglin Air Force Base in Florida, and then Fort Indiantown Gap in Pennsylvania. Voluntary organizations working with the United States government [were] trying to find sponsors.

People don’t necessarily have family or friends; they didn’t have a job that was already waiting for them beforehand. They were not already set to go to school here. Because those are the usual sponsors that bring immigrants into this country: job, family, or school. And so these ad hoc sponsors get set up, sometimes they are families within the church organizations, voluntary agencies, sometimes they are employers. [Author’s note: Today, refugees don’t need “sponsors,” but many organizations effectively take on the role of helping refugees establish themselves in different communities.]

There’s a desire to get people out of the camps and resettled as quickly as possible. And there’s the other end of it: where refugees — especially those who don’t know anybody in the country, don’t know the language or the culture — they want to stick together as long as possible. There were stories in 1975 about a lot of refugees refusing to leave the camps if they couldn’t be joined by other people in the camp who either were family or they claimed were family. So, you know, there were some places and businesses that had success relocating large amounts of people.

Advertisement

In Arkansas, there were chicken factories that were looking for a lot of low-wage workers, and a lot of Vietnamese people got resettled working in chicken factories or in the fishing industry in Louisiana. And then eventually, what’s going to happen after these people get resettled is they are going to be pressured — if it’s anything like the ’70s — to become as economically self-sufficient as possible. To not be on welfare too long, to learn English as quickly as possible, which is what happened to my family.

My family is not part of the first wave; they’re part of the second wave, infamously called “boat people.” And when we got resettled within the United States, we didn’t really have a choice. You wait to see if somebody in the United States is willing to take you in and bring you over, and you become essentially like an adoptee. And there was one famous refugee who in his memoirs, he called his sponsors, Father and Mother No. 2. Because it was almost like that kind of very paternalistic relationship.

We’ll take you in, they find an apartment for you, they furnish your place, you know, help you out with groceries and food for a few weeks, and make sure that you’re doing all right before they leave the nest or you leave the nest. And we wound up in Binghamton, New York, stayed there for about six months or so.

Advertisement

My father decided we needed to leave because, as I said earlier, the emphasis [is] on getting refugees to be economically self-sufficient. The state of New York wouldn’t let my father go to school and work at the same time, whereas the state of California would. And so he and a lot of other people engaged in secondary migration from their initial resettlement spot to places like California, to places like Texas, where communities already existed, where they could actually open a business because a lot of people don’t necessarily speak English. So that’s the kind of process we can expect.

Li Zhou

When your family was moved to Binghamton, was that location something you had a say in?

Phuong Tran Nguyen

We didn’t have family members in the United States already; those who have family members, obviously, will get reunited with them. So no, we didn’t have a say. The United States wanted to make sure people had as little to say as possible, or it would have taken forever to evacuate the refugees. And that’s probably what’s going to go on right now: In order to get more people out, they have to make sure the refugee camps don’t get overcrowded, so that they can bring the next wave in. Otherwise, they have to keep opening up more and more refugee camps.

Advertisement

And the refugee camps are not meant to be a permanent place of residence for the next steps in the process. And so, no, they didn’t have to say; that’s why we ended up ending up Binghamton. That’s why refugees ended up all over the place, but because of secondary migration, especially because of the presence of ethnic economies, people were able to move — either because by moving, they’d be able to start a business of their own, because there was finally a customer base for what they had to sell. Or they could be the customers themselves and get the goods and services they needed.

 

 

A Vietnamese family, relocated to the US, sit on a stoop outside their home in the West Philadelphia on June 1984.
 

Li Zhou

Could you talk about some of the biggest challenges that Vietnamese refugees faced? And are there areas where you think the government should have done more to address those challenges?

Phuong Tran Nguyen

For people that I interviewed, I tried to bring a theoretical angle: What did it feel like to lose your country, and this and that? Were you worried about the war? But for most people, it is much more personal than that. Yeah, you’ve lost the war, you’ve lost your country, but most importantly, you’re going to be separated from your families forever.

Advertisement

What the US could have learned from the ’70s is to try to minimize the amount of disbursement that happened. It’s inevitable that people won’t all be located in California and New York, but if they can help it, to try to make the process as minimally traumatic as possible. So people aren’t staying in some remote area, without any sign of an Afghan community. And to really make assurances and make good faith efforts to reunite families. It’s going to be a long time before some people are reunited with their loved ones, because these people aren’t going to be able to get out anytime soon. Some might be jailed. And some might not survive this process.

I think the main thing is just making sure that people have an opportunity to build community, to have a little less of an emphasis on assimilation. And to assume that forgetting the past, just thinking forward is going to be enough to deal with the PTSD.

Li Zhou

Why do you think arguments to justify refugees still rely so much on the idea that they are model citizens who contribute to society, rather than just focusing on the moral responsibility to help people?

Advertisement

Phuong Tran Nguyen

I think part of it is the war scenario, that refugees are leaving countries that the US was at war with. And there’s this necessity of differentiating refugees from the people the United States was fighting. And I think most Americans are unable or unwilling to make that differentiation.

So when people come from Vietnam, there’s a good chance that they’ll encounter people who assumed that these are the people that the US was fighting in the first place. So there’s that kind of immediate, imminent threat element at stake right there, where there’s that need to differentiate folks.

And [the government] spent, you know, lots of political and cultural capital over the years, talking about the threat this nation posed to us, to US interests and freedom. And now you’re bringing people of that same country over, and you have to explain, “Oh, no, it was actually a civil war instead, and we’re bringing the people who are on our side, our friends. And so it’s a whole new ballgame.”

Advertisement

And, you know, this country has a very, very long history of xenophobia. … It’s a shame that we have to kind of engage in these battles and that we can’t go beyond it. But the reason we can’t go beyond it is because the anti-immigrant side is still there. As long as there’s a side that’s resistant, you still have to fight them.

Advertisement

Comentarios

0 Comentarios

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Comentanos

WOW

‘Wait Wait’ para el 9 de octubre de 2021: Ilana Glazer juega Not My Job

Published

on

‘Wait Wait’ para el 9 de octubre de 2021: Ilana Glazer juega Not My Job


El audio estará disponible más tarde hoy.

El programa de esta semana se grabó de forma remota con el presentador Peter Sagal, el juez oficial y anotador Bill Kurtis, la invitada de Not My Job Ilana Glazer y los panelistas Helen Hong, Adam Burke y Roxanne Roberts. Haga clic en el enlace de audio de arriba para escuchar el programa completo.

Advertisement

Andy Ryan / Andy Ryan / Amazonas

Ilana Glazer se arrodilla con una camisa blanca y jeans azules

Andy Ryan / Andy Ryan / Amazonas

Advertisement

¿Quién es Bill esta vez?
Meltdown de las redes sociales; Un banco realmente offshore; Juego de niños para Netflix

Preguntas del panel
La empresa familiar se vuelve demasiado joven

Advertisement

Fanfarronear al oyente
Nuestros panelistas cuentan tres historias sobre adultos jugando juegos de niños, de las cuales solo una es verdadera.

No es mi trabajo: cuestionamos a Ilana Glazer sobre las rosquillas
Ilana Glazer saltó a la fama como co-creadora y coprotagonista de Broad City. Ahora tiene un nuevo especial de comedia sobre la vida durante la pandemia en la ciudad de Nueva York. Como es Glazer, pensamos en preguntar sobre las cosas que se glasean: donas.

Preguntas del panel
Activando La Señal Rápida; Más pruebas que debe revisar; ¡Pantalones holgados para siempre!

Advertisement

Limericks
Bill Kurtis lee tres limericks relacionados con las noticias: ¿Por qué The Californian Cross The Road? Este año no debe tener disfraz de Halloween; Un hombre va audazmente

Relámpago rellena el espacio en blanco
Todas las noticias que no caben en ningún otro lugar

Predicciones
Después del éxito de Calamares, nuestros panelistas predicen cuál será el próximo gran éxito de Netflix.

Advertisement

Comentarios

0 Comentarios

Continue Reading

WOW

Presentamos a las 9 integrantes finales del grupo femenino de «Girl’s Planet 999»: Kep1er

Published

on

El episodio final de Mnetprograma de supervivencia Girls Planet 999 ha terminado, lo que significa que finalmente se han decidido los ganadores. Aquí están los nueve miembros del nuevo grupo de chicas. Kep1er.

Shen Xiaoting del Grupo C (Entretenimiento de primera clase) es el noveno miembro de Kep1er con 700.663 puntos de votantes.

Advertisement

Durante el transcurso del programa, Xiaoting, de 21 años, mostró sus habilidades con actuaciones de Producir 48«Rumor», «How You Like That» de BLACKPINK, «Fate» de Lee Sun Hee y la canción original «Snake» con Team Medusa. Su MBTI es ISFJ y su habilidad especial es la danza. Antes Girls Planet 999, Xiaoting también compitió en Producir Camp 2020.

| Mnet

De hecho, me estaba preparando para dejar el escenario. Porque en el anuncio anterior, siempre estuve en el rango 3. Pero fue una suerte. Muchas gracias por votar, Planet Guardians. Vine aquí con esperanza y preocupación, pero recuperé mi confianza y me probé a mí mismo que no soy tan malo. Creí que podía lograr todos mis objetivos. Gracias por los maestros. Buen trabajo a todos. A todos los miembros del personal, gracias. Y a todos nuestros compañeros de equipo, quiero decirles esto. Aunque no podemos estar juntos, estés donde estés, sé feliz y lo hiciste muy bien durante estos últimos meses.

– Discurso ganador de Shen Xiaoting

Advertisement

Aquí está la trayectoria de clasificación de Xiaoting desde el episodio uno hasta ahora:

Sakamoto Mashiro de J-Group (143 Entretenimiento) es el octavo miembro de Kep1er con 708.149 puntos de votantes.

Durante el transcurso del programa, Mashiro, de 21 años, mostró sus habilidades con las interpretaciones de “DUMDi DUMDi” de (G) I-DLE, “Fiesta” de IZ * ONE, “In the morning” de ITZY y la canción original “U + Yo = AMOR ”con el Equipo 7 Minutos AMOR. Su MBTI es INFP y sus habilidades especiales son bailar y cocinar.

Advertisement

| Mnet

En primer lugar, este fue mi sueño durante tanto tiempo. Muchas gracias a Planet Guardians. Esta vez, no pensé que lo lograría. Ni siquiera preparé el discurso. Muchas gracias por ayudarme hasta aquí. Gracias por ayudarnos a crecer, maestros. Esta audición fue la última oportunidad para mí, así que fue un gran regalo para mí. Amo a toda la gente que conocí aquí. Haré todo lo posible para convertirme en un gran artista. Además, mis amigos que todavía están esperando. Todas mis unnies y hermanas menores. ¡Te quiero todo! Gracias.

– Discurso ganador de Sakamoto Mashiro

Aquí está la trayectoria de clasificación de Mashiro desde el episodio uno hasta ahora:

Ezaki Hikaru de J-Group (Academia de artistas Avex) es el séptimo miembro de Kep1er con 713,322 puntos de votantes.

Advertisement

Durante el transcurso del programa, Hikaru, de 17 años, mostró sus habilidades con las presentaciones de «BOOMBAYAH» de BLACKPINK, «The Eve» de EXO, «No Excuses» de Meghan Trainor y la canción original «Snake» con Team Medusa. Su MBTI es ESFJ y su habilidad especial es rapear.

| Mnet

Honestamente, nunca pensé que podría llegar al grupo de debut. El hecho de que esté aquí en la final es irreal y estoy muy feliz. Gracias por votar por mí, Planet Guardians. ¡Estoy tan feliz! ¡Gracias!

– Discurso ganador de Ezaki Hikaru

Aquí está la trayectoria de clasificación de Hikaru desde el episodio uno hasta ahora:

Advertisement

El ex miembro de Busters Kang Yeseo (143 Entertainment) de K-Group es el sexto miembro de Kep1er con 770,561 puntos de los votantes.

En el transcurso del programa, Yeseo de 16 años mostró sus habilidades con las interpretaciones de “Crazy” de 4MINUTE, “Fiesta” de IZ * ONE, “Fate” de Lee Sun Hee y la canción original “Utopia” con Team UNICORN. Su MBTI es ENFJ, lo que significa que es una puta y su habilidad especial es la actuación.

| Mnet

En realidad … al principio, cuando los maestros eligieron el rango, mi rango bajó y bajó de nuevo. Así que esta vez, no pensé que pudiera estar en el Top 9, y eso me hizo sufrir. Me gustaría agradecer a los Guardianes del Planeta. Además, gracias por ayudarme a estar de pie en este escenario, miembros de nuestro personal y maestros. Ni siquiera me imaginé esto. Además, unnies. Gracias por apoyarme siempre. ¡Mashiro, lo logramos juntos! Estoy tan feliz ahora. Estoy muy agradecido con mis padres, mi oppa. ¡Gracias!

– Discurso ganador de Kang Yeseo

Advertisement

Aquí está la trayectoria de clasificación de Yeseo desde el episodio uno hasta ahora:

Seo Youngeun de K-Group (BIScuit Entertainment) es el quinto miembro de Kep1er con 781.657 puntos.

Durante el transcurso del programa, Youngeun de 16 años mostró sus habilidades con las presentaciones de «Kick It» de NCT 127, «How You Like That» de BLACKPINK, «My House» de 2PM y la canción original «U + Me = LOVE». con Team 7 LOVE Minutes. Su MBTI es ENTJ, y su habilidad especial es el hip-hop y el baile de grupos de chicos.

Advertisement

| Mnet

Para mí … Siempre estuve apoyando a las chicas que llegaron al Top 9. Pero gracias a todos los Planet Guardians que me apoyaron, logré debutar. Muchas gracias a todos los Guardianes del Planeta de todo el mundo. Además, gracias por ayudarme, maestros, para poder mostrar mi mejor esfuerzo a los Guardianes del Planeta. Además, a mi familia que estará viendo esto. Te amo demasiado. Mantenerse sano. Te amo. Amo a las 99 chicas. Y a las 18 chicas finales, muchas gracias y los amo. ¡Gracias!

– Discurso ganador de Seo Youngeun

Aquí está la trayectoria de clasificación de Youngeun desde el episodio uno hasta ahora:

Kim Dayeon de K-Group (Entretenimiento de medusas) es el cuarto miembro de Kep1er con 885.286 puntos de votantes.

Advertisement

Durante el transcurso del programa, Dayeon, de 18 años, mostró sus habilidades con las actuaciones de «Pop / Stars» de K / DA, «How You Like That» de BLACKPINK, «Ice Cream» de BLACKPINK y SELENA GOMEZ y la canción original «Snake». ”Con el equipo Medusa. Su MBTI es ESTP y su habilidad especial es la danza.

| Mnet

Antes de que comenzara el programa, ni siquiera esperaba el debut y simplemente hice lo mejor que pude. Pero llegar al grupo de debut … es tan irreal para mí ahora. Gracias por ayudarme y practicar conmigo, todos mis amigos. Gracias y los amo a todos. ¡Muchas gracias maestros, los amo! Por último, los miembros del personal, los escritores, los productores y todo el personal, muchas gracias. Y sobre todo, mis padres. ¡Hice mi debut! ¡Te quiero! ¡Gracias!

– Discurso ganador de Kim Dayeon

Aquí está la trayectoria de clasificación de Dayeon desde el episodio uno hasta ahora:

Advertisement

Choi Yujin de CLC de K-Group (Cube Entertainment) es el tercer miembro de Kep1er con 915.722 puntos de votantes.

En el transcurso del programa, Yujin de 25 años mostró sus habilidades con las presentaciones de «Bubble Pop» de HyunA, «How You Like That» de BLACKPINK, «Fate» de Lee Sun Hee y la canción original «Shoot!» con el equipo POP! CORN. Su MBTI es ENFP y su habilidad especial es hablar japonés.

| Mnet

En primer lugar … durante los últimos meses, gracias por votar por mí, Planet Guardians. Cuando vine aquí por primera vez, estaba muy preocupado. Pero después de verme a mí mismo en el escenario y ser feliz, y Planet Guardians lo disfruté, pensé que era algo tan grandioso que desafié. Gracias siempre En todo momento quiero ser agradecido y humilde. ¡Gracias!

– Discurso ganador de Choi Yujin

Advertisement

Aquí está la trayectoria de clasificación de Yujin desde el episodio uno hasta ahora:

Huening Bahiyyih de K-Group (Jugar M Entertainment) es el segundo miembro de Kep1er con 923.567 puntos de votantes.

Durante el transcurso del programa, Bahiyyih, de 17 años, mostró sus habilidades con las interpretaciones de “Mr. Chu ”,“ Fiesta ”de IZ * ONE, BLACKPINK y“ Ice Cream ”de Selena Gomez y la canción original“ Shoot! ” con el equipo POP! CORN. Su MBTI es ESFJ y su habilidad especial es el baile.

Advertisement

| Mnet

De hecho, no pensé que llegaría a la etapa final. Muy agradecido con los Guardianes del Planeta de todo el mundo. Mientras hacía esto, todos mis 99 amigos que han estado conmigo y practicado conmigo, estaba realmente feliz de estar con ustedes. He crecido mucho gracias a los maestros. Además, mi familia, que siempre me ha apoyado. Planet Guardians, ¡gracias por el regalo! Como artista, intentaré crecer cada vez más.

– Discurso ganador de Huening Bahiyyih

Aquí está la trayectoria de clasificación de Bahiyyih desde el episodio uno hasta ahora:

Y Kim Chaehyun de K-Group (Entretenimiento WAKEONE) es el miembro del 1er lugar de Kep1er con 1.081.182 puntos de votantes.

Advertisement

Durante el transcurso del programa, Chaehyun de 19 años mostró sus habilidades con las presentaciones de “Black Mamba” de aespa, “YES or YES” de TWICE, “My Sea” de IU y la canción original “Utopia” con Team Unicorn. Su MBTI es ESFP y sus habilidades especiales son cantar, hacer bricolaje y hablar japonés.

| Mnet

Estoy tan sorprendida que ni siquiera puedo llorar. No se que decir. En primer lugar, estoy muy agradecido con los productores, los miembros del personal y los estilistas, maquilladores. Y a mis tutores más antiguos, mi familia y mis amigos, muchas gracias. El nombre Planet Guardian se sintió incómodo al principio, pero ahora, con solo escuchar esa palabra, me anima. Mi historia en Girls Planet 999 tiene un final feliz. Gracias. Como siempre dijeron los maestros, intentaré apreciar todas las actuaciones. Gracias de nuevo.

– Discurso ganador de Kim Chaehyun

Aquí está la trayectoria de clasificación de Chaehyun desde el episodio uno hasta ahora:

Advertisement

¡Y eso completa la alineación final de Kep1er! Estén atentos para más noticias sobre el nuevo grupo de chicas mientras se preparan para su debut oficial.

¿Se pregunta qué significa Kep1er? He aquí un resumen de por qué Mnet eligió este nombre para el Girls Planet 999 grupo de chicas.

Mnet anuncia el nombre del nuevo grupo de chicas de «Girls Planet 999»

Advertisement

Advertisement

Comentarios

0 Comentarios

Continue Reading

WOW

RIP Norm Macdonald

Published

on

RIP Norm Macdonald

El comediante Norm Macdonald, un icónico Sábado noche en directo miembro del elenco y comediante favorito entre los comediantes, falleció a la edad de 61 años después de una larga y privada batalla contra el cáncer. Su gerencia anunció la noticia a Deadline esta mañana.

Macdonald había estado luchando contra el cáncer durante diez años, pero mantuvo su diagnóstico en privado del público en general.

Advertisement

«Estaba muy orgulloso de su comedia», dijo su socia de producción Lori Jo Hoekstra. “Él nunca quiso que el diagnóstico afectara la forma en que la audiencia o sus seres queridos lo veían. Norm era un cómico puro. Una vez escribió que ‘una broma debe tomar a alguien por sorpresa, nunca debe complacer’. Ciertamente nunca se complació. Se extrañará terriblemente a Norm «.

Macdonald tuvo un gran impacto como miembro del elenco de Sábado noche en directo, donde su Actualización de fin de semana Los segmentos eran notoriamente con púas, mordaces y muy divertidos. Continuó haciendo stand up durante años después de dejar el programa y también fue uno de los invitados más rebeldes de Conan O’Brien.

Advertisement

Es difícil exagerar el impacto de Macdonald en la comedia en las décadas posteriores a ser una estrella nacional. Como comediante, Macdonald a menudo era desafiante, a veces destripando los temas de la vida real de sus chistes y otras veces dando vueltas a través de una exposición dolorosa e intencionalmente poco divertida mientras construía anticipación para el remate. Partes como su broma sobre la polilla y su broma sobre el asesino en serie acumularon millones de visitas en línea han sido objeto de análisis de YouTube que han obtenido millones de visitas.

Advertisement

Macdonald’s Comedy Central roast de Bob Saget es posiblemente el segmento más memorable jamás realizado en el Comedy Central Roast serie, particularmente debido a cómo intencionalmente la «bombardeó». Mientras que otros comediantes tomaron fotos brutales de Saget, Macdonald entregó un conjunto de líneas tostadas genéricas con clasificación PG mientras la audiencia se sentaba en silencio mientras los otros comediantes aullaban de risa. Macdonald explicó más tarde que había recibido un libro de chistes «tostados» de la década de 1940 como regalo y decidió simplemente leer algunos chistes del libro en el evento.

La noticia del fallecimiento de Macdonald sorprendió a las redes sociales, y los fanáticos y colegas ofrecieron homenajes, conmoción y clips de su trabajo.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Comentarios

0 Comentarios

Continue Reading

Facebook

¿Búscas empleo?

Videos

Lo más visto