1 US to arm Syrian rebels (Matthew Lee & Julie Pace in San Francisco Chronicle) President Barack Obama has authorized sending weapons to Syrian rebels for the first time, US officials said Thursday, after the White House disclosed that the US has conclusive evidence President Bashar Assad's government used chemical weapons against opposition forces trying to overthrow him. Obama has repeatedly said the use of chemical weapons would cross a "red line," suggesting it would trigger greater American intervention in the two-year crisis.
Sen. John McCain, one of the strongest proponents of US military action in Syria, said he was told that Obama had decided to "provide arms to the rebels," a decision confirmed by three US officials. The officials cautioned that decisions on the specific type of weaponry were still being finalized, though the CIA was expected to be tasked with teaching the rebels how to use the arms the White House had agreed to supply. The US has so far provided the Syrian rebel army with rations and medical supplies.
2 When the US behaves like China (Ai Weiwei in The Guardian) Even though we know governments do all kinds of things I was shocked by the information about the US surveillance operation, Prism. To me, it's abusively using government powers to interfere in individuals' privacy. This is an important moment for international society to reconsider and protect individual rights.
I lived in the US for 12 years. This abuse of state power goes totally against my understanding of what it means to be a civilised society, and it will be shocking for me if American citizens allow this to continue. The US has a great tradition of individualism and privacy and has long been a centre for free thinking and creativity as a result.
In our experience in China, basically there is no privacy at all – that is why China is far behind the world in important respects: even though it has become so rich, it trails behind in terms of passion, imagination and creativity.
Before the information age the Chinese government could decide you were a counter-revolutionary just because a neighbour reported something they had overheard. Thousands, even millions of lives were ruined through the misuse of such information. Today, through its technical abilities, the state can easily get into anybody's bank account, private mail, conversations, and social media accounts. The internet and social media give us new possibilities of exploring ourselves.
To limit power is to protect society. It is not only about protecting individuals' rights but making power healthier. Civilisation is built on that trust and everyone must fight to defend it, and to protect our vulnerable aspects – our inner feelings, our families. We must not hand over our rights to other people. No state power should be given that kind of trust. Not China. Not the US.
3 The car as the next big tech platform (Straits Times) The car is the next great proving ground for communications technology, General Motors chief executive Dan Akerson has said. The automobile will become a major platform for tech "and one with far better battery life than an iPhone", he said in prepared remarks to the Chief Executives' Club of Boston.
Developing better in-car technology is critical for automakers like GM to attract younger, tech-savvy buyers. If they can pull it off, the companies will generate new sources of revenue and boost profit margins. One approach may be for GM to sell advertising within the car itself, Mr Akerson said last month.
In mid-2014, the No. 1 US automaker, teaming up with AT&T Inc, will start selling vehicles embedded with 4G LTE mobile broadband, a wireless connection that allows for faster flow of data that GM says would allow passengers in the backseat to watch streaming video.
4 Atoning for the Empire's sins (David M Anderson in The New York Times) The British do not torture. At least, that is what we in Britain have always liked to think. But not anymore. In a historic decision last week, the British government agreed to compensate 5,228 Kenyans who were tortured and abused while detained during the Mau Mau rebellion of the 1950s. Each claimant will receive around £2,670 (about $4,000). The money is paltry. But the principle it establishes, and the history it rewrites, are both profound. This is the first historical claim for compensation that the British government has accepted. It has never before admitted to committing torture in any part of its former empire.
In recent years there has been a clamor for official apologies. In 2010, Britain formally apologized for its army’s conduct in the infamous “Bloody Sunday” killings in Northern Ireland in 1972, and earlier this year Prime Minister David Cameron visited Amritsar, India, the site of a 1919 massacre, and expressed “regret for the loss of life.”
Why did the British keep documents, instead of destroying them? Plenty else was burned, or dumped at sea, as the British left Kenya. The answer lay in the unease of some British colonial officers. Many did not like what they saw. When the orders to torture came down, some realized the jeopardy they were in. These men worried that it was they, not their commanders, who would carry the can.
A case already before the courts concerns the 1948 Batang Kali massacre in colonial Malaya, now Malaysia. In Cyprus, translators employed by the British during the 1950s told tales of electrocutions and pulled fingernails as British intelligence officers tried to elicit information about gunrunning. The case of Aden, now in Yemen, could be the worst of all. In 1965, the British governor retreated up the steps of his departing aircraft, firing his revolver at snipers arrayed around the airport runway. This was not the “orderly retreat from empire” that many historians would have us believe characterized British decolonization. Britain’s brutality against its Yemeni enemies in Aden during those final days has become a local legend.
Empire was built by conquest. It was violent. And decolonization was sometimes a bloody, brutal business. No American should need reminding of that. And Britain, along with other imperial powers of the 19th and 20th centuries, may yet have to pay for this.
5 The Japanese and longevity (Khaleej
Times) The modern world is rife with contamination. We eat food that
is full of chemicals and additives, we live in homes where we are in
contact with toxic material and we breathe in polluted air. So, it’s
no surprise that despite the advancements made in the field of
medicine, cancer, heart disease and other maladies still afflict
large number of people.
But according to him and family, there wasn’t some great secret to his longevity; eating light, a positive attitude and a strong will to live were apparently the reason why he survived for over a century. The next in line to inherit the title of the oldest living person alive is also a native of Japan. Misao Okawa is from Osaka and is 115 years old.
While Kimura and Okawa are definitely extraordinary cases, average life expectancy in Japan is above 82 and is thus relatively high. You might be wondering what the Japanese are doing right to lead long and healthy lives? There’s no obscure secret or fountain of youth is the East Asian countries. The Japanese abide by the simple rules of healthy living: good diet and exercise. Featuring an eclectic variety of raw fish and seafood, Japanese food is inherently healthy. And instead of using cars, many Japanese prefer to walk to their destinations. While this lifestyle might not make one live beyond a 100, it will, at least, improve the quality of your life.
No comments:
Post a Comment