Who guards those who guard the gates? That is the question that we must ask ourselves following the recent shocking revelations by China and the severe repercussions that have had a ripple effect on the international community. Indeed the discoveries of ‘pau’s, Chinese Delicacies have been found to contain cardboard and other chemicals. Mattel products manufactured in China have been found to contain magnets that are dangerous for the children to play with. Years ago, China products were found to have contained high amounts of toxic contents in clothing’s and other products. This raises ethical as well as safety questions regarding the products that are manufactured in China. The ethical questions are that of the manufacturers trying to save a little money here and there by cheating and using cheaper but unsafe substitutes or maybe even using harmful chemicals to cover up the fake items that they add into their products as seen in the case of the ‘pau’s. The ethics of the manufacturers come into question and this is a very serious issue considering the fact that China is fast becoming the next booming economy and Asia’s pride, the Rising Dragon as she is called. The other question is that of the safety schemes that the Multi-National Companies and the Aviation and Food authority, or any other ministries in charge of the manufacturing of these products, have in place to ensure that the manufactured products are safe for consumption or use by anyone. It takes two hands to clap and the blame must not only lie with the factories and the people manufacturing the products. With China becoming a hub for manufacturing as well as the host of next year’s Olympics, these questions must be answered and the problems resolved to ensure that everything can go safely and smoothly for the international community. Safety issues aside, focusing on the ethical issues are the most important part for me, as I feel that that is the underlying problem. Solve it and there will no longer be a need for any group to be set up to combat such problems. Aldolf Hilter was a paranoid person who had to be the last guardian over every single member of the army, he did not trust anyone and so he kept a close watch on those who kept a close watch for him on others. This will not be practical in today’s society, and ethics and integrity play a very important role. As in the case of the affected products in China, the manufacturer must have integrity when making these products so as to ensure that no party gets harmed in any way. If everybody plays his or her own part, then there will not be any need for any governing bodies over such trivial matter. We should never let greed control us, especially when it concerns the lives of many people out there. Greed in trying to profit from using defective products could cause thousands of deaths due to intoxication of banned substances in products from China. The ‘Made in China’ tagline is now one that is notorious for its lousy quality, rather than the cheap and wonderful goods that is has been capable of coming up with in the past. True, China has always been at the forefront of the world’s inventions, with the inventions of gunpowder, compasses and many others during the ancient and long illustrious history of China, however, to date, China has not been putting its creative juices to good use, rather to gain profit creatively like cardboard food. Items crafted in the past by the Chinese were always one that was of the highest quality, both being brilliant in design and also for its durability, old furniture and many products built by the Chinese coolies in the early days of Singapore were of good quality as the people then were proud of the work that they had to do from the very bare hands that crafted many exquisite products. The quality was there as they took pride in whatever they did and did not try to cheat their way out. Ethics, ethics and ethics. That is the keyword that has to be on our minds. Without that, everything that we do is meaningless.
Regarding this article, I feel that the Korean government is indeed in a dilemma. They are put in a very difficult position, to trade the hostages for the prisoners in Afghanistan which are not really in their control, prisoners, as we are reminded who are potentially dangerous, and when released, are just like the Chinese saying of releasing a tiger back to the wild. On the other hand, not releasing the prisoners will result in the hatred of the government by the people as they feel that the government is neglecting them, the prisoners have almost a death penalty sentenced onto them as surely as China being the Rising Dragon. Releasing the prisoners will only result in the terrorists or Muslim Extremists to get even bolder as their requests are granted. The Taliban would most probably carry out more of such kidnappings in the future as the government will fear for the safety of their citizens and will try to subdue to their pressing and ridiculous requests. The execution of the first 2 hostages by the Taliban has proven that they are capable of practicing what they preach, but they on the other hand have also shown themselves that they are quite vulnerable by the fact that they keep extending their deadlines even without negotiations by both parties. This is just like the story by Anthony Horowitz’s Scorpia. In this story, the terrorists hold the British school children hostages and want the British to give in to their requests. Their aim: To weaken the ties between the British and the Americans who have the abilities to fulfill the requests, but are not giving in to the ridiculous demands that are made by the terrorists. This can also be seen in the case mentioned above. The Afghan government has the ability to release the prisoners, but they are not going to release the prisoners as it is very dangerous to do so considering that the released terrorists have the ability to kill more than the number of hostages in captive once they are released. However, the twist in this is that the Korean government too understand that it is a very hard request and not very logical to the world. Thus they hope to end this conflict by peaceful negotiations. As Hiram Johnson once said, ‘The first casualty when war comes is truth.’ It is only during conflicts like this when you realize who you can depend on. War is only a cowardly escape from the problems of peace – Thomas Mann. These terrorists only wish to brew trouble in the peace that is admired by the world. The war against terror continues as we are reminded of the grisly executions of the 2 male hostages who died for a worth cause as their government refuses to confer to the demand of the terrorists. We can only feel for the pitiful families who have loved ones held captive by the barbaric militants, and empathize with their plight. The military don’t start wars. Politicians start wars. William Westmoreland was right in making this point. It is the Western Ideals that anger these militants and they use violence in return. Rounding this off with yet another quote, if we don’t end wars, war will end us. War is a vicious cycle like what H.G. Wells mentioned. It is bloody and meaningless. Lives are loss while both parties try to prove themselves. Negotiation will be the only hopeful method in the case of this difficult dilemma, unless the Koreans have a brilliant squad of commandos like the Israelis who managed to recover 9 athletes in 1972 from Munich after a hostage attempt by Palestine terrorists.
This article depicts a stunning resemblance to the recent Virginia Tech massacre, with regards to the killer’s mindset and feelings.
In this article, the gunman was supposedly stressed out and hardly spoke to anyone, another similarity to the Virginia Tech killer, Cho Seung-Hui. In another stunning similarity, the gunman in this article was angry at life as was Cho angry with the people around him.
The recent spate of killings in the United States in the recent years have sparked worldwide debates on many topics with the possession of guns and stress from school just to name a few.
In these killings, we should not focus neither just on the victims nor the background of the person, but rather then environment and the society today. In my opinion, the attitude of the people these days is the cause of the problem and the attitude is the result of many various reasons such as the media and the peer pressure.
It is not just the US that is a problem, the problem that is occurring today is just blown up by the fact that it is legal to handle guns in the US while it is illegal in most of the other countries, and thus when the people are angry, they just fire their weapons at others irresponsibly which results in many victims. However in other countries when the same person is subjected to the same treatment, he would have to resort to other forms of violence to seek out revenge, or maybe commit suicide.
Some things never change, the attitudes of some people for one take a long time to change. Asians are still not very accepted in some parts of the world and for people like Cho, a Korean, perhaps speaking up was a difficult thing and even when he tried, he was often mocked at. This resulted in everyday trauma for him. Similarly, the gunman, Robert did not like to speak to anyone, perhaps for the fact that he lost his daughter soon after she was born. The trauma caused him to hate God for not saving his daughter; just the same way that Cho hated the people around him for being so snobbish.
Perhaps the people all around the world can actually look at this matter from the killer’s viewpoint and see how situations can be improved upon. What’s done cannot be undone. The lives that were taken serve as a horrifying reminder that racism and many other prejudices are still worldwide today and that we all have a part to play in this matter, to help those who are considered outcasts to once again fit back into the community, when they are left all alone to face the trauma, they are helpless and when they have nothing to lose, they will just use violence to revenge and get back at everyone who has harmed them in one way or another or just at everyone they meet.
Everyone has a part to play, and softer approaches do help in some cases and the people will feel at home and not traumatized.
Drink driving as we all know is very dangerous and the consequences can be disastrous. However, many celebrities are making headlines for drink driving these days with international celebrities such as Paris Hilton and Mel Gibson to local celebrities such as Christopher Lee and former host Benedict Goh.
Some welcome the sentence given to these people while others feel that they are celebrities and should be give a chance. But the question does not lie in whether these celebrities should be given chances or lighter punishments because they are famous, but rather why is drink driving still so rampant? Drink driving is usually highlighted only when a celebrity commits such an offence or when it results in many casualties. But is reality only filled with so few cases?
Drink driving, like drug dealings can result in many being victims, however, in Singapore, drug smugglers are given the death sentence, according to what PM Lee Hsien Loong mentioned back then when the Vietnamese drug smuggler was sentenced amid much outcry, he mentioned that these drugs can kill many lives out there. The drink driving offender too can kill many with his reckless driving, so why is the punishment so light? A few months in jail? A heavy fine?
Perhaps the stance that the government has taken these past years has been too light and should be heavier, or should the messages that are carried across have more impact such as that of the recent smoking ad which showed the harmful effects of smoking? Does it only mean that showing the horrible consequences then only can the people be truly awaken to the harsh reality?
There has always been this old Chinese saying that says it is much easier to have a bad influence on a person than to change a bad person’s character. It is very difficult to force a person to drink lesser or not drink at all before he drives, perhaps if we were to look at the current situation from a different perspective, we could tackle other problems which would perhaps reverse or save the situation.
Perhaps the mindset of the people today ought to change, so that they will understand the importance of not drinking before driving and persuading people to say ‘No’ to drinking before driving will be an uphill climb. But these are some other areas to improve rather than highlighting the penalties that drink driving will result in. A hard approach has not churned any result, but perhaps a softer one might.
Thus perhaps like suggestions from pub owners, the pubs could take the initiative by helping to call the taxis to ferry the drunk customers home.
We should not just focus on the celebrities tipple trouble, make them a scapegoat or example for the rest of the world to see, neither should we highlight nor increase the penalties which have not worked, but rather we should try a softer approach while tackling the problem from another perspective, from a customer’s perspective.
DALBB; 11:37 PM
Sunday, February 25, 2007
Reflections on Iran defiant on nuclear work ahead of UN report
I feel that the United States of America is taking a very huge risk here as they are not financially capable of launching an all-out war against Iran here. The USA is still trying to recover from the war in Iraq and since the last war’s statistics, it has been shown that each missile costs US$1 Million. Although Iran would like to have their own Nuclear Program, the majority of the world is disapproving of it, especially USA as it feels threatened by another country having weapons of mass destruction.
The United States of America cannot carry on fighting wars. Her allies will not be able to continually support her. Although Iran is ambitious and would like to carry out their own Nuclear Programs, they should think about how this will impact the world. If everybody were to carry out their own programs without any power controlling them, then there would be chaos. Thus, we must remember the role of the United Nations and why it was set up after World War 2.
Sometimes, USA must also accept the fact that countries round the world are developing at a fast pace. Many countries want to be able to be powerful and in order for that to happen, they need to have their own good weapons so as to reassure themselves that they are safe.
The more USA tries to control its neighbours, the more there will be tension as they want to be free to do as they please. It is the same with a teenager who wants to obtain his freedom from his parents but his parents are worried about him getting too much freedom and the various vices out there that will ruin him because of his freedom.
I strongly feel that the UN should take a stronger step in ensuring that countries will be able to strike a balance between having their own freedom and when they should not. A single mistake in what they do, especially in nuclear technology can mean a large help to a country or death to millions. A raving maniac who would like to dominate the world might just make use of the technology to his advantage. Thus, sometimes, USA is also right in denying countries their right of way sometimes as they feel that it is for the better good of the rest of the world.
Whatever the case, it is important for all of us to draw important lessons from the Iraq war. War is not a solution and I would like to end off with quotes from various prominent people.
The only way to win a war is to prevent it. - Secretary of State George C. Marshall
I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought with, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones. - Albert Einstein
Mankind must put an end to war, or war will put an end to mankind. - John F. Kennedy
DALBB; 7:56 AM
Friday, February 23, 2007
Reflections on 'LTA to test efficiency of linear bus stops' In my opinion, there is absolutely no point in having linear bus stops. The main aim of the bus bays back then when the LTA implemented it was to reduce congestion. By having Bus Bays, the bus would be able to enter the bay and thus alight and drop of passengers safely, furthermore, the vehicles behind the bus would not have to wait and cause congestion which would in turn result in having the bus behind being slow in arriving on time at the bus stop. Thus, the overall aim of the bus bays was to shorten the waiting time for the passengers waiting for the bus and also to make the traveling time between bus stops shorter.
However, with LTA planning to have linear bus stops again, it would be unsafe to alight and pick up passengers to from the bus stops as passengers then to wait by the road side instead of in the bus stop. This would be very dangerous and even with bus bays currently, the passengers do not wait behind the yellow line which is deemed safe. Furthermore, with the linear bus stops, the vehicles behind the bus that is at the bus stop would have to wait for the bus, which would thus in turn result in congestion. This would also in turn result in the next bus at the previous bus stop to be caught in the congestion that is caused by the bus in front holding up the traffic. This vicious cycle will not only cause traveling times to instead increase but also tempers to flare as people do not like to be caught in traffic jams.
I have never seen Singapore during the days when it had liner bus stops as I had not been born then, however, I have had this experience when I went to China on an Immersion Program last year. In China, the bus stops are linear. Whenever the bus stops, tempers will flare behind the bus as there are many passengers and like me, as a foreigner, I am not used to their lifestyle, I am not used to their usual hustle and bustle. If you dilly dally, they will just shout at you to hurry up.
However the case, I believe that having designated bus lanes more effective as can be seen from the accomplishment in the city area. With all the rush hours round the clock, these buses are still very punctual regardless of the heavy traffic as it does not bother them. It is a much better solution than the linear bus stops. However, this will be very difficult to implement on usual roads and thus having bus stops will be a more feasible option due to the lower traffic and the little space that Singapore has.
DALBB; 9:34 PM
SINGAPORE: The Land Transport Authority is looking into the idea of linear bus stops to improve travelling speeds for buses. These are bus stops constructed along and adjacent to the road, without the inlet known as the bus bay. Studies conducted by the LTA indicate that buses trying to exit from bus bays are often blocked by traffic. So it wants to evaluate the efficiency of linear bus stops, or straight bus lanes. It will use a planned road widening at Jalan Eunos as the platform for a trial. Six pairs of linear bus stops will be built there to replace the existing ones. This was announced at the launch of SBS Transit's "Move to the Rear" campaign. LTA's Chief Executive, Brigadier General Yam Ah Mee, said bus operators had given feedback that along high-traffic stretches, straight lanes might enable buses to move more quickly. The road widening at Jalan Eunos is slated to begin in the third quarter of this year and will be completed in 2009. - CNA/ir Tuesday February 13
DALBB; 8:29 PM
TEHRAN : President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Thursday insisted on Iran 's right to nuclear technology, ahead of a key UN report likely to find that Tehran has failed to meet demands to halt sensitive atomic work. Iran risks tougher UN sanctions over its controversial nuclear drive that the West fears is a cover for ambitions to build an atomic bomb. But it has insisted it will not freeze uranium enrichment work as a precondition for talks with the international community to try to end the long-running standoff. "If some assume they can violate the country's rights and stand against it, they must know that they are wrong," Ahmadinejad said in a speech in northern Iran carried by the ISNA news agency. " Iran ians defend their rights and the nuclear right is a demand of all Iran ians. Nobody in the world can deprive them of their rights even one iota." UN chief Ban Ki-moon was to hold talks on Thursday with International Atomic Energy Agency head Mohamed ElBaradei, who is to issue a report by Friday on Iran 's compliance with UN demands to halt enrichment. The report is expected to formally confirm that Iran is pressing ahead with enrichment, a process which can be used to make atomic weapons as well as nuclear fuel. Iran , which says it has the right to peaceful nuclear technology as a signatory to the Non-Proliferation Treaty, ignored a UN deadline on Wednesday to halt the process. The deadline was set by the UN Security Council on December 23 when it imposed sanctions and gave the IAEA 60 days to declare whether Iran has implemented a "full and sustained suspension" of uranium enrichment. US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said in Berlin on Wednesday that she would be consulting with other major powers on the next steps to take. Washington, which is also on the offensive against Iran over alleged meddling in Iraq and support for what the United States terms terrorist groups in the region, has already said it would seek tougher penalties. But Rice also reaffirmed a US offer to end a 27-year rupture in American- Iran ian relations if Tehran complies with the UN conditions. "We offered to reverse 27 years of policy to engage in the context of the six (parties), and I said I would meet with my Iran ian counterpart any place, any where, any time if they suspend," she said. The limited sanctions adopted in December specifically target trade and officials involved in Iran 's nuclear and ballistic missile programmes. It is not clear what further penalties Iran could face for failing to obey the deadline, and UN diplomats have appealed for patience saying they need to read ElBaradei's report before considering the next course of action. But some acknowledge that a new resolution tightening sanctions would be inevitable, amid speculation Washington is preparing for possible military action after sending a second nuclear-powered aircraft carrier to the region. Iran ian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki said Tehran was prepared for possible US military action, but believed dialogue was the best way to resolve the dispute. "The United States put forward two options: the first is to use violence and the second cooperation," he told reporters on a visit to Turkey. "We are ready for both eventualities but, of course, we have always preferred cooperation." Mottaki said the dispute should be resolved through a "diplomatic solution," and that threats would not force Tehran into making concessions. - AFP/de
22 Feb 2007
DALBB; 8:26 PM
Article: China confirms satellite downed The missile was reportedly launched from near Xichang Space Centre China has confirmed it carried out a test that destroyed a satellite, in a move that caused international alarm. Foreign Ministry spokesman Liu Jianchao said a test had been carried out but insisted China was committed to the "peaceful development of outer space". The US backed reports last week that China had used a ground-based medium-range ballistic missile to destroy a weather satellite. A senior Taiwanese politician said he viewed it as an aggressive act. It is the first known satellite intercept test for more than 20 years. Several countries, including Japan, Australia and the US, have expressed concern at the test, amid worries it could trigger a space arms race. Until Tuesday, China had refused to confirm or deny the 11 January test. International concern Liu Jianchao told reporters that China had notified "other parties and... the American side" of its test. CHINA IN SPACE China's first manned space mission launched in 2003 - following former Soviet Union and the US Chinese astronauts aim to perform a spacewalk as early as next year Until now, the US and Russia have been the only nations to shoot down space objects China insists its space programme is of no threat, but other nations are wary China says it spends $500m on space projects. NASA is due to spend $17bn in 2007
"But China stresses that it has consistently advocated the peaceful development of outer space and it opposes the arming of space and military competition in space," he told a news conference. "China has never, and will never, participate in any form of space arms race." However, Dr Joseph Wu, head of the body responsible for Taiwan's relations with China, viewed it differently. "This is an aggressive act by the Chinese side," he told the BBC on a visit to Japan. "I don't think it's just limited to Taiwan only but of course... Taiwan stands out to be the first country that might have to suffer if a future conflict were to erupt between China and some other countries." China sees Taiwan as part of its territory and has threatened to use force if the island ever moved to declare formal independence. The US, which is committed to provide Taiwan with defensive weapons, supports the status quo. US spy satellites watch over the Taiwan Straits, and coordinating any defence against a possible Chinese invasion would be made much harder if those spy satellites were destroyed. Debris fears The magazine American Aviation Week and Space Technology reported that a Chinese Feng Yun 1C polar orbit weather satellite had been destroyed by an anti-satellite system launched from or near China's Xichang Space Centre on 11 January. The test is thought to have occurred at more than 537 miles (865km) above the Earth. The report was confirmed by US National Security Council spokesman Gordon Johndroe last Thursday. He said at the time the US "believes China's development and testing of such weapons is inconsistent with the spirit of co-operation that both countries aspire to in the civil space area". Japan and Australia also spoke of their fears of a possible new arms race in space. There are already growing international concerns about China's rising military power. While Beijing keeps its defence spending a secret, analysts say that it has grown rapidly in recent years. China is now only the third country to shoot something down in space. Both the US and the Soviet Union halted their tests in the 1980s over concerns that the debris they produced could harm civilian and military satellite operations. While the US may be unhappy about China's actions, the Washington administration has recently opposed international calls to end such tests. It revised US space policy last October to state that Washington had the right to freedom of action in space, and the US is known to be researching such "satellite-killing" weapons itself.
