「現代中国語に極めて大きな影響を与えた」として日本の現代用語を列挙。科学、人権、社会主義、自由主義、治外法権、土木工事、工芸美術といった言葉に加え、アニメ、「腐」、ロリ、達人、人気など、比較的新しい言葉も日本からやってきたものであると伝えた。
<map id="map_skzxehrw" name="map_skzxehrw"><area coords="24,41,261,54" href="http://www.classification.gov.au/Public/Resources/Documents/2008%20media%20releases/1057%20-%20Media%20Release%20-%2013%20August%202008%20-%20Four%20anime%20films%20classified%20upon%20review.pdf" alt="" shape="rect" /><area coords="117,70,208,83" href="http://www.classification.gov.au/Public/Resources/Documents/2009%20media%20releases/Director_speech_-_Bibiographical_Society_Conferenc%20Monash%20University%20-13%20July%20%282%29.pdf" alt="" shape="rect" /><area coords="88,199,144,212" href="http://www.alrc.gov.au/sites/default/files/pdfs/publications/10_refused_classification_category.pdf" alt="" shape="rect" /></map>law - Did Australia ban small-breasts pornography? - Skeptics Stack Exchange via kwout
不平等の広がりを指摘した世界的ベストセラー「２１世紀の資本」の著者で、来日中のトマ・ピケティ・パリ経済学校教授が３０日夕、東京都内で討論会に出席した。日本の消費税率を欧州諸国並みの２０～２５％程度に引き上げるべきかとの質問に「ノーだ」と応じ、改めて資産や所得の多い人への累進課税の強化を訴えた。
“While (the victim) was taking Gaa’s order she asked if Gaa wanted white or wheat toast, to which Gaa responded: ‘I’m prejudiced. I’ll take white,’” court documents detail, adding the cashier then took his ticket to the grill before moving to the coffee area, which is available to the public.
“At that time, Gaa came up to (the victim) and grabbed her right arm, leaving bruises, and asked her if she liked to party.”
The victim said “no,” to which Mr. Gaa allegedly replied, “’I have a place I would like to take you where I hung your grandpa,’” court documents said.
They were then taken to a field and were forced to kneel for around two hours, before some were led away to different spots in the settlement. There were over a hundred people present, witnesses stated.
"They took them behind the wall. Less than a minute, then a gunshot," Abu Omar said. "All we could hear was the gunshots. We couldn't see."
Another witness who spoke to Reuters said that the Iraqi government forces stood by helplessly and some were crying as the militias murdered the civilians. Another, Abdullah al-Jubouri, who hid in a pile of rubbish after seeing the Humvees approaching, said he saw soldiers and militiamen firing at lines of civilians – some of whom had their hands tied.
"I saw them falling like domino pieces," he added.
TEPHEN COHEN: Yeah, it is. It certainly is President Obama. Look, here’s the underlying problem. What Obama just said implies, if not asserts, that if it wasn’t for Russia, Ukraine would be stable, that Russia has destabilized Ukraine. No serious person would believe that to be the case. Ukraine is in the throes of a civil war, which was precipitated by the political crisis that occurred in Ukraine last November and then this February, when the elected president of Ukraine was overthrown by a street mob, and that set off a civil war, primarily between the west, including Kiev, and the east, but not only. There’s a central Ukraine that’s here and there. This civil war then became, as I said it would or might when we first started talking earlier this year, a proxy war between the United States and Russia.
Now, it’s absolutely true that Russia has made the destabilization of Ukraine worse. It’s also absolutely true that the United States has contributed to the destabilization of Ukraine. But if tomorrow the United States would go away and Russia would go away, Ukraine would still be in a civil war. And we know what civil wars are. We had one in our country. Russia had one. There were many civil wars around the world in the 20th century and elsewhere today. The point is, the only way you can end a civil war, either the one side completely conquers and the other side gives up, as happened with the Confederacy in the United States, or there’s a stalemate or somebody says, "Enough killing, because these are brothers and sisters and mothers and fathers, they’re part of the same family," and you negotiate.
It’s not about whether Ukraine has the right to take back its territory. The problem is, as I just said, that a civil war began when we, the United States, and Europe backed a street coup that overthrew an elected president. When you overthrow a constitution and when you overthrow a president, you’re likely to get a civil war. It usually happens. Now, when you have a civil war, the country is divided. And in this case, the government in Kiev is trying to conquer where the rebels, so to speak, are located. The problem is that the rebel provinces do not recognize the legitimacy of the government in Kiev. The United States recognizes the legitimacy, but that doesn’t make it legitimate.
Now, let’s go to what’s going on in Kiev now. I mean, Obama also said—and I kind of chuckled and cried—that we are helping Ukraine build a democracy. What kind of democracy is unfolding in Kiev? All right, they had a presidential election. About a fifth of the country couldn’t vote. Now, Poroshenko has called a parliamentary election in October, a month from now. But where the war is, in the south and the east, they won’t vote. So you’re going to end up with a rump country, further dividing the country. Meanwhile, they’re shutting down democracy in Kiev. Communist Party is being banned. Another party that represents the east is being banned. People are being arrested. There’s censorship kicking in. There’s no democracy in Kiev, because it’s a wartime government. You just don’t get democracy. So, these assertions by the United States that we’re democracy builders, we’re virtuous, and it’s all Putin’s fault, this is—it’s worse than a half-truth; it’s actually a falsehood.
So what was this unfolding strategy to undermine Syria and Iran all about? According to retired NATO Secretary General Wesley Clark, a memo from the Office of the US Secretary of Defense just a few weeks after 9/11 revealed plans to "attack and destroy the governments in 7 countries in five years", starting with Iraq and moving on to "Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Iran." In a subsequent interview, Clark argues that this strategy is fundamentally about control of the region's vast oil and gas resources.
Exploring different scenarios for this trajectory, the report speculated that the US may concentrate "on shoring up the traditional Sunni regimes in Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Pakistan as a way of containing Iranian power and influence in the Middle East and Persian Gulf." Noting that this could actually empower al-Qaeda jihadists, the report concluded that doing so might work in western interests by bogging down jihadi activity with internal sectarian rivalry rather than targeting the US:
These strategic concerns, motivated by fear of expanding Iranian influence, impacted Syria primarily in relation to pipeline geopolitics. In 2009 - the same year former French foreign minister Dumas alleges the British began planning operations in Syria - Assad refused to sign a proposed agreement with Qatar that would run a pipeline from the latter's North field, contiguous with Iran's South Pars field, through Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Syria and on to Turkey, with a view to supply European markets - albeit crucially bypassing Russia. Assad's rationale was "to protect the interests of [his] Russian ally, which is Europe's top supplier of natural gas."
The Iran-Iraq-Syria pipeline plan was a "direct slap in the face" to Qatar's plans. No wonder Saudi Prince Bandar bin Sultan, in a failed attempt to bribe Russia to switch sides, told President Vladmir Putin that "whatever regime comes after" Assad, it will be "completely" in Saudi Arabia's hands and will "not sign any agreement allowing any Gulf country to transport its gas across Syria to Europe and compete with Russian gas exports", according to diplomatic sources. When Putin refused, the Prince vowed military action.
The fact that U.S. intelligence assesses that ISIS poses no current threat to the U.S. is repeatedly ignored by our politicians and media. In the last two months, President Obama and John Kerry have presented the American public with the idea that ISIS could pose a threat to the U.S. — which is why our “no boots on the ground” initiative against ISIS has begun, completely contradicting evidence provided by U.S. intelligence.
In fact, what the media has done is provided unlimited airtime to these politicians, analysts and pundits who directly profit from war, who represent the defense industries, who work for the oil companies and construction industries, without questioning them once.
It’s sectarian. They can’t get along. ISIS will attack us. The people in the Middle East need us. Our allies in the region support U.S. involvement.
Our media became the official mouthpiece for President Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry to promote airstrikes on Syria because, as our administration put it, the Assad regime is using chemical weapons against his own people.
It was weapons of mass destruction all over again. It was nearly the same narrative we used to justify the war in Iraq and we’re now using it to justify war in Syria. The Obama administration used the chemical weapons attack as a pretext for war.
Two days later, a MintPress article went viral. It was on-the-ground reporting from our journalists who spoke with Syrians in Ghoutha. We spoke with doctors, with rebels themselves, their family members, and we asked them, because those were the experts, those were the witnesses, and those are the people at the heart of the story: Who committed this chemical weapons attack?
And they told us that the al-Qaida-linked rebels let off the sarin gas and that the rebels were receiving arms, funding and even the sarin from Saudi intelligence.
But MintPress is not alone. Just a few months after our newsroom was bullied and attacked, a Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist by the name of Seymour Hersh made international headlines when he published an article called “Whose Sarin?,” which detailed leaked intelligence he had received about the U.S. knowing that the al-Qaida rebels had most likely propagated this sarin gas attack to frame the Assad regime as a pretext for war.
But Obama was being pressured by Turkey and Saudi Arabia to strike Syria.
And this Seymour Hersh we’re talking about here: [He’s] the same journalist who exposed the My Lai Massacre in Vietnam and its cover-up and exposed abuse at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq.
The role of journalism in the United States, as defined by the U.S. Constitution, is to act as a government watchdog and to work in the interest of the public to hold those in power accountable and prevent them from abusing their power.
The corporate media divides us, it creates boogeymen, it induces fear, and survives off of sensationalism and to hate what is different. Although the world is complex, we are actually interconnected more than we know.
Malcolm X once said, “If you’re not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people who are being oppressed, and loving the people who are doing the oppressing.”
Today it’s the Muslims, yesterday it was the Russians, and many years ago it was the Communists. Different enemies, altered narratives, same motive: money, oil, gas, resources and influence.
