アマゾンなどに「フェイク・レビュー」、組織的に活動 英消費者団体の調査で判明
— ニューズウィーク日本版 (@Newsweek_JAPAN) 2018年10月22日
──消費者団体が潜入調査。そして、フェイク・レビューの見破り方は…https://t.co/LwrgLySfA1 …#アマゾン #フェイク #イギリス
アマゾンでフェイク・レビューではないかと猜疑心いっぱいになるのが習慣になり、他のサイトでもこのレビューは本物か？とまず疑ってかかるので物を買うのが面倒になってきた。
— suzuky (@suzuky) 2018年10月22日
ソ連のINFは、米本土に到達するほどの射程は有しておらず、その狙いを欧州に限定していたが、この「米国には届かないが、欧州には届く」という性質が、米=NATO間の拡大抑止の信頼性に大きな疑問を投げかけた。
米本土に届かないソ連のINFは、米国の安全保障にとって直接の脅威ではない。この状況の中、NATO諸国は、欧州がソ連のINFによって限定核攻撃された場合、「米国は自らが核攻撃される危険を冒してまで、欧州の安全保障にコミットしてくれるのか（核反撃してくれるのか）」という不安を抱くようになった。ソ連のINFには、NATO諸国にこのような不安を抱かせ、欧州の安全保障と米国の拡大抑止とのリンケージを切り離し、弱体化させる（デカップリング）狙いがあったのである。
この不安を解消すべく米国とNATOは協議を重ね、1979年12月のNATO外相・国防会議において、在欧核配備と米ソの軍縮・軍備管理交渉を同時に追求する「二重決定」方針が発表された。すなわち、欧州に米国のINF（「パーシングⅡ」とGLCM）を配備することによって、NATO諸国に対する拡大抑止を保証しつつ、ソ連を核軍縮・軍備管理交渉のテーブルに着かせるための圧力をかけるという方針である。この方針が奏功し、1981年11月には、米ソ双方がINFを撤去するための軍縮・軍備管理交渉が開始された。交渉は紆余曲折したものの、最終的に米ソは1987年12月に双方のINFを全廃することに合意。両国は1991年6月までに、米国は計846基のINF（パーシングⅠ・ⅡおよびGLCM）を廃棄。ソ連も計1846基のINF（SS-20、SS-4、SS-5、SS-12、SS-23、SSC-X-4）を廃棄した。
WATCH: @HananRazekBBC’s special report - Dark disappearances: How Saudi critics keep going missing https://t.co/cVwvX3o1AL
— Mohamed Madi (@m_madi) 2018年10月21日
BBCニュース - ＜動画＞ サウジ政府を批判すると次々と消える 王子でさえも https://t.co/jmauVLrc7e pic.twitter.com/gGbP9yJOWN
— BBC News Japan (@bbcnewsjapan) 2018年10月22日
サウジ政府を批判する人の発見をコンサル会社のマッキンゼーが担っていたというのがNYTの報道にあるけど、もし本当ならマッキンゼーは政治弾圧や殺人の補助を金をもらって仕事として担っていたことになる。 https://t.co/8cmgEKiUMv
— kazukazu88 (@kazukazu881) 2018年10月22日
Statement in response to today's New York Times article https://t.co/o4Z3h2THcC pic.twitter.com/rJtMzDOclG
— McKinsey & Company (@McKinsey) 2018年10月21日
（書評）『ヒトラーのモデルはアメリカだった』 ジェイムズ・Ｑ・ウィットマン〈著〉：朝日新聞デジタル https://t.co/V5f7XuNmdA
— mozu (@mozumozumozu) 2018年10月22日
実際には、これは突飛（とっぴ）な議論ではない。１７９０年の米国初の帰化法は、対象を「自由な白人」に限定した。その後、非白人も市民と認められるようになるが、１９世紀後半にはアジア系移民の排斥法が制定され、黒人、先住民、フィリピン人やプエルトリコ人も二級市民に貶（おとし）められていく。
人種間混交の排除でも米国は際立った。優生学が流行した２０世紀初頭には各州で異人種混交禁止法が導入される。人種主義的社会秩序の構築も進み「血の一滴の掟（ワンドロップルール）」により黒人を分類する慣行が広まった。
Begin with eugenics. A ruthless program of eugenics, designed to build a “healthy”society, free of hereditary defects, was central to Nazi ambitions in the 1930s. Soon after taking power, the regime passed a Law to Prevent the Birth of the Offspring with Hereditary Defects, and by the end of the decade a program of systematic euthanasia that prefigured the Holocaust, including the use of gassing, was under way.25 We now know that in the background of this horror lay a sustained engagement with America’s eugenics movement. In his 1994 book The Nazi Connection: Eugenics, American Racism, and German National Socialism, historian Stefan Kühl created a sensation by demonstrating that there was an active back-and-forth traffic between American and Nazi eugenicists until the late 1930s, indeed that Nazis even looked to the United States as a “model.”2
To that end they were determined to establish a citizenship regime that would be firmly founded on racial categories. They were further determined to prevent mixed marriages between Jews and “Aryans,” and to criminalize extramarital sex between members of the two communities.36 In both respects they found, and elcomed, precedent and authority in American law, and by no means just in the law of the South. In the 1930s the United States, as the Nazis frequently noted, stood at the forefront of race-based lawmaking. American immigration and naturalization law, in the shape of a series of laws culminating in the Immigration Act of 1924, conditioned entry into the United States on race-based tables of “national origins.” It was America’s racebased immigration law that Hitler praised in Mein Kampf, in a passage that has been oddly neglected by American legal scholars; and leading Nazi legal thinkers did the same after him, repeatedly and olubly. The United States also stood at the forefront in the creation of forms of de jure and de facto second-class citizenship for bs, Filipinos, Chinese, and others; this too was of great interest to the Nazis, engaged as they were in creating their own forms of second-class citizenship for Germany’s Jews. As for race mixing between the sexes, the United States stood at the forefront there as well. America was a beacon of anti-miscegenation law, with thirty different state regimes—many of them outside the South, and all of them (as we shall see) carefully studied, catalogued, and debated by Nazi lawyers. There were no other models for miscegenation legislation that the Nazis could find in the world, a fact that Justice Minister Gürtner highlighted at the June 5, 1934, meeting with which I began. When it came to immigration, second-class citizenship, and miscegenation, America was indeed “the classic example” of a country with highly developed, and harsh, race law in the early 1930s, and Nazi lawyers made repeated reference to American models and precedents in the drafting process that led up to the Nuremberg Laws and continued in their subsequent interpretation and application. The tale is by no means one of “astonishing insignificance.”
First and foremost, the United States offered the model of anti-miscegenation legislation. The notion that marriage between “superior” and “inferior” races should be avoided was widespread in the world in the age of early twentieth-century eugenics.
Indeed in Mein Kampf Hitler praised America as nothing less than “the one state” that had made progress toward the creation of a healthy racist order of the kind the Nuremberg Laws were intended to establish
観に行きたい。 https://t.co/XznKPH0rTr
— 相原コージ (@kojiaihara) 2018年10月22日
#6月10日 #6月11日 #ザ・ニュースペーパー #福本ヒデ #京都市 #コミュニティラボ #在廊 #アーティストトーク #ムンク叫び #文句の叫び #安倍首相 #トランプ pic.twitter.com/tiMMbahTZZ
— 福本ヒデ (@fukuhide0714) 2017年6月5日
My heart ❤️
— StanceGrounded (@_SJPeace_) 2018年10月21日
Watch this little girl try so hard to get Alexa to play her jam #babyshark
This is so cute
RETWEET! pic.twitter.com/dGk8joS5Um
Babysharkは通じなくてもAlexaは通じているところがすごい。それにしてもかわいい。 https://t.co/ydghDqojnn
— Kazuto Suzuki (@KS_1013) 2018年10月22日
Using the term "My jam" has superceded just being relevant to a specific song that is your favorite. It is relevant to any specific subject matter. It is used to describe any specific thing that you feel you enjoy more than the majority of other options in the same category.
Sushi is my jam.
My Jammusic
Your favorite song when you hear it you go crazy.
Girl thats my jam!!!
Post-Cold War U.S. foreign policy has been a near total failure. Two new books look at why. https://t.co/FgPyVFDP9j
— mozu (@mozumozumozu) 2018年10月22日
American policymakers were free not only to pursue their direct national interests, but also to pursue grand visions of remaking the world in the U.S.’s own image
“The objective of U.S. foreign policy over the past several decades has been to gradually transform as much of the world as possible through the promotion of electoral democracy, the rule of law, free markets, and by bringing other countries into institutions and alliances that are U.S.-led,” Walt told The Intercept. “This effort has been nearly a total failure. It hasn’t failed entirely, but in terms of stated objectives, democracy is in retreat around the world and is looking increasingly dysfunctional even in the United States itself.”
Mearsheimer undertakes a more radical critique of the liberal foreign policy paradigm as a whole. While he accepts that liberal democracy is the best system to govern the U.S., Mearsheimer disputes the contention that American values are universal. Whereas, for example, Americans tend to prize individual rights above all, others may well have different ideas about what constitutes the highest good worth defending. These may include notions of communal well-being and social stability, alternative ideals that often run in contrast to the American focus on individual liberty.
Mearsheimer also argues that the belief in American exceptionalism, however well-intentioned, can easily lead to aggression. As a power that believes its values are universal, the U.S. seems to be unable to view illiberal states as completely legitimate, making it extremely difficult, if not impossible, to pursue good-faith diplomacy with them. Instead of working out a sustainable balance of power, the U.S. thus finds itself reflexively seeking to undermine the governments of illiberal countries like Iran and Russia, whose values it finds distasteful, even when the strategic benefit of doing so is unclear. This “liberal intolerance” of political difference has helped fuel bloody proxy conflicts that may have been avoided had the U.S. been more willing, at least on principle, to accept the sovereignty of its rivals.
The liberal impulse to define conflicts as moral crusades, rather than as clashes over interests or national security, also feeds an ugly annihilationist tendency in policymaking. A major example of this is the U.S. war in Afghanistan.
Rather than define victory in these reasonable terms, the war against the Taliban was instead characterized as a moral crusade on behalf of human rights, feminism, and an array of other causes about which there can be no negotiation. Rejecting any compromise with an enemy it had defined as evil, the U.S. helped its local allies pursue a campaign of total annihilation against the Taliban and its supporters. Years later, Afghanistan is no closer to being a liberal democracy and the war is still raging there, at horrific human cost. The U.S., for its part, has given up on even defeating the Taliban and is instead simply trying to negotiate a face-saving exit.
It’s not clear, however, whether liberal values are as contingent as Mearsheimer makes them out to be. During the Arab Spring, considerable numbers of people showed themselves willing to risk their lives to achieve basic freedoms of individual expression and conscience, in scenes which at the time resonated strongly with the American public. While the U.S. ultimately sided with the forces of authoritarian “stability” in Egypt, Bahrain, and Syria, the popular movements that arose in those countries showed strong support for at least some of the liberal values that Americans cherish.
Both Walt and Mearsheimer are viewed as deans of the realist school, to varying degrees. Pursuing such a realist foreign policy would likely mean an end to reflexive U.S. support of movements aimed at undermining dictatorial governments, though Walt’s book does leave the door open to strictly humanitarian interventions in certain cases.
He based his logic on the belief that it is the time for the international community to loosen the sanctions as North Korea has already crossed a point of no return in denuclearization. But his European hosts gave that notion the cold shoulder.
The French and British leaders even used the term CVID (complete, verifiable and irreversible denuclearization) — which is not used by Uncle Sam anymore — and are not convinced of the need to ease sanctions on the pariah state
Though the government has the conviction that easing sanctions will facilitate the North’s denuclearization, Europe thought differently. It believed that only tightened sanctions will lead to denuclearization.
2. Based on last year’s United Nations General Assembly resolution reflecting the final report of the Commission of Inquiry on Human Rights in the DPRK, the resolution this year condemns the North Korea’s systematic, widespread and gross human rights violations, and urges the North Korea to urgently take measures to end all human rights violations. In addition, the resolution underscores very serious concerns regarding reports of torture, summary executions, arbitrary detention, abductions and other forms of human rights violations and abuses that North Korea commits against citizens from other countries within and outside of its territory.
本年の決議は，「北朝鮮における人権に関する国連調査委員会」の最終報告書の内容を反映させた昨年の国連総会決議を基に，北朝鮮の組織的かつ広範で深刻な人権侵害を非難し，北朝鮮に対し，その終結を強く要求しています。また，北朝鮮による，北朝鮮内外における外国人に対する拷問，法的手続を経ない死刑，恣意的な拘留，拉致やその他の人権侵害の報告に深刻な懸念を強調しています。
公館からの電話も盗聴している、ということだね。トルコはどこまで追い詰める気なんだろう。今回はカショギ氏の婚約者がトルコ人ということだから、そっちの力学もあるのかも知れない。
— buvery (@buvery) 2018年10月21日
https://t.co/fReUnQ1ff8
He first visited the Saudi consulate in Istanbul on 28 September to obtain a document certifying that he had divorced his ex-wife, so that he could marry his Turkish fiancée.
The US has legal and moral obligations to Khashoggi, a US resident with three US citizen children
世界中から父親応援の声！https://t.co/wO0B47eo8N
— クーリエ・ジャポン (@CourrierJapon) 2018年10月21日
IMG_6585
館内にベビーチェア付きの化粧室がございます。
設置場所：男性／5F(北側トイレ)・7F(南側トイレ)
・・・・・女性／4F(北側トイレ)・5F(北側トイレ)
RT 鍵ぱみゅ 若者のゴルフ離れが叫ばれて久しい昨今ですが、今や「1年以内にゴルフをやった」って人が5.5%しかいないらしいのよ。そのうち54%が60歳以上で、要するに現役世代では2.7%だそうで。50代・40代が8%代、それ以下の世代はガクンと下がる。これ本当に10年後には姿を消すんじゃないか
— Spica (@Kelangdbn) 2018年10月21日
■ゴルファー、60～70代が過半数
性別と年代別の構成比をみると、さらに衝撃的な数字がみえてくる。年代別の構成比は60代が23.1%、70代は29.7%だった。60代、70代を合わせた52.8%を上回るのはゲートボール（63.5%）だけ。ゴルフをする人の半数以上をこの年代が占めており、15年（48.4%）に比べて一段と高齢化が進んだ。また、女性の比率は13.7%で、前年に比べ0.8ポイント減った。性別や年齢を問わず楽しめるのがゴルフの魅力にもかかわらず、まだまだ女性の比率が低いのが現状だ。
ゴルフの参加率は5.5%で、前年から2.0ポイント下がった。特に目立つのは50代男性（15.8%→8.5%）と40代男性（11.0%→8.3%）。2桁の参加率があったこの世代の大幅な落ち込みが影響している。
ゴルフ界にとって明るい兆しはないだろうか。前年より参加率が増えた世代がある。10代、20代の女性だ。比率は低いが、10代が0%から3.0%、20代は0.9%から1.5%にそれぞれ増えた。今年限りでの現役引退を発表した宮里藍が03年にプロ入りしてから、若手女子プロの活躍が続いており、若い女性にゴルフがより身近なスポーツになってきている表れかもしれない
