児童養護施設は、原則１８歳で退所しなければならない。多くの人がよりどころとする家族に頼れない退所者は、孤独になりがちだ。
福岡県岡垣町の児童養護施設「報恩母の家」の花田悦子施設長（５２）は「施設でも自立に向けた取り組みをし、退所後も相談にのるが、子どもは職員の忙しさを知っているから気を使ってしまう面がある。施設職員だけでなく、地域や社会に支える人や場所が増えるのはうれしい」。
福岡県の児童養護施設で育った元プロボクサーの坂本博之さん（４７）は今でも児童養護施設を退所した１００人以上と連絡を取り合う。「社会に出る前は不安だらけ。安心できる寝床があればムチャもできるが、施設を出た子には、そうするには厳しい状況もある」と話す。反社会的な仕事をやめさせたり、手紙の書き方を教えたり……。そんな子どもたちにこうエールをおくる。「悲しいことも、つらいこともあるが、それ以上に楽しいことがある。今の一瞬を頑張る『一瞬懸命』でやっていこう」
The US response to North Korea’s proposal was briefed to the foreign minister in January 1988, the document added, noting that Washington echoed the South Korean skepticism over the North Korea’s diplomatic overture.
“It is the issue that should be handled by the South Korean government,” the report quoted the US government as saying. “Such a proposal is unrealistic without North Korea’s tangible and viable measures to build confidence in economic and humanitarian issue.”
Kim has not committed to freezing his nuclear weapons programme, but has indicated his willingness to touch on the subject of denuclearisation in the upcoming meetings with South Korean President Moon Jae-in next month and US President Donald Trump by May.
However, according to Jane’s Intelligence Review, North Korea has begun testing an experimental light water reactor and may bring another reactor online at its Yongbyon Nuclear Research Centre.
“This is a trap. Instead of wishful thinking, we should tread very cautiously. At least we should seek some kind of pledges from Kim Jong-un about his intention to translate his rhetoric into actions,” Yun said.
Trump and Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe said last month that there would be “no meaningful dialogue” unless North Korea agreed on “complete, verifiable and irreversible denuclearisation”.
However, Yun said Kim apparently had a different definition of denuclearisation – which includes the removal of US nuclear weapons and troops from the peninsula – and “there are many preconditions before North Korea actually starts its own measures to denuclearise”.
“How can you accept the offer when you know all those preconditions, which include the withdrawal of US troops from South Korea? It is unthinkable,” he said.
“We have had quite a few failures in the past. If we fail again, many people will start to talk about the worst scenario,” which include a dangerous military stand-off and possible conflicts, said the former diplomat.
“Before that they have to declare everything from nuclear materials to facilities and weapons and they have to accept international inspections, including from the International Atomic Energy Agency. It can be phased but they have to show they have nothing to hide,” Yun said.
来日
1976年7月のオリバーの来日は、興行師の康芳夫の仕掛けである。康はアメリカで話題になっていたオリバーに目をつけ、所有権を持つマイケル・ミラーと契約をして日本での興業権を得た。日本中を巡回してまわり、どの会場も満員だったという。
特別チャーター機で羽田に到着したオリバーをタラップから降りさせ、来日歓迎ディナーショーには正装で出席し、宿泊するのはダイヤモンドホテルのスイートルームにするなど、オリバーを人間扱いした巧妙な演出は、マスコミの興味を惹き、連日の報道はオリバーを一躍ブームにした。しかしながら実際には多くのホテルで宿泊を断られ、檻に入れる条件でやっと客室を確保できた。このときホテルでオリバーの世話をしていたのがIVSテレビのアシスタントディレクターだったテリー伊藤(当時は本名の伊藤輝夫)である。テリーは糞尿を垂れ流すオリバーに腹を立て、殴る蹴るの暴力を振るった結果、オリバーはテリーに恐れをなし、二度と視線を合わせようとしなくなったとのことである[3]。かまやつひろしも著書「ムッシュ！」でテリーから聞いた話として本人の発言と共に触れている。
特に日本テレビでは出演料500万円を払い、1976年7月22日に「木曜スペシャル 謎の怪奇人間オリバー!」と題して、学者らが鑑定分析する模様を放送して24.1%の高視聴率をあげた。ちなみにこれを担当したのが日本テレビの社員ディレクターだった矢追純一であった。その映像はBBCが「サイエンス」でオリバー君の特集を組んだとき流用された。ただし、オリジナル音声は英語のナレーションや関係者の発言が被さっている部分もある。
ホテルの客室は最上級のスイートルームで、VIP並の扱いをすることにより話題を盛り上げようとしたが、高視聴率に気を良くした日本テレビはさらにオリバーの「花嫁」を募集。「オリバーの子供を出産したら1,000万円の報酬が支払われる」という報奨金まで設定されたため、これに対して数十人の女性が応募する反響があった[4]。最終的に、無名の19歳のタレント（現在は占い師を営んでいる）を康が個人的に選び、記者会見まで行われた。しかし、この前代未聞の企画は実現するには至らなかった。
帰国後
アメリカに帰国したオリバーを待ち受けていたのは、マイケル・ミラーから売却され、所有者の間を転々として、サーカスや見世物小屋で見世物として扱われる生活だった。そして、見世物として飽きられてしまった1980年代末になると、今度は化粧品会社の実験所の1.5メートル四方の小さな檻で7年間を過ごした。狭い檻の中でオリバーは発狂して暴れまくることが多くなってしまったという。
３月に米大統領補佐官（国家安全保障問題担当）に指名された対北強硬派のジョン・ボルトン氏は、米朝首脳会談について、「北朝鮮の核兵器、装備を米国に搬送して廃棄するリビア方式を議論すべきだ」と主張している。
リビア方式では、２００３年に核計画放棄に同意したリビアから、すべての核関連設備や物質が米英の情報機関要員によって米テネシー州オークリッジ国立研究所に運ばれた。そのうえで廃棄し、リビア国内を２年間かけて検証したのちに制裁を解除し、国交正常化した。
“Things are not going as Trump has wished for, so he is twisting South Korea’s arms so that Moon will work for the kind of results Washington wanted when he meets with Kim Jong-un,” said Koh Yu-hwan, a professor of North Korean studies at Dongguk University in Seoul, the South Korean capital. “Like the businessman he is, Trump is telling Moon, ‘I will pay you — when you produce the results.’ ”
Previous United States administrations used the military alliance that South Korea depends on for its security as leverage in securing American interests in trade and other negotiations, but they did so in low-key negotiations, South Korean officials said. Mr. Trump has made much of that process public.
“Trump does not separate security from trade; they are all part of his pack of cards, while Moon tended to see them as separate issues,” said Shim Sang-ryul, a professor of international trade at Kwangwoon University in Seoul.
But Mr. Trump’s decision to link the trade deal with South Korea to a breakthrough in denuclearizing North Korea shows a growing unease in Washington, analysts said. Washington fears that Seoul might drift from their alliance and move closer to Beijing, while Mr. Trump feels his approach to North Korea is being undermined in the wake of a flurry of diplomatic initiatives by Mr. Kim in recent weeks, especially his meeting this week with China’s president, Xi Jinping, analysts said.
A key problem for Mr. Trump is that South Korea sides with China in arguing that the Libyan model is unrealistic, championing an “action-for-action” phased approach for denuclearization.
Previous United States administrations used the military alliance that South Korea depends on for its security as leverage in securing American interests in trade and other negotiations
米軍は出て行け、軍事費は福祉に、すべて話し合えばわかりあえる
North Korea has no intention of keeping any promises that it makes to the international community to dismantle or disable its nuclear or ballistic missile capabilities, according to analysts.
ＴＰＰ１１はまだ締結されていない。国会で協定が承認され、関連の手続きを終え、協定寄託国であるニュージーランドに通知した時点で「締結」になる。また茂木敏充経済再生担当相が出席した署名式の開催地はペルーではなく、チリの首都サンティアゴ。署名式は８日午後（日本時間９日未明）に開かれ、朝日新聞、毎日新聞、読売新聞などが９日付夕刊、翌１０日付朝刊で報じた。
AMY GOODMAN: You’re held in a cell in solitary confinement 23 hours a day?
CHELSEA MANNING: Yeah. And, you know, by this point, being in solitary confinement had become normal. So, it was over 11 months altogether, if you include both Quantico and Kuwait, that I was held.
JUAN GONZÁLEZ: I want to read from the letter you sent to President Obama about that period of time. You said, “The Army kept me in solitary confinement for nearly a year before formal charges were brought against me. It was a humiliating and degrading experience—one that altered my mind, body and spirit.” And you went on to say, “These experiences have broken me and made me feel less than human. I have been fighting for years to be treated respectfully and with dignity; a battle I fear is lost. I do not understand why.”
CHELSEA MANNING: Is there much more to say than that?
AMY GOODMAN: Well, let’s go to Atul Gawande. First, I want to turn to—in March 2012, the U.N. special rapporteur on torture, Juan Méndez, criticized the condition of your detention, telling The Guardian_, “I conclude [that] the 11 months under conditions of solitary confinement (regardless of the name given to his regime by the prison authorities) constitutes at a minimum cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment in violation of article 16 of the convention against torture. If the effects in regards to pain and suffering inflicted on Manning were more severe, they could constitute torture.” And then, Atul Gawandehealth, practicing surgeon in Boston, staff writer at The New Yorker magazine, studied the effects of solitary confinement on prisoners.
DR. ATUL GAWANDE: The science of what happens to people deprived of social contact is they have to fight for their sanity. And many lose their sanity. That reality, that we are social beings in our physiology, led me to ask the question: Is solitary confinement, the way we’re practicing it now, torture? And you can’t read the cases—and I describe the cases of both hostages and people who are in prisons—and conclude that, number one, those experiences are different. They’re the same. Number two, you can’t conclude that it’s not torture
What did non-Christian authors say about Jesus?
As far as we know, the first author outside the church to mention Jesus is the Jewish historian Flavius Josephus, who wrote a history of Judaism around AD93. He has two references to Jesus. One of these is controversial because it is thought to be corrupted by Christian scribes (probably turning Josephus’s negative account into a more positive one), but the other is not suspicious – a reference to James, the brother of “Jesus, the so-called Christ”.
About 20 years after Josephus we have the Roman politicians Pliny and Tacitus, who held some of the highest offices of state at the beginning of the second century AD. From Tacitus we learn that Jesus was executed while Pontius Pilate was the Roman prefect in charge of Judaea (AD26-36) and Tiberius was emperor (AD14-37) – reports that fit with the timeframe of the gospels. Pliny contributes the information that, where he was governor in northern Turkey, Christians worshipped Christ as a god. Neither of them liked Christians – Pliny writes of their “pig-headed obstinacy” and Tacitus calls their religion a destructive superstition.
Did ancient writers discuss the existence of Jesus?
Strikingly, there was never any debate in the ancient world about whether Jesus of Nazareth was a historical figure. In the earliest literature of the Jewish Rabbis, Jesus was denounced as the illegitimate child of Mary and a sorcerer. Among pagans, the satirist Lucian and philosopher Celsus dismissed Jesus as a scoundrel, but we know of no one in the ancient world who questioned whether Jesus lived.
This in-depth literature review by Alternet's Valerie Tarico outlines five reasons scholars give that he did not exist:
There is no first century secular evidence that he existed - all sources are either Christian or Jewish
The earliest New Testament writings are vague on details of his life - they become more fleshed out in later texts
The eyewitness accounts in the four canonical gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke and John) are all second hand
The gospels make contradictions about his life
Modern scholars who claim to have uncovered the 'real Jesus' contradict each other
