MikeLigalig.com

How to visit


DMZ, South Korea, Panmunjom
A view from the Dora Observatory.
Carl Court/Getty Images AsiaPac/Getty Images

On both sides of the DMZ, travelers must book a guided private or group tour with an official operator, such as Koryo Tours in the North, or Viator in the South.

In North Korea, there are two major points of interest within the DMZ: Panmunjom and the Concrete Wall observation post, which overlooks the South Korean anti-tank barrier on the southern end of the treaty zone.

In contrast, the South Korean side of the DMZ, and the surrounding area, encompasses several parks, observation towers and museums -- plus a plethora of tour itineraries.

US travelers have been banned from visiting North Korea since September 1, 2017, so access via the South is the only option. Most first-time visitors choose a combined DMZ and JSA tour by way of Seoul.

The itinerary usually takes travelers to unfinished infiltration tunnels (said to be built by the North), the barricaded Freedom Bridge (used to return prisoners at the end of the war), Nuri Peace Park, the Dora Observatory and the Mount Odu Observatory.

Also known as Unification Hill, the Mount Odu Observatory is a highlight, providing voyeuristic travelers with binoculars and 360-degree views across the peninsula.

From this perch, you'll see the modern cities and cars of South Korea in one direction, juxtaposed with marshy landscapes up north. While largely desolate, you might spot a glimpse of graceful white cranes, eagles, bears, goats or deer.

"It can be confusing to go to the 'front line' and find all things calm, despite the rhetoric"
Simon Cockerell, Koryo Tours

But that's just one part of the DMZ experience.

In South Korea, the atmosphere varies widely from site to site, from quiet deference at JSA to the bustling Dora Observatory.

There is even a theme park built in Imjingak Nuri Peace Park, just outside the DMZ on the South Korea side, which may feel at odds with the area's somber history.

"While there's tension there all the time, it's not the case to say that it is on a knife edge or anything like that," says Cockerel. "After all, it has been in its current state for decades.

"It can be confusing to go to the 'front line' and find all things calm, despite the rhetoric."

Get your bearings


DMZ, South Korea, Panmunjom
South Korean soldiers stand guard at the border village of Panmunjom.
Carl Court/Getty Images AsiaPac/Getty Images

When imagining the 2.5-mile-wide DMZ, the first image that comes to mind is often the Joint Security Area (JSA), also known as the Panmunjom truce area. It's easily identifiable by the vibrant blue Military Armistice Commission Conference Room, which straddles the Military Demarcation Line.

Surprisingly quiet, the JSA has been called "haunting" and "unsettling" due in part to barbed wire fences and steely military personnel.

Bill Clinton, who visited in 1993, famously called it the "scariest place on earth."

"Panmunjom is the most-visited part of the DMZ, from both sides," says Simon Cockerell, managing director of Koryo Tours, which organizes independent travel to North Korea.
"This is where you can see the front line up close, and even cross it within (the conference room)."

How to visit the Korean Demilitarized Zone

Kate Springer, CNN
Published 4th May 2018



(CNN) — All eyes are on the Korean Demilitarized Zone (DMZ) right now, where South Korea's President Moon Jae-in and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un met in April and vowed to bring peace to the peninsula.

Even the US President could be on his way there. A source told CNN in May that Kim Jong Un has agreed to meet President Trump at the DMZ, a no-man's land about 30 miles north of Seoul that was established in the 1953 Korean War Armistice Agreement.

Dividing the peninsula like a scar, the 160-mile-long treaty zone isn't just a strategic political meeting place -- it's also a tourist magnet.

It may be one of the world's most heavily militarized borders, but the DMZ welcomes more than 1.2 million travelers each year, according to the Korea Tourism Organization.

CNN Travel explains how to visit the DMZ, what you should know before going and the likely fate of the zone should South Korea and North Korea finally broker a formal peace.

aargh. i wish to collar the photographer...

and the heir is...

i'm good at this.

Hopefully, a timely solution to the Kuwait crisis would help DU30 recover his senses and rethink his understanding of the limited authority and power of a president. A great spiritual writer says authority "does not consist in the one above yelling at the one below, and he in turn to the other further down." This is precisely how DU30 has exercised his authority and power, and this is what has led us to our fiasco in Kuwait, and threatens to lead us to a much bigger fiasco if and when our noble justices finally decide to follow DU30 at the cost of the Constitution, justice, and the truth.

http://www.manilatimes.net/

And this, of course, is what happened to the justices of the Supreme Court who have reportedly decided to vote for the ouster of their own Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno in an absurd quo warranto proceeding, after DU30 declared that Sereno is his enemy and he wants her out of the court.

Under the Constitution, to which every justice owes his or her office, no impeachable official like Sereno may be removed except by death, permanent disability, resignation, or impeachment for, and conviction of culpable violation of the Constitution, treason, bribery, graft and corruption, other high crimes or betrayal of public trust, with the concurrence of no less than two-thirds of all the members of the Senate.

But DU30 has barked out his order, and the justices would not risk provoking the anger of this particular god. Better kill the Constitution and the highest court than defy his wishes.

To the ends of the earth

Obviously because of the way DU30 spoke against Kuwait's alleged maltreatment of Filipino domestics, which had elicited an official comment from the Kuwaiti government, a bright young lawyer like Dado, who once worked for me with diligence and distinction in the Senate, was driven to lead the rescue mission, unmindful of what he himself knew about the Vienna Convention and the inviolable rights of a sovereign state. He wanted to show he had been listening to the President and was willing to follow him to the ends of the earth.

This too is what happened to the policemen in Operation Tokhang, who were led to kill mere drug suspects by the thousands, without due process or documentation, after they heard the President say kill, kill, kill!

This too is what apparently happened to the Bureau of Immigration and Deportation official, who was compelled to issue a deportation order to the 71-year-old Australian nun, Patricia Fox, after DU30 said he had heard her in a political rally and that he himself had ordered her arrest.

Kuwait to blame?

In most of his public statements after the Demafelis body was found, DU30 sounded as though he believed the State of Kuwait, rather than the poor maid's murderers, was itself responsible for the murder, and that all Kuwaiti employers were inclined to commit the same crime against Filipino domestic workers. He seemed to have forgotten that the maltreatment of household help is not the invention of any particular class of foreign employers; it exists in our own neighborhoods, sometimes even in our own households, except that the maltreated domestic does not have any recourse to any labor attaché, consul or ambassador.

This was one of the reasons why as a senator, I filed the first proposal of a law that would protect domestic workers in the country, not necessarily abroad, except that I was termed out before the proposal could move. To his credit, Sen. Jinggoy Estrada pursued this great cause, and this is now the Kasambahay Law which protects all domestic workers.

Meek as a sheep

From the intensely aggressive posture DU30 showed after the police found the body of the murdered OFW, Joanna Demafelis, stuck inside a freezer in an abandoned warehouse, the tough-talking former Davao mayor has morphed into a sheep, as it were, as far as Kuwait is concerned. Where he spewed a lot of venom earlier, he has now begun to sound even kind when talking of Kuwait, as though he were now talking of Beijing.

I believe the Philippines has been sufficiently humiliated, and Kuwait can afford to be generous now to save the situation. It may want to take a conciliatory move to put this incident behind the two governments. But this is a great learning opportunity for DU30 and his people. No one among them will have the courage to tell DU30 this, but the Kuwaiti fiasco happened because all the officers involved wanted to show the President they would follow him to the ends of the earth, and if he said "jump," they would gladly jump, without asking him from what floor of the building.

Who ordered the rescue?

But did DU30 order the unlawful operation? If not DU30 himself, who did?

Although this was primarily a labor issue, it appears Labor Secretary Silvestre Bello 3rd was the last person to know about the rescue operations. Did the orders come directly from Cayetano, or did they come from DFA Undersecretary for OMWA Sarah Lou Arriola, a non-career official who may or may not have heard at all of the Vienna Convention?

The fiasco has understandably triggered a lot of blame-passing among DU30's own people. Yesterday, one morning broadsheet reported that Cayetano and Bello had a shouting match in DU30's presence, before the President left for the last Asean summit in Singapore. The report did not say who outshouted whom, but the entire government is obviously hurting badly from this incident.

Cayetano apologized, but –

This happened after Cayetano had apologized, in President Rodrigo Duterte's presence, to Kuwaiti Ambassador Musaed Saleh Althwaikh during a well-publicized meeting in Davao. The ambassador was himself recalled to Kuwait after his Davao meeting and Villa's expulsion. What does this mean? This means the Kuwait foreign ministry decided not to accept Cayetano's apology and instead play hardball.

DU30 must have been the first person to appreciate Kuwait's strong reaction because of his own experience. He himself had threatened and continues to threaten foreigners who "interfere in his country's domestic affairs" by talking about his extrajudicial drug killings. How then could Kuwait allow Philippine rescue teams to extract allegedly distressed Filipino domestics from Kuwaiti private homes without any adverse reaction from the government?

According to Foreign Secretary Alan Peter Cayetano, 68 OFWs had been "rescued" through this operation, while some 132 more were still awaiting the "rescuers." Meanwhile, the videos had gone viral, and from April 19 to April 23, they were reportedly viewed at least 400,000 times. These were genuinely applauded by some; one highly supportive columnist said it was that kind of action, whose time had come.

But a justly offended host government reacted by expelling Philippine Ambassador Renato Villa as persona non grata, ordering the arrest of DFA-Office of Migrant Workers Affairs (OMWA) Executive Director Raul Dado and two other foreign affairs officers involved in the operation, and jailing four drivers without any diplomatic status.

 
This violated Kuwait's sovereignty and the norms prescribed by the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations. The government complicated its error when on April 19, 2018 Acting DFA Assistant Secretary for Public Diplomacy Elmer Cato reportedly posted videos of the unauthorized rescue activities on Facebook, as though they were genuine diplomatic achievements.

What they could have done

Assuming there were complaints of employers' abuses against our Filipino domestic workers, the Philippine embassy in Kuwait could have forwarded these complaints to the appropriate Kuwaiti authorities, and asked them to act. Should they fail to act, then the government would have found sufficient reason to raise the matter to the highest level. But under no circumstance did the Philippine government have the authority or power to extricate allegedly distressed Filipino domestic workers on its own. We are not even a middling military, economic or political power.

DU30 can learn a lot from the Kuwait fiasco 

BY FRANCISCO TATAD   
MAY 2, 2018



I HOPE and firmly believe the Philippine diplomatic crisis with the State of Kuwait could be solved very soon, and that our Filipino domestic workers in that country and their dependents at home would be spared so much unnecessary anxiety and pain. The solution to the crisis need not be hard to find, and many are eager to see both governments work together and raise Philippine-Kuwaiti relations to a new level. But we cannot fudge the facts.

The Philippines committed an unfortunate breach when on April 7, it undertook "rapid rescue missions" of allegedly distressed Filipino domestic workers in Kuwaiti private homes, without the participation or consent of the appropriate Kuwaiti authorities. Seven teams were said to have participated.

Specious


MAKISTOCK/SHUTTERSTOCK

Current meaning: Seeming fair, but falsely so

Original meaning: Fair or beautiful


Egregious



Current meaning: Shockingly bad

Original meaning: Anything that separates itself from a group

https://www.rd.com/culture/

Moot point


MONKEY BUSINESS IMAGES/SHUTTERSTOCK

Current meaning: A matter of no importance

Original meaning: A hypothetical idea created specifically to be talked about


Resentment


WOWSTY/SHUTTERSTOCK

Current meaning: Indignation

Original meaning: Gratitude

Symposium


LSTOCKSTUDIO/SHUTTERSTOCK

Current meaning: A conference or meeting to discuss a particular subject

Original meaning: A drinking party. The word comes from the Greek word "symposion," which the ancient Greeks used to describe their lively, boozy banquets.


Harlot


RIDO/SHUTTERSTOCK

Current meaning: A promiscuous woman

Original meaning: A goofy, mischievous man

Artificial


JACOB LUND/SHUTTERSTOCK

Current meaning: Contrived or false

Original meaning: Artfully and skillfully constructed


Villain


SYDA PRODUCTIONS/SHUTTERSTOCK

Current meaning: Evildoer

Original meaning: A trusted farm hand. It used to be spelled villein, and it evolved into the version we're familiar with today.

10 Words That Mean the Opposite of What They Used to Mean

BY BETH DREHER

Thanks to cultural changes, incorrect translations, and a host of other reasons, word meanings often shift over time. Here, ten words that have done a 180.

Awful


ALEX EMANUEL KOCH/SHUTTERSTOCK

Current meaning: Very unpleasant

Original meaning: Inspiring wonder, as in "full of awe."


Bully


OLENA YAKOBCHUK/SHUTTERSTOCK

Current meaning: Someone who mocks or harms those who are weaker

Original meaning: A good fellow or a darling. Linguists believe it evolved from the Dutch word "boel," meaning "lover."

The California appeals court ruled that animals cannot bring copyright infringement suits and said PETA had put its own goals ahead of the monkey's despite its status as the animal's "next friend."

"Puzzlingly, while representing to the world that 'animals are not ours to eat, wear, experiment on, use for entertainment, or abuse in any way'," the three-judge court said, "PETA seems to employ Naruto as an unwitting pawn in its ideological goals."

PETA responded by saying that the monkey "is discriminated against simply because he's a nonhuman animal." NVG

http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/

The picture recorded on Slater's camera quickly went viral, and become one of the most shared selfies ever.

But in 2015, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, a US-based animal rights group, filed a suit on Naruto's behalf, claiming the photographer had infringed Naruto's copyright since the monkey had taken the picture himself.

An initial court ruling dismissed PETA's case, but Slater still agreed last October to donate 25 percent of the earnings from the picture to charities that protect the habitat of macaque monkeys.

PETA sought to drop the case entirely, but a US appeals court made the unusual move of stepping in anyway and issuing a ruling that criticized the group for dropping the case despite having presented itself as the monkey's "next friend," a legal status normally used in court on behalf people unable to represent themselves.

US court rules monkey does not own selfie copyright

Agence France-Presse
April 25, 2018


The viral selfie taken by a macaque monkey using the smartphone of nature photographer David J. Slater and which became the subject of a complicated copyright lawsuit is displayed at the Museum of Selfies, in Glendale, California, on March 29, 2018. Image: Robyn Beck – AFP/File

A US court has ruled that a monkey who snapped a selfie on a wildlife photographer's camera does not own the copyright to the image, which became an internet sensation.

The ruling late Monday is expected to draw a line under a protracted legal battle between British photographer David Slater and the animal rights group PETA, which filed a suit on behalf of Naruto the monkey.

The case began in 2011 when the crested macaque monkey approached a camera Slater had set up on the forested Indonesian island of Sulawesi and managed to press the button, taking a picture of himself with what appeared to be a broad grin on his face.

But whether that's actually happening is another unknown.

It's one reason why scientists and environmental groups are saying there's an urgent need for more research.

And with global plastic production expected to triple by 2050, along with the fact that some plastics can take hundreds of years to biodegrade, microplastic pollution is a problem that isn't going away.

https://edition.cnn.com/

The health risks

One risk stems from the fact that microplastics passing through wastewater plants can pick up harmful bacteria, which they can carry with them. If we ingest the plastics, we may ingest the bacteria.

Another is that plastics have a number of chemicals added at the manufacturing stage, and it's possible that these are released in the body.

"In sufficient concentrations the chemicals can injure and kill cells," Kelly said. "The cells may be replaced successfully, or they may not. [There could be] damage to protein and DNA and things like that. But at the moment, we don't know if this is happening."

And while microplastics are too big to be absorbed by our cells, if they become broken down into fragments in the nanometer size range, it's possible they could be absorbed in our circulatory system or pass into our organs, Mahon said.

The big question is, what effect do these plastics have on humans? The short answer is, we just don't know, but scientists, including Kelly and Mahon, believe there is a potential health risk.

Amount of plastic produced since the 1950s

8.3bn metric tons
- 9% recycled
- 12% incinerated
- 79% accumulated in landfills/natural environment

6.3bn metric tons (waste)

"They're definitely present," he said. "The issue is at what concentration they're present in the air."

One source of airborne microplastics is the same fertilizers that contaminate the ground; as these fertilizers dry out, some of the plastics may get carried away by wind action.

And you can't avoid the plastics by staying at home: They've also been detected in indoor air.

"Inside modern homes there's lots of potential sources of plastic," Kelly said. "Potentially from erosion of synthetic carpets but also fibers could be released by putting on and taking off our clothes."

"Even if they stay on the surface, they could be washed into streams when it rains. And even if they don't get washed into streams, there's still the potential for environmental impact, and then there's the whole terrestrial food chain."

Though there's little known about the effect on plants or on the wider food chain, studies have shown that earthworms exposed to microplastics in soil have increased gut inflammation, slower growth and higher mortality.

As well as contaminating the land, microplastics have been detected in the air.

Professor Frank Kelly, director of the Environmental Research Group at King's College London, is researching the presence of microplastics in London's air.

Where it's coming from

Fertilizers are thought to be one of the leading contributors.

Sewage sludge -- the semi-solid by-product of sewage water treatment -- is used in many countries to fertilize agricultural fields. But the sludge can contain microplastics in the form of microbeads found in cosmetics that have been washed down the sink and clothing fibers that get flushed into sewage systems after synthetic clothes are machine washed.

Exactly what happens to these plastics once they're in the environment is largely unknown. "It's crucially important that we get a hold on what's happening on the land," said professor Anne Marie Mahon of the Galway-Mayo Institute of Technology in Dublin. She studies microplastic pollution and has found it in Irish tap water and well water. Other research recently found microplastics in bottled water around the world.

"It's vital we know if they travel over land," she said. "Do they stay in the top of the soil? Do they become integrated vertically into the soil column, in which case there could be a risk to groundwater?

Because research on microplastics on land and in freshwater is still in its infancy, there are no accurate figures on the extent of the problem, but some studies have suggested there are more microplastics on land than there are in our oceans.

Globally, more than 330 million metric tons of plastics is produced each year, leaving potential sources of microplastic pollution all around us.

Only 14% of plastic packaging is collected for recycling globally.

It's not just the oceans: Microplastic pollution is all around us

By Mark Tutton, CNN
April 22, 2018


Plastic waste at a landfill in Dakar, Senegal.

(CNN)- Chances are you've seen the photos of dead seabirds, their stomachs filled with scraps of plastic foraged from beaches and oceans around the world.

You've probably also heard of the microplastics polluting our seas: pieces of plastic that have been worn down by the elements into tiny fragments, smaller than 5 millimeters, that can harm fish and other wildlife.

But while marine plastic pollution has been studied for decades, the extent and effects of plastic pollution elsewhere is only just beginning to be explored.

In the past few years, scientists have found microplastics in our soil, tap water, bottled water, beer and even in the air we breathe. And there's growing concern about the potential health risks they pose to humans.

I was Europe's last chance. - Adolf Hitler


I am your last card. - Rodrigo Duterte

Behind these deluded utterances is the ultimate narcissism of power: Hitler: "I was Europe's last chance." Duterte: "I am your last card."

Read more: http://opinion.inquirer.net/

The public has learned to take these instances of public vilification of targeted figures as part of the Duterte style of rule. People know these are not empty threats. Indeed, the public takes them as synonymous with the President's exercise of political will. They themselves don't feel threatened.

Adolf Hitler wrote a lot about mass psychology. Some of the things he said somehow give us a glimpse of the logic behind the Duterte method and its assumptions about mass stupidity. Here's a sampling.

On cruelty: "Cruelty impresses, people want to be afraid of something. They want someone to whom they can submit with a shudder. The masses need that. They need something to dread." "I have not come into this world to make men better, but to make use of their weaknesses."  On force: "Only force rules. Force is the first law."  "The one means that wins the easiest victory over reason is terror and force."

His most recent prey, the 71-year-old Australian Catholic missionary Sister Patricia Fox, who has lived among the Filipino poor for decades, couldn't believe she would be of interest to any government security agency. Over the years she has joined many protest rallies on the side of the oppressed, at times believing her voice amounted to nothing. But Mr. Duterte apparently heard what she said in one recent rally, and personally ordered her investigated. The Bureau of Immigration promptly picked her up from her residence and detained her for a day, threatening to deport her. The real message being sent is addressed to all foreign guests in the country: You're here as visitors; don't ever make the mistake of getting involved in political activities.

Compared to Ferdinand Marcos, Mr. Duterte has performed the art of intimidation with consummate skill. Without warning, he calls out the name of his prey, denouncing him or her in the strongest possible terms, and publicly announces that he or she, or they, are in his line of fire. His choice of target often seems whimsical, taking the form of a spur-of-the-moment mention in the course of a longwinded presidential rant.  The victims are often left wondering what precipitated it, and how long they have been on his mind.

Anyone who is thus named as enemy, and has no will to fight, usually keeps quiet. The writer Elias Canetti describes it as akin to being arrested. "The feel of the hand of authority on his shoulder is usually enough to make a man give himself up without having to be actually seized. He cowers and goes quietly. He maintains an appearance of composure, even though it is not everywhere that this is justified by what is likely to happen to him subsequently." He could be released the same day after beng taught a lesson about power, or maybe jailed indefinitely after being charged with a nonbailable crime.

Indeed, he has intimidated the entire business community by calling out, seemingly from out of the blue, businessman Roberto Ongpin — concerning his gaming franchise. Ongpin thereafter quietly sold his business to a waiting investor, reportedly still wondering what he had done to incur the President's ire.

In a society where legal procedures and requirements are subject to creative interpretation, and observance of regulations is often negotiated, nearly every corporate entity is vulnerable, one way or the other, to charges of noncompliance with the law. Extortionists in all branches of the government have been known to prey upon these vulnerabilities to get money.

But, we are face to face with an entirely different phenomenon when it is the President himself who orders the investigation of people he publicly singles out as his or the country's enemies. A more accurate term for it would be the personal weaponization of government authority.

PUBLIC LIVES

The Duterte method

By: Randy David
Philippine Daily Inquirer
April 22, 2018

Nearly two years after Rodrigo Duterte was elected to the presidency, his signature approach to power has become all-too-familiar. It is one based on the methodical use of the coercive power of the state in order to intimidate dissenters, critics, skeptics, deviants, and noncooperative individuals who, in his perception, are not taking him seriously.

It is this approach that has basically defined his antidrug campaign, in which a few thousand drug suspects have been brazenly killed in police operations. This brutal show of force has been enough to frighten and compel hundreds of thousands of others to "surrender," have themselves detained, or simply listed down for monitoring and rehabilitation. In their minds, to be included in the list of drug surrenderers serves as an insurance that they won't be targeted for killing. This deadly assumption has been proven wrong countless times.

But the use of the fear factor has not been confined to the drug campaign alone. Mr. Duterte has silenced most of the political opposition by jailing the outspoken Sen. Leila de Lima on the incredible charges of conspiring with detained drug lords to trade in illegal drugs when she was justice secretary. By going after the Chief Justice herself, he has likewise warned the judiciary not to question or strike down any of his decisions. He has tamed mainstream media by attacking the "biased" reporting of the newspaper Philippine Daily Inquirer, the ABS-CBN media broadcast network, and the digital news portal Rappler. But, he doesn't stop there. He pursues his case against the owners by pointing to their various liabilities as business entities, rather than as professional news organizations.

While running for president, Rodrigo Duterte promised to assert Philippine sovereignty, even picturing himself riding a jet ski by his lonesome to plant the Philippine flag on the Chinese-occupied reefs. Two months ago he said it was just a joke. He followed up with another supposed joke to the Chinese ambassador to make the Philippines a province of China.

Read more at https://www.philstar.com/opinion/2018/04/20/1807582/will-manila-protest-military-planes#VlQufrfrmosFqfq8.99

Of the militarization of Panganiban Reef and Manila's arbitral win, former national security adviser Jose Almonte said: "They've been constructing for years; they've been there since early '90s. War does not have to be an option. China, who wants to be a superpower, is sensitive to world opinion. We should continue to uphold the arbitral decision. We can't enforce it because we have no armed might. Even the UN can't implement it. And America will not implement it even if they can. So we should campaign for world opinion."

The military aircraft landing is another step in China's operations, said Dr. Jay Batongbacal, director of the UP Institute for Maritime Affairs and Law of the Sea. "They started with cargo planes. We should watch out for fighter jets or bombers next. If this happens, it means they are expanding their operations in their bases. Eventually this will be more frequent until it becomes permanent." Collin Koh, a research fellow at Singapore's Rajaratnam School of International Studies, was quoted as saying, "Should Manila choose to be silent and downplay the issue, it could become routinized or normalized operations for China...There must be certain calculations within the Chinese political elite circles that Manila is in Beijing's pocket, because of President Duterte's desire for rapprochement and quest for Chinese aid and investments, which thus conclude that they could possibly get away with further acts of militarization."

Critics say the Duterte administration is soft on Chinese incursions in Philippine maritime jurisdictions. The foreign office has been silent on China's erection of missile pads on the fake islands, and recent installing of signal jammers against sea and aircraft. It claims to hold Beijing to its vow to not concrete any more reefs and shoals into fortresses. Beijing does not need to build more since it already has seven, all within the Philippine EEZ and continental shelf.

Manila has not followed up on its arbitral win against Beijing in July 2016. A UN court has rubbished Beijing's bogus historical claim to the entire South China Sea. Yet Manila alibis that to press its legal victory would mean unwinnable war. Preferring economic tact, Manila is banking on Beijing's loans to its "Build, Build, Build" infrastructure plan, mainly for transportation. Yet no transport facility has been built. Recently at the Boao Forum in China's Hainan province, Philippine officials heralded the first ever big loan – for irrigation. (Boao in recent Philippine history is where a President went, leaving the bedside of a critically ill spouse, to receive what witnesses swore at the Senate as "appearance fee" of $10 million (P500 million) for the $329 million overpriced NBN-ZTE deal.)

GOTCHA

Will Manila protest military planes?

Jarius Bondoc
(The Philippine Star)
April 20, 2018

In landing air force transport planes on Panganiban Reef, Beijing lied to the world about not militarizing its artificial islands in the South China Sea. It reneged on promises to Manila of non-provocative acts. The region is watching what the Duterte administration will do.

Two Chinese military aircraft were photographed on the landing strip on Panganiban, internationally known as Mischief Reef. Parked meters apart, the planes apparently arrived together early this year. Panganiban is within the Philippines' 200-mile exclusive economic zone, and 600 miles from China.

Diplomatic protest is in order, experts say. Asked by reporters, Foreign Sec. Alan Peter Cayetano avoided talking of such action. He said he has yet to verify the photos, published by the Inquirer Wednesday. He supposedly does not know if the photos, dated Jan. 6, 2018, came from the Philippine military.

sickened with sadness here. quo vadis, philippines?

The delivery of fair, impartial, equal, and swift justice would be exceedingly difficult to accomplish. The supervision and administration of the Judiciary, still to be vested in the Supreme Court, would be a nightmare. Our justices of the Supreme Court would have no more time to testify against each other.

Under Federalism, then, a truly independent, effective, and efficient judiciary worthy at all times of the trust and confidence of the people would just be a dream unfulfilled, a vision unrealized.

Now I will give you time to render your own verdict: Are these "judicial reforms" under Federalism? You can give your answer as we await the outcome of the continuing massive and very expensive campaign for Federalism.

The best answer of course is Reject Charter Change, Reject Federalism.

The victory of the Rejections is the Resurrection after the two Calvaries of the Judiciary.

All the best, and God bless the Philippines and the Filipino people.

Thank you.

source: facebook post of eileen mangubat

Also, one of the proposals seeks the creation of a Constitutional Court, which would decide on constitutional questions, electoral protests cases involving the President and Vice President, the disputes between the Federal government and State governments, between and among State governments, and disputes between the State governments and the local government units.

We do not know yet who are qualified to be appointed to the Constitutional Court. I know of one who suggests that the Constitutional Court may be a hybrid of retired Supreme Court Justices, preferably retired Chief Justices, and others. I am sure he was only joking. But he appeared serious.

Howsoever viewed, with these proposals under Federalism, we will have a horribly bloated Judicial bureaucracy, subjected to potential pressures, influences, and interferences exerted by politicians and political dynasties, with lawyers seeking the blessings of politicians to get judges' positions created by politicians themselves.

Knowing the litigious mentality of our people who would bring to court cases which could otherwise be resolved by simple acts of Christian charity, our courts will face a deluge of cases.

In another proposal, each State would have the power to enact penal laws and prescribe penalties therefor. Thus, inevitably, we will have Federal crimes and State crimes.

In another proposal, the States can have their own Constitutions or organic acts. Cases concerning their application or interpretation will ultimately reach the Supreme Court for its final resolution.

In another proposal, all courts must decide all cases pending decisions as of the ratification of the Constitution within six months from such ratification.

In two proposals, the Judicial and Bar Council will be abolished. Open political pressures and interferences in the appointments to the Judiciary will rule the day. Justices and judges would be put at the mercy of politicians and political dynasties.

In another proposal, judicial power is no longer vested in "one Supreme Court and in such other courts as may be established by law," as provided in Section 1 of Article VIII, but in "one Federal Supreme Court, the Regional Court of Appeals, the Sandiganbayan, and in such lower courts as may be established by law in the different Regions of the Federal States."

This would "constitutionalize" the Sandiganbayan and the Regional Court of Appeals, which would effectively abolish the present Court of Appeals. This constitutionalization would make it difficult to make changes thereon because to do so would require an amendment to the Constitution.

With the various component States authorized to establish lower courts in their respective States, we could just imagine how many can be created in each State, mostly for political purposes. The number will depend on the wishes or caprices of the political clans/dynasties in the States.

In another proposal, the State Legislatures are authorized to establish courts for the indigenous peoples.

Here now are what you really want to hear more from me.

This is about the Judiciary under Federalism. I only made a short reference to the Judiciary when I enumerated the hidden agenda behind federalism, to wit: the removal of certain judicial powers of the Judiciary and abolition of the Judicial Bar Council. Federalism would be the longest Calvary for the Philippine Judiciary. The latter will undergo some scourging, some lashes, some whipping. I do not know if these are judicial reforms.

I leave the conclusion to each of you after some deep reflection and discernment.

In the three proposals in the House of Representatives, one reduces the extent of judicial power by deleting from Section 1 of Article VIII of our Constitution the power of the court "to determine whether or not there has been a grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part of any branch or instrumentality of the Government," thereby restoring the 1935 and 1973 Constitutions which prevented the Supreme Court to inquire into cases involving so-called "political questions" which in fact emasculated the Judiciary's power and anything under the well-settled principle of "checks and balances" in a tripartite democratic system of governance.

Our becoming a province of China may not be too far away. It was also reported in the 1 March issue of the Philippine Star that Malacañang mentioned about the China-Philippine co-ownership of the West Philippine Sea or South China Sea. Then, as reported in the Philippine Daily Inquirer issue of 7 March, Director Batongbakal of the UP Institute for Maritime Affairs and Law of the Sea revealed a news article in a China Communist Party newspaper that the Philippines $7.34 billion loans from China would be secured by our natural resources.

The issue of Charter Change has further divided our already divided people. This reminds us of what Jesus Himself says about the Pharisees of His time.

According to the Gospel of Matthew (12:25), Jesus said: "Every kingdom divided against itself will be laid to waste, and no town or house divided against itself will stand."

I have in many forums denounced the several evils of Federalism and what it can do to our country and our people. Most of you may have known about them.

I also described Federalism as similar to the sin mentioned in verse 3 of Chapter 21 of the Book of Sirach of the Old Testament. This verse says that every sin or offense is like a two-edged sword; when it cuts, there can be no healing. Federalism is a two-edged sword, when it cuts, there is no healing.

By skillful propaganda strategy, this issue of Charter Change has overshadowed other major issues of paramount importance such as, among others: continuing violations of human rights with the daily cases of extrajudicial killings; peace and order and national security aggravated by the increasing threats from terrorist groups and the NPA; graft and corruption; and threats to our territorial integrity.

As to the latter, China is practically flying its flag on the West Philippine Sea, and is trying to grab our Benham Rise and perhaps later our beloved Philippines itself.

Remember, last February 19, before Chinese businessmen, the President mentioned of the Philippines as a province of China. Malacañang spokesperson Harry Roque explained that it was just a joke of the President. But knowing China, it will not consider it a joke. Chinese leaders are not known to be jokers.

This lifting of the citizenship requirement would end up with the outright surrender of the Philippines to foreigners at no cost to them. It would open further the way for the Philippines becoming a colony of a foreign power, or just a province of China according to the President.

It would convert our Congress from a free (spelled F-R-E-E) market of noble ideas and ideas into a fee (spelled F-E-E) market of lobbyists for moneyed foreign powers and businessmen seeking entry into our national resources and wealth. Graft and corruption in the halls of Congress and outside will flourish. Bribed and corrupted members of Congress will have huge foreign deposits which even AMLA would be powerless to monitor.

These certainly are components of the "new paradise" for the politicians. But not for the people. To them it would be HELL – spelled H-E-L-L.

This is the reason why, following the rush to amend or revise our 1987 Constitution by, primarily, adopting the Federal system of government, I publicly declared that the shift to Federalism is a lethal experiment, a fatal leap, a plunge to death, a leap to hell.

(3) the lifting of term limits as now prescribed by the Constitution, thereby allowing the President to seek reelection and the other elected officials to hold on to power for as many terms as they want;

(4) increasing the number of years for a term of office of elective positions;

(5) providing for a transition period for Federalism which could last for many years with the incumbent President in power;

(6) the lifting of the restrictions on the exercise of the Presidential power to proclaim martial law or to suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus thereby opening the door to the resurrection of the Marcos dictatorship;

(7) the removal of certain judicial powers of the Judiciary and abolition of the Judicial and Bar Council, thereby weakening the Judiciary especially the Supreme Court; and

( 8 ) the lifting of the Filipino citizenship requirement in the National Patrimony and economic provisions of the Constitution and leaving everything to Congress.

Behind it are the hidden agenda of shrewd politicians who seek to establish a "new paradise" – of power, fortune, and fame – for them. These are the politicians who fit the description given by former French president Pompidou: those who place the nation at their service; not statesmen who place themselves at the service of the nation.

These hidden agenda are hidden no more; they have been exposed.

From the drafts of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of the Philippines submitted to or filed with the Lower House, or as gathered from pronouncements of the gods of the Lower House, these are, among others:

(1) the adoption of the parliamentary form of Government;

(2) extensions of the terms of incumbent elected officials, which would mean the postponement or cancellation of the May 2019 elections;

In short effective decentralization of power sharing between the central government and the political subdivisions – which is the principal aim of federalism – are already assured and mandated – not denied or impeded – by the Constitution.

On the other hand, they are hampered or impeded by the failure – deliberate or otherwise – to fully implement the Constitution. If more are still needed, the 1991 Local Government Code can just be amended.

Under the Code, Congress is mandated to review it once every five years. Congress has not done so. So why blame the Constitution?

In the final analysis, my friends, the shift to Federalism is just a bait.

The proponents of Federalism try to lure our people to believe that our existing unitary system is highly centralized which has created and maintained an "Imperial Manila" which nurtures and perpetuates a tremendous imbalance in the exercise of governmental powers, and allocation of government resources in favor of "Imperial Manila" and against the present political subdivisions or local government units.

To reverse that imbalance, they now propose the creation between the Central Government and its existing political subdivisions a strong autonomous sovereign governmental authority – States or Regions – which shall share with the central government authority and power to the end that the existing local government units will truly enjoy the blessings of genuine autonomy.

We know of course that if this were the only motivation and purpose, there would be no need to amend the Constitution.

Our present Constitution provides for that autonomy. It devotes one whole Article on Local Government – Article X. This Article orders the first Congress convened under the Constitution to enact a Local Government Code which shall, among other things, provide for a more "responsive and accountable local government structures instituted through a system of decentralization" (Sec. 3). That first Congress enacted the 1991 Local Government Code.

Charter Change is made more attractive by the thrill of a shift from our 120 year-old unitary system of government to the untried, untested Federal system of government supposedly Filipino whose "architectural design" is still left to the imagination.

You may recall that at the inaugural session of the President's Consultative Committee, the Chair, retired Chief Justice Reynato Puno, urged the eighteen members of the Committee to devote serious thought on the "architectural design" of a Federal system distinctly Filipino (Manila Bulletin, 20 February 2018).

This is an admission that the system would be in style, in substance, and in scope, exclusively Filipino. It would have no models like any of the existing Federal States, such as the United States of America, Canada, Germany or the Russian Federation, or further back yet, the USSR.

We are informed that of the present 193 Member-States of the United Nations, only forty (40) have adopted Federalism.

There were many who believed so especially those who believed that the impeachment case will not prosper in the Senate where the Senators, truly acting as Judges, will put aside their political colors, and that the quo warranto will not prosper. Then, the third alternative would be to force the Chief Justice to resign.

I commend and congratulate the Chief Justice for her courage, unequalled in any language, in standing for the Judiciary by announcing that she will not resign and will face the impeachment trial, which she even wanted to be done as soon as possible.

Here is a Chief Justice who is willing to die for the Judiciary's independence and integrity.

And now on the group of signs I labeled as Charter Change or the Second Calvary of the Philippine Judiciary.

More alarming yet was the demand of some judges and court personnel for the Chief Justice to resign, which amounted to condemning her without evidence and judging her guilty without trial.

Again, never before had this happened in our history as a democratic country with a Constitution that guarantees the rule of law and due process.

This sad chapter of our history compelled me to issue on 12 March 2018 a "Call to Preserve the Independence of the Judiciary and to Safeguard the Rule of Law and Due Process."

I just wondered quite aloud and perhaps rightly so if the judges and court personnel who demanded for the resignation of the Chief Justice had allowed themselves, wittingly or unwittingly, to be used by those who seek to remove the Chief Justice.

Then the Solicitor General filed, several years after the period to do so had expired, a quo warranto case before the Supreme Court for the purpose of removing the Chief Justice, even as the impeachment case is ongoing.

This case leaves for history many firsts: (1) it is the first to be filed in the Supreme Court;

(2) it is the first where the Members of the Court, except one, voted to require the respondent Chief Justice to comment on the Petition within a non-extendible period of ten days;

(3) the first where the Members of the Court required a Chief Justice to appear at the oral arguments to answer questions from her colleagues; and

(4) the first where a majority of the Members of the Court would sit as judges against a respondent whom they had earlier testified against in the impeachment case.

This First Calvary of our present Judiciary appears to have started when our Chief Justice asserted her defense of its independence when the executive department tried to interfere in the matter of disciplining judges, and when she praised the Constitution for its focus on human rights and for ensuring and preserving judicial independence in her statement for the thirtieth anniversary of the ratification of the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines last 2 February 2017.

On that occasion, she solemnly said:

"More than simply a statement of principles and a collection of hopes and aspirations, the 1987 Constitution formed the backbone for the democracy ushered in by the force of the People Power Revolution of 1986. Ending the revolutionary government put in place then President Corazon C. Aquino's Proclamation No. 3, the 1987 Constitution also provided rich and fertile ground for the rule of law to be nourished, to grow and to bear fruit. This it did with the renewed focus on human rights and civil liberties and enshrined sovereignty and institutional protection for the independence of the Judiciary."

Added to these were her subsequent judicial pronouncements which were misunderstood as anti-administration. She paid a high price for these.

She now faces impeachment, which took a long process in the Lower House where even sitting Justices of the Court were invited to testify on matters basically administrative and within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Court.

Never has there been in the history of our Republic a spectacle such as this.*

*underscoring, and all subsequent underscoring, mine. - islander

The first is the current war against the Philippine Judiciary. I call this the First Calvary of the Judiciary.

The second is composed of many which can be put together and labeled Charter Change. I call this the Second Calvary of the Judiciary.

I will dwell on the first because the intensified war against or attacks on the independence of the Judiciary threaten the institution itself as the guardian of the Constitution, the protector of the rights and freedoms of the people, the last bulwark of democracy and the sentinel of the rule of law.

This saddens me to the core of my heart because I spent fifteen years of my life in the service of the Judiciary, seven of which as Chief Justice. As such, I started my difficult task of leading the Philippine Judiciary with a vision-mission: a judiciary that is independent, effective and efficient; that delivers fair, impartial, equal and swift justice; one that adheres to and preserves the core values of the rule of law and pursuit of excellence; and one that safeguards the public trust and confidence in it at all times. In pursuit thereof, early in my watch, the Supreme Court promulgated the Action Program for Judicial Reform (APJR), which was the most comprehensive package of judicial reforms for the Philippine Judiciary, and the World Bank and the Asian Development Bank considered it as a model even for the other judiciaries of the world. The then Professor of Law, Ma. Lourdes P.A. Sereno, now our Chief Justice, contributed much to the APJR as consultant for some very substantive and significant aspects of judicial reforms.

As concerned groups with indomitable courage to be deeply involved in and to fight for great causes that would affect our country and our people of this our beleaguered generation and of those yet unborn, you organizers cannot just idly stand by. There are indeed "signs of the time" that indicate something worse for the country and our people, but all camouflaged with "good intentions."

Yes, signs of the time. Indeed, in this our time, which could even be short – there are many signs. This brings us to a recollection of what Jesus said to the Pharisees and Sadducees, who demanded from Him a sign. In the Gospel according to Matthew, chapter 16, verses 1-4, Jesus said: "In the evening you say, 'Tomorrow will be fair, for the sky is red;' and in the morning, 'Today will be stormy for the sky is red and threatening.' You know how to judge the appearance of the sky, but you cannot read the signs of the times. An evil and unfaithful generation seeks a sign, but no sign will be given it except the sign of Jonah." And in the Gospel according to Luke, chapter 11, verse 30, the sign of Jonah is the sign to the Ninevites (of Nineveh) of the forthcoming destruction of Nineveh.

You are correct: there are signs of the time. The real sign may yet be the sign of Jonah. By your forum series you can ultimately send the message of the sign of Jonah – destruction of our beloved Philippines.

What are these gloomy signs which would finally end with that of Jonah – the destruction of our country?

THE CALVARIES OF THE PHILIPPINE JUDICIARY TODAY: JUDICIAL REFORMS?

Madame Chief Justice Ma. Lourdes P.A. Sereno, Dean Mende, Participants in this forum, guests, ladies and gentlemen,

Welcome to Cebu our dear Chief Justice, the home of Lapu-Lapu, the first Filipino hero to repulse a foreign invader and who would even be the first to shout "over my dead body" if the Philippines would be made a province of China. It was the President himself who mentioned this lowly status of the Philippines before a group of Chinese businessmen last February 19. Presidential Spokesperson Harry Roque, in an attempt to cushion the horrible negative impact of the pronouncement said that it was only a joke of the President. Knowing China, it will not consider it a joke. Chinese leaders are not known to be jokers.

Madame Chief Justice, with the descendants of Lapu-Lapu, you are safe here in Cebu.

I must congratulate the College of Social Sciences of UP Cebu, the Movement Against Tyranny (MAT), All UP Academic Employees Union of the UP Cebu, Cebu for Human Rights (C4HR), KARAPATAN Visayas, and the National Union of People's Lawyers (NUPL-Cebu) for organizing a series of public forums entitled, "Signs of the Time," and for choosing for this afternoon's segment the topic "Road to Judicial Reforms."

It's not just about the lynching of Chief Justice Lourdes Sereno.

The independence of the Philippine judiciary is under attack. With it comes the chilling prospect of the "destruction of our beloved Philippines."

Strong language, yes.

It was the first time retired Chief Justice Hilario Davide Jr. took the stage with the embattled Sereno in a packed hall of college-high school students and basic sector groups in UP Cebu last April 5.

Davide's full speech here describes the struggle of "Two Calvaries". One is the attack on judicial independence. The second is Charter Change seeking to install Federalism.


(Retired) Chief Justice Hilario G. Davide Jr.

GettyImages
AFP

http://www.newsweek.com/

GettyImages
AFP

GettyImages
AFP

GETTY IMAGES EUROPE

GETTY IMAGES EUROPE

GettyImages
AFP

GettyImages
AFP

GettyImages
AFP

GettyImages
AFP

GettyImages
AFP

GettyImages
AFP

GETTY IMAGES EUROPE

GettyImages
AFP

GettyImages
AFP

GettyImages
AFP

GETTY IMAGES NORTH AMERICA

GettyImages
AFP

But with all of that and much more in mind, we could all use a cute animal break. You've earned it, world. Hang in there for 2018.


GETTY IMAGES EUROPE

2017 WAS TERRIBLE, SO HERE ARE SOME ADORABLE CATS AND DOGS PHOTOS

BY LEAH THOMAS
12/21/17


GettyImages
AFP 2017

This year has been hard for everyone. If you're reading this, you've almost survived the ordeal that was 2017.

Congratulations.

As a reward, here are some photos of cats and dogs. They don't care where you were born or who you voted for or what you've tweeted recently, and they have absolutely no idea what's been happening for the past 12 months.

These adorable animals alone should not be enough to distract you from catching up on a year of White House chaos, tax cuts for the rich, the attempted destruction of Obamacare, #MeToo, the downfall of famous accused sexual harassers, the latest rises in America's gun violence epidemic, white supremacists' violent protests in Charlottesville, lawsuits over police brutality and ICE deportations, federal government attacks on LGBT and women's rights, the imminent end of net neutrality, executive office firings, apocalyptic threats and missile tests from North Korea, Robert Mueller's Russia probe and guilty pleas, the fear that A.I. robot Sophia is going to kill you in your sleep, the constant discrediting of the "fake news" media, everything that is Donald Trump Jr. and Jared Kushner, speculation about whether that golden showers dossier is true, major hurricane devastation in Puerto Rico and the South, an over-hyped solar eclipse, the rise and fall of Omarosa, Kellyanne Conway disrespecting the Oval Office couch, an alleged child molester almost (but not) winning an Alabama Senate seat, the Trump travel ban, the decimation of environmental protections, aliens maybe existing after all, even more evidence of Russian cyber attacks, the Paradise Papers, the Women's March, anxieties about Brexit, the further spread of terrorism across Europe, California wildfires, Steve Bannon's "war" on the GOP, and our president repeatedly hinting at nuclear war on his Twitter account.

sorry, how the apostles died had already been posted here in TB in 2009 (buwadsanga), 2013 (tagatigbao) and 2016 (islander).

there was this:

How do you use while on its own?

The base word in both of these expressions, while, is most commonly a conjunction, meaning "during," "although," or "throughout the time that." Here's an example: "She ate the cookie dough while he greased the baking sheet."

While can also be a verb meaning "to cause (time) to pass, especially in some easy or pleasant manner." Example: "She whiled away the hours ruminating on the differences between awhile and a while."

http://www.dictionary.com/

How do you use a while and awhile correctly?

The noun phrase a while can (and often does) follow a preposition, such as for or in. Here's an example: "He said he would be home in a while."

The adverb awhile cannot follow a preposition. This is a rule that makes sense if you revisit the definition of the term ("for a short time or period") and drop it into a sentence: "He said he would be home in for a short time or period." However, if we get rid of the preposition and rewrite it as "He said he would be home awhile," the sentence works with a slightly-altered meaning (he will be home for a short time instead of he will be home in a period of time).

What's The Difference Between "A While" and "Awhile"

What's the difference between a while and awhile?

Few word pairs capture the idiosyncrasies ("peculiar characteristics") of the English language like a while and awhile do. Both of these terms are expressions of time, but one is written with a space while the other is one word.

These two terms represent different parts of speech. The two-word expression a while is a noun phrase, consisting of the article a and the noun while (which means "a period or interval of time").

The one-word awhile is an adverb that means "for a short time or period."

Although these definitions are similar (and although the terms can sometimes be used interchangeably), there are a few simple rules that are helpful in keeping them straight.

Quote from: islander on March 21, 2018, 12:04:23 PM
The Brexit referendum and the US presidential election in 2016 also revealed that Facebook provides significant relative advantages to negative messages over positive ones. Authoritarian governments can use Facebook to promote public support for repressive policies, as may be occurring now in Myanmar, Cambodia, the Philippines, and elsewhere. In some cases, Facebook actually provides support to such governments, as it does to all large clients.

oops.

The challenges posed by internet platform monopolies require new approaches beyond antitrust enforcement. We must recognize and address these challenges as a threat to public health. One possibility is to treat social media in a manner analogous to tobacco and alcohol, combining education and regulation.

For the sake of restoring balance to our lives and hope to our politics, it is time to disrupt the disrupters. (Project Syndicate)

* * *
Roger McNamee is a cofounder of Elevation Partners and an early investor in Facebook, Google and Amazon.

http://opinion.inquirer.net/

Brain hacking

In the United States, approximately one-third of the adult population has become impervious to new ideas, including demonstrable facts. Such people are easy to manipulate, a concept that former Google design ethicist Tristan Harris calls "brain hacking."

Western democracies are unprepared to deal with this threat. The United States has no effective regulatory framework for internet platforms, and lacks the political will to create one. The European Union has both a regulatory framework and the necessary political will, but neither is adequate to the challenge. The EU's recent judgment against Google — a record $2.7 billion fine for anticompetitive behavior — was well conceived, but undersized. Google appealed, and its investors shrugged. It may be a good start, but it was clearly insufficient.

We are at a critical juncture. Awareness of the risks posed by internet platforms is growing from a small base, but the convenience of the products and psychological addiction to them are such that it may take a generation to effect change from the user side, as it did with antismoking campaigns. Recognition of the corrosive effect of platform monopolies on competition and innovation is greater in Europe than in the United States, but no one has found an effective regulatory strategy. Awareness that the platforms can be manipulated to undermine democracy is also growing, but Western governments have yet to devise a defense against it.

I am confident that the founders of Facebook, Google, and other major internet platforms did not intend to cause harm when they adopted their business models. They were young entrepreneurs, hungry for success. They spent years building huge audiences by reorganizing the online world around a set of applications that were more personalized, convenient, and easier to use than their predecessors. And they made no attempt to monetize their efforts until long after users were hooked. The advertising business models they chose were leveraged by personalization, which enabled advertisers to target their messages with unprecedented precision.

But then came the smartphone, which transformed all media and effectively put Facebook, Google, and a handful of others in control of the information flow to users. The filters that give users "what they want" had the effect of polarizing populations and eroding the legitimacy of fundamental democratic institutions (most notably, the free press). And the automation that made internet platforms so profitable left them vulnerable to manipulation by maligning actors everywhere—and not just authoritarian governments hostile to democracy.

As Andreessen warned us, these companies, with their global ambition and reach, are eating the world economy. In the process, they are adopting versions of Facebook's corporate philosophy—"move fast and break things" — without regard for the impact on people, institutions, and democracy. A large minority of citizens in the developed world inhabits filter bubbles created by these platforms — digital false realities in which existing beliefs become more rigid and extreme.

Dark sides

Then came 2016, when the internet revealed two dark sides. One is related to individual users. Smartphones with LTE mobile infrastructure created the first content-delivery platform that was available every waking moment, transforming the technology industry and the lives of two billion users. With little or no regulatory supervision in most of the world, companies like Facebook, Google, Amazon, Alibaba, and Tencent used techniques common in propaganda and casino gambling, such as constant notifications and variable rewards, to foster psychological addiction.

The other dark side is geopolitical. In the United States, Western Europe, and Asia, internet platforms, especially Facebook, enable the powerful to inflict harm on the powerless in politics, foreign policy, and commerce. Elections across Europe and in the United States have repeatedly demonstrated that automated social networks can be exploited to undermine democracy.

The Brexit referendum and the US presidential election in 2016 also revealed that Facebook provides significant relative advantages to negative messages over positive ones. Authoritarian governments can use Facebook to promote public support for repressive policies, as may be occurring now in Myanmar, Cambodia, the Philippines, and elsewhere. In some cases, Facebook actually provides support to such governments, as it does to all large clients.

Social media's junkies and dealers

By: Roger McNamee
March 21, 2018

NEW YORK — We were warned. The venture capitalist and Netscape founder Marc Andreessen wrote a widely read essay in 2011 titled, "Why software is eating the world." But we didn't take Andreessen seriously; we thought it was only a metaphor. Now we face the challenge of extracting the world from the jaws of internet platform monopolies.

I used to be a technology optimist. During a 35-year career investing in the best and brightest of Silicon Valley, I was lucky enough to be part of the personal computer, mobile communications, internet, and social networking industries. Among the highlights of my career were early investments in Google and Amazon, and being a mentor to Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg from 2006 to 2010.

Each new wave of technology increased productivity and access to knowledge. Each new platform was easier to use and more convenient. Technology powered globalization and economic growth. For decades, it made the world a better place. We assumed it always would.

Uncooked white rice


PIMONPIM W /SHUTTERSTOCK

Regardless of whether you store your uncooked white rice in the pantry, the refrigerator, or the freezer, you'll never need to replace it. According to Still Tasty, "White, wild, Arborio, jasmine and basmati rice all have an indefinite shelf life, when kept free from contaminants. The exception is brown rice—thanks to its higher oil content, it won't keep nearly as long." However, if the rice is cooked and you plan on having it as leftovers for later, you might be susceptible to food poisoning.

https://www.rd.com/

Pure vanilla extract


AFRICA STUDIO /SHUTTERSTOCK

Since pure vanilla extract contains alcohol, it helps prolong its shelf life. It's important that it's pure vanilla extract, though. Imitation vanilla extract doesn't have as much alcohol as its pure counterpart does. So as long as your extract is pure and properly sealed so no bacteria can find its way into the bottle, you can look forward to all the vanilla you want—that is, at least until you run out. (Did you know vanilla extract can work as a natural home deodorizer?)

Hard liquor


DEYMOSHR /SHUTTERSTOCK

Hard liquor is only "immortal" when it's stored in a cool place and left unopened. So no, you can't open that bottle of Barcadi and drink it again years later. After it is first exposed to air, it might begin to lose its flavors and structure due to oxidation. The alcohol can also be affected if it's exposed to extreme weather conditions, intense light, or heat. "In part that's because temperature can break down a type of organic molecule called a terpene," according to Wired.