Milton Friedman blames the Minimum Wage laws that even increases discrimination and unemployment rate and thus, they are ineffective.
An unknown guy explains why increasing minimum wage is wrong
The prices of the things will increase in order to pay for employees (inflation). Then, it's gonna stay the same. Also, as more people lose their jobs, (unemployment increases) people cannot buy things much.
WHO IS RIGHT??
For this question, I think the former is right. As seen in the documentary 30days, people simply do not know how poor people live and approach the matter theoratically. An inflation has increased the prices of goods significantly. Yet, the minimum wage is staying at the same level for 10years. THERE MUST BE A CHANGE.
I hereby confess my love towards thee. I have been reading thee for 3 days and have not finished thee yet. Thou might think that I am lazy and that my affection towards thee is feigned; I say, upon this page where everyone can see and thus no one shall lie, I LOVE THEE!! It took so much time because I went over what thou are saying over and over again!! I was first attracted to thee when I looked into thy structural composition for the AP Literature presentation. The five staged contents - Exposition/ Rising Action/ Climax/ Falling Action/ Conclusion - proved how well written and sophisticatedly contrived thou are; the subtle overlapping and smooth transition between each stage made it easy for me to read through thee and embrace thy messages. In addition, thou are prone to understand human emotions very well. Thou, without any pretense or affectation, vividly portray what characters feel, why they feel such sentiments, and how they react. I especially like thy being so humane and easily apprehensible; THAT IS SO CHARMING!!!
-> honored King Lear
I hereby confess my resentment towards thee. Why are thou written in old language!! Though my deep love ultimately overcame the obstacle, thou are such a bad person who makes her lover to bury his head into an old English dictionary. Also, whay are thee so fat!! Thou are like 200 pages. Next time, though probably I will never meet anyone so attractive as thee, try to reduce some weight. Thou kill all thy servants who all gather to send thy messages. Lear is dead, Cordelia is dead, Regan is dead, Goneril is dead,... The decisiveness is also what leads me to like thee; yet, the very same cruelty sometimes frighten me. Make sure thou never scare me!!
-> furious King Lear
-> furious King Lear
-> Death of Cordelia
I hereby confess my sorriness towards thee. I am deeply sorry for carelessly throwing thee into the school bag and making thy skin crumpled. I am also deeply sorry for carelessly throwing thee onto my bed and folding thy arms and legs as I slept over thy bent body. Though I can never repair and restore thee, I promise thee that I will try my best to keep thee in the finest condition and love thee way more than the magnitude of pain I have given thee.
I hereby expressed all what I wanted to tell thee. Though I end my letter to thee here, my deepest affection for thee never ends.
Genre: SF, Action, Adventure Release: 2006 .06 .28 Running time: 154 minutes Director: Bryan Singer Written by: Daniel Harris, Michael Dougherty Presented by: Warners Bros. Pictures Main Actors: Brandon Routh (Superman / Clark Kent), Kate Bosworth (Lois Lane), James Marsden (Richard White), Kevin Spacey (Lex Luthor), Frank Langella (Perry White)
Synopsis: After being disappeared from Earth for 5 years to visit his home planet Krypton - where he finds nothing but remnants, Superman returns!! Yet, in the meantime when he was gone, the world has changed a lot; cities are full of criminals and their evil conducts, his former lover Kate Bosworth is engaged to her newspaper company editor's cousin, and the forever villain Lex Luthor is out of prison and is planning to destroy the whole continent of North America and kill billions of people; he tries to use the crystals of Krypton to build a continent that will wipe out most of the continent.
To prevent the sinister dream of Luthor's from being achieved, the Man of Steel fights against the psychopathic criminal. Yet, Luthor uses Kryptonite - the lethal substance that is Superman's only weakness - and our Superman gets into a trouble....
One of the renowned Hollywood blockbuster movie directors who directed "The Usual Suspects", "X-men" series, Bryan Singer, has come with a new work: the "Superman Returns". How much he wanted to work on this movie can easily be seen from many episodes; for one, Singer refused to direct "X-men3" - unarguably one of the most widely known job in his career that earned him huge fame - and handed the job over other director, Brett Ratner SOLELY in order to work on the Man of Steel! As an enormous fan of "Superman" himself , how Singer would interpret and add variation to the original superman figure has drawn attention of many people.
- Reflection? Artificiality!
Though both "X-men" series and "Superman" series come from the same source, comic book series, they come to us in a very different way. "X-men" had never been filmed before Singer and thus, every single characteristic and feature that Singer gave to the characters directly became the true figure of them. In case of "Superman", on the other hand, Singer had to both present new interpretation of characters whild reflecting some of the qualities that Richard D. Doner and Richard Lester had given to it in the original Superman in 1979 and 1980. When he decided to summon Superman back to 21st century from 1980s, Singer must have "fitly" fuse and separate from the original "Superman".
However, it seems that Singer failed to do so; the movie is tied too much with the past Superman series. The "Superman Returns" excessively sticks to the original version in that it uses classical narrative and exterior of characters. Even the credit sequence that comes at the very beginning of the film and the very ending of the film is the very same credit sequence that Richard Doner had used. Outside of that, astonishingly similar-looking actors as the past version, artificially made place setting at 1970s NYC, the very same places such as the bar, littery offices of Daily Planet building, and jammed streets of NY that had formed the place setting of the previous version coming up again all sum up and make the movie too much tied to the 1979 Superman. What's even more restraining is that for the places which appear in the Doner's Superman but not in his, Singer makes a miniature models of them and displays them in Luthor's home. Trivial episodes reappear just as it was in the past Superman series such as Kent and Olson talking in a bar; even the camera angle is identical. Not only the settings being repeated but camera angles, lines of actors, situations in the film, and scenes of the movie being repeated just the same as the past series causes artificiality. Preservation of the Man of Steel in 1980s as if it was in a vaccuum tube is not a way to connect the Superman series; it should reflect that the audience is living in the 21st century and thus, Superman has "changed" by the time.
- Interesting Status of Lex Luthor
During the movie, Lex Luthor compares himself to the Prometheus who in Greek mythology stole fire from Gods and gave it to humans and thereby let human civilization develop. He compares the Man of Steel as God and avows to fight against him.
In the Greek myth, Prometheus is unrequitedly punished for crossing God's will. Yet, in the Superman Returns, Luthor has coordinative status as does Superman. At this point, an interesting conjecture comes up.
The very beginning of the movie starts with the story of Lex Luthor. In the scene, Luthor inherits billons of dollars from a dowager - who he married with - and gets a huge power. He then goes to the 'fort of solitude' which is located in Superman's native planet with the money and meets with the illusion of Superman's father, Kal-El. The illusion is deluded that it assumes Luthor to be Superman and gives him the power of Krypton crystal and Luthor steals all the crystals from the planet.
That the tool that Luthor commits evil deeds with is the source of Superman's power is somehow ridiculous and ironic. However, if we put the relationship in the light of brothers, Luthor seems to be the evil sibling of Superman's, Cain.
Here, interestingly, the lady who acted the dowager is the very same actor who acted Lois Lane in the original Superman. Therefore, Lex Luthor, who married Lois Lane and was admitted by Kal-El could be intepreted as Superman's id and an evil brother who has to kill Superman.
Maybe, Luthor is not the Prometheus, but Hades, who is the older brother of Zeus and takes care of the afterlife world.
- Superman as an extraterrestrial being
If we see the Superman movies made in 1979 and 1980s, the Man of Steel is described as a humane and assimilative being that saves the world, has weaknesses and "feels" human feelings. However, in the Superman Returns, the Man of Steel is a man of "steel" who is stuck in the space between the human world and the alien world.
Luthor saying "He's dead" when Kal-El's illusion appears, the editor of Daily Planet preparing two articles titled 'Superman is dead' and 'Superman is alive', Lois Lane writing an article titled 'The reason we donot need Superman anymore', heroic actions of Superman becoming the subject of entertainment of people all show that Superman's existence is not "necessary" for people anymore.
Superman's costume makes him unnatural and artificial. Bullet getting crushed when it hits Superman's eye makes the Man of Steel a "steel"-like being. Superman is described as an extraterrestrial existence through the film and whereas it sends a social message about how selfish and corrupting human nature is, it disappoints crowd who wants a "hero" and wishes to feel safe with his abilities.
-After watching...
In the movie, the assumption that Superman is a savior sent be Kal-El to help people and save them from their inheritant wickedness parallels with the setting of Bible where God sends Jesus Christ to save the people. Whereas Superman is a herioc being who devotes to humankind's salvation and safety and thus must be applauded, as Jesus had to sacrifice himself, the Man of Steel must die.
Brian Singer seems to have understood the matter of imperfection very well and have expressed it very well throughout the movie.
It aroused reminiscence that the Man of Steel had made his comeback. Yet, watching the 1979 appearance of him in 2010 was somehow unnatural and artificial.
Yet, I enjoyed the movie in general, and the fundamental question that the film throws - How innately evil we are and how we should solve the matter out - reminds us of the social problems and filthy crimes going on in our societies. Hope the movie, even a very little bit, helps raising people's moral standards that will ultimately lead us onto trying to solve social problems.
It has long been a dream of mine to travel alone in a "new world" - a world where I have never been to, where I do not have any acquaintance, where I am not at all familiar with the culture, and where I would feel totally isolated and alienated. I always became excited as I imagined meeting with some unknown indigenous tribes and trying my best to converse with them and assimilate to their way of living. The fascination of the dream mainly came from two sources; first, I wanted to be "unique" and have unique experience and second, I wanted to "feel the nature".
During the last winter vacation, the desire has grown more intense; the only and major reason for the intensification was Walden, written by the famous American writer and theorist, Henry David Thoreau. It is a very well known episode that Thoreau isolated himself from the civilized world for 2 years in order to leave himself, his "existence" and "being", away from all the artificial things and learn the true value of nature.
Before reading the masterpiece, my awareness toward nature was somewhat indifferent. Truly, I have read and heard a lot of literary works, sayings, and remarks about the value of nature - how peaceful, cozy, and motherly it is. Yet, for they never got into the deepest facet of nature and thus never reflected the truist aspect of it, they were just a trivial and repetitive words ; they never "came to my skin".
As I flipped the pages of Walden, however, I felt that my heart was beating with excitement, my hands were trembling with astonishment, and my hair was getting sweaty with the fabulous and evident insight of the author. Walden combines both the philosophies of the Eastern thinkers and the Western thinkers; such ideas like Mencius' "Zhung-yong [중용]" - an idea that a wise man should closely observe and realize the value and fundamentals of nature and follow the order without trying to commit extreme conducts that will harm the harmony- are appropriately connected to the author's own experience in the nature; for the Mencius' philosophy, it is combined with the Thoreau's experience with some farmer who had failed to successfully train a dog -because he, foolishly, thought that because dogs run faster than people, dogs could reach everywhere within several hours; becuase he, stupidly, thought that because dogs have more sensitive olfactory senses than people, dogs could smell and distinguish everything.
Sequence of such evident connection and proof of all the trivial texts I have learned with real life episodes that he himself experienced have led me to revive my old dream and be dominated by the excitement and satisfaction that the experience would give me.
Having watched the "Spring" part of the director Kim Ki-Duk's film, many of my classmates talked about how cute the boy is, how poor the fish and snake are, and how mysterious some of the scenes are. Throughout the movie, however, I thought of my dream; the dream that I had in my young elementary days, the dream that I reminded of as I was reading Walden, and the dream that I promised myself to achieve before I graduate college.
The setting of the film rests in some temple in the middle of a lake that is surrounded by mountains and that has no sign of human exploitation. Two Buddist monks - one old and one very young - live in the temple. It was the very setting I dreamed of, except for the fact that there were not much people to contact with.
Being able to live in the environment is such a fortunate gift for me. As seen in the film, any person would be completely liberated from the civilization and be able to cry at the death of a "small" fish and a "small" snake. These days, more and more I feel the arrogance of humankind - we assume that we are "big" compared to other creatures; we are NOT. I earnestly wish that I could, for one large fraction of my life, be able to find the life-yearned place and reflect myself, my feelings, and my life.
It was a sunny day with dazzling sunlight; so hot that anyone would take their shirts off when nobody's around. I, a painter living at the coastside for some kind of an inspiration that would lead me to draw a "painting of the century", called the host at the hotel to order a breakfast. "Get me a newspaper - California Tribune, if possible - and some toasts with jams and a glass of orange juice." 'What should I do today?' I was running out of money because I didn't have a fixed job yet. Then, a hotel worker brougdht me a newspaper and I naturally searched through the help-warranted ads. A psychology experiment caught my sight - "$200 per day for 3days", the advertisement said. 'Hmm.... that's a fabulous offer', I thought. It was about staying in a large sealed building in which the environment for this experiment was set; "No PHYSICAL HARM ASSURED", it sai. 'All right, I'll go for this'. And that was when my life changed unimaginably.
After having finished the meal, I headed toward the place mentioned on the newspaper. It was a battered building with 5stories.
I entered.
I entered with expectations.
I entered with expectations without knowing that the event will change me into a whole different being.
I entered a brave new world.
A doctor came and asked me if I came to join the experiment. 'Yes. I am quite interested.' The person made me to sign a contract - it said something like "This experiment may give big shock on your life. If you with to maintain a normal life, you may not participate in this experiment". 'Well, I am a strong person. Besides, I need this money'. And I signed the contract.
The whole experiment was about staying in a closed room for three days without any social contacts. I was not able to write letters, send e-mails, call my family, and even say hello to the gate keeper of the building. At first, I thought it would be easy - because I basically live a lonely life without much social relationships.
On the very first day, I sat in the empty room thinking about my past - my school lives, previous job experiences, fight with my parents, and so on. I tried to dig out every single memories in my brain that are memorable. I thought and thought and thought. Surprisingly, only three hours passed. Then, I slept. Only two hours passed. I suddenly found out that there was nothing to do. 'What am I gonna do for the remaining 67 hours?' Oh my God....
Before the second day, I was already thinking that I might become insane. What in the world should I do.... Then, I thought I may think about pictures. Since thinking was all I could do, I thought about renowned paintings by Da Vinchi, Rafael, and other artists. Then, I thought about how I am gonna draw a fabulous everlasting painting. What are the qualities that define a good painting? What should I draw about? I was turning crazy... Nothing came up and thus I was too lethargic to do anything...
On the second day, I wished I could die for two days and come back. I just lay on the floor and spent the whold day... thinking, intermittently, about my life's aim; drawing a picture of the century.
That night in my dream, I became a renowned artist. My paintings were priced higher than those of Da Vinchi's or Pollock's. I saw my drawing in the picture; it was drawn with a blood. At first I was very shocked. Then, I recognized; a drawing that reflects my life and my true feature is the one that would obtain perpetual influence.
I woke up thinking about the dream. 'It is the last day', I thought. Then, I suddenly recognized that I was sleeping in the hotel. 'What is happening?', I thought. In my hand, there was a California Tribune and on the table there were toasts and an orange juice. While eating, I knew I've gotten an inspiration.
That day, I started drawing a picture. That picture is the picture of the century for me. That is the picture of the century both in reality and in the dream world where I underwent the psychology experiment.
It was a sunny day with dazzling sunlight; so hot that anyone would take their shirts off when nobody's around. I, a painter living at the coastside for some kind of an inspiration that would lead me to draw a "painting of the century", call the host at the hotel to order a breakfast. "Get me a newspaper - California Tribune, if possible - and some toasts with jams and a glass of orange juice." 'What should I do today?' I am currently running out of money because I don't have a fixed job yet. Then, a hotel worker brings me a newspaper and I naturally search through the help-warranted ads. A psychology experiment catches my sight - "$200 per day for 3days", the advertisement says. 'Hmm.... that's a fabulous offer', I think. It is about staying in a large sealed building in which the environment for this experiment is set; "No PHYSICAL HARM ASSURED", it says. 'All right, I'll go for this'. And that is when my life changed unimaginably. (ME)
It was not very far away from the hotel, and I went there with few cigarettes and cards, just in case I make a frend there. Ad says that they will provide food and water, so I didn't bring any food with me. There were about 40 people waiting, and I said to a staff that I want to join and he tole me to wait with them for few minutes. After that few minutes, someone - I think it's the supervisor- came and gave few words and said to enter. Inside was not a bad environment. (HARAM)
"You will gonna live this building for 3days". "Can you please sign this paper for this experiment?" 'Sure, no reason to deny this chance'. There were bunch of warnings regarding the experiment. WE DON'T TAKE CHARGE blahblah~ Ok, I admit and gonna take the experiment. (SUJAE)
The entire building had a bad smell, I think it's the smell of rotting garbage. The supervisor calls out "There are rooms for sleeping and whasing on the top floor. It's first come - first served! Come quick!!" People started to run to find an elevator. However, I went straight to the stairs instead. I have strong legs. I can go faster than the others taking the elevator. When I stepped on the first stair, I was sucked upward by an invisible force and was immediatedly on the top floor. I got the best room, of course. It didn't even smell bad like the 1st floor. (BOOKYUNG)
What was that? I was curious and somewhat nervous at the same time, because I could not imagine where the force came from. However, as exotic and delicious cuisine was served, I completely forgot about all my worries, I ate, ate, ate, and ate until my tummy was about to explode. (CHAERIM)
And, to my surprise, my tummy really did explode. Oh, my God! I naver thought a stomach could burst the food its taken few minutes ago. (HYUNGSEOK)
And I died.... guessing what the intention of the experiment was. Was it to experiment whether a person's tummy can explode or to experiment how many idiots apply for experiments if posted an advertisment on it? (ME)
Rachael, one of the three main children in the documentary, is crying as she preys
Levi, one of the three main children, smiles just before she leaves her house heading for "Kids on Fire"
Tori, one of the three main children in the documentary
"Evangelical indoctrination is given an unflinching, even-handed look in this utterly worthwhile documentary."
The remark is what critics from Rotten Tomatoes had given about "Jesus Camp" after having watched the film.(http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/jesus_camp/)
"A documentary on kids who attend a summer camp hoping to become the next Billy Graham."
The remark is what critics from IMDb had given for an explanation of "Jesus Camp". (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0486358/)
"I have to admit that part of me really hoped I would like “Jesus Camp,” the new documentary from Heidi Ewing and Rachel Grady, before I even saw it. I am, after all, actively involved in the Children’s Ministry at my church, teaching Sunday School every week and having the opportunity to help serve our church’s wonderful children’s pastor. I also had the great opportunity to spend a summer working at an equally wonderful Christian children’s camp in Washington a few years back. So, a movie that follows a children’s pastor and her ministry, as well as takes us on a trip to her Christian summer camp really was something I wanted to be able to get behind."
The remark is what a critic named Jonathan Rodriguez had written on a christianity-related website after havng watched the film.(http://www.christiananswers.net/spotlight/movies/2006/jesuscamp2006.html)
Becky Fischer, one who hosts "Kids on Fire"
Having read some of the comments on "Jesus Camp", I now recongnize that there ARE some people who actually like or admire what the documentary is featuring. Some say that they want to join the "Kids on Fire" camp, a summer camp in Devils Lake, N.D. that grooms and brainwashes participant children to become soldiers in “God’s army", some say that the documentary has objectively mirrored bright features of the "Jesus Camp" and some even say that the children will become "Billy Graham"s, an evangelical priest who had gained fame through his profound piety and sincere sermons and who is currently ranked at number seven on Gallup's list of admired people for the 20th century, by participating in the camp.
My ONLY RESPONSE to these remarks is "Are you people insane?"; the documentary is totally antisocial, agitative and arational. The documentary HARMS the society.
The overall plot of the documentary revolves around a summer camp named "Kids on Fire". Becky Fischer, a pastor who runs the camp, is a firm believer of the political and moral importance of a Christian presence in America - hence, children in the camp are encouraged to repudiate sin, hate abortion, pray for George Bush and re-dedicate themselves to spreading the word of God. Through out the film, what Becky says are very all of a same sort; for God is the only valid being, you children should seek only after him, not considering what society is like, what is morally wrong or right, and so on. She puts the phrase "- in the name of God" at all her words - even those that are ridiculous. For example, she says "President Bush is a great wise man in the name of God", "We should not eat meal today in the name of God", "You should not go out in the rain in the name of God" - how in the world do the statements make sense? She also says quotes like "Prey urgently so God's will could be done", "God can do anything. Let's fix the world", "Because Muslims train children to be able to sacrifice for Islam religion, we should open campls as well and make children focused solely on Christianity", "Stand up, and take our land back", "God is only possible answer to all questions", and so on. Children at the prey conference perform barbarian like wierd dances as if they are some indians in primitive region. They repeats preyer over and over again which sounds like a magical spell from an Egyptian myth and cries insanely!! Becky might say that the tears are streaming from the children as they are filled with the Holy Spirit, but would anyone cry as he or she davens the Lord's prayer? They are simply affected by the atmosphere - the very ironical atmosphere that "God is giving you His spirit just because you have participated in the camp and now you are His servant and can do anything."
"Jesus Camp" is brainwashing the children
Interviews of children participants in the camp
The camp is brainwashing the children. No nominal muttering of preyers gives a person to take offense at Muslims, no irrational dismissal of Evolutionism and other scientific advancements gives a person to become God's servants, and no crying carried along by the weird atmosphere of the camp can redeem a person. How in the world being educated to not be shy when talking to strangers, to answer that the reason an object falls is because of its will to return to God, and to worship President Bush and becoming young soldiers for Republican Party have anything to do with Jesus' words?
Currently 25% of Amerians are Evangelical Christians, and 10% of the American population are in the very same denomination that is featured in "Jesus Camp". They are growing in power and people must become aware of their influence and try to stop such inflammatory camps from being held.
If any of the Evangelical Christians are reading this text, I suggest you to reconsider whether what God is saying matches with what you are doing; what the Bible says matches with what you are saying. The definition of "good parenting" is another's definition of "abuse." Some people think spanking a child with a wooden stick was considered a standard tool of child disciplining. In contrast, some consider corporal punishment to be unacceptable. The very same issue looms over "Jesus Camp" - it brigns up a question whether the indoctrination of Levi, Rachel, and Tori - the main children characters who show most extreme bursts of emotions in the camp - falls under the definition of "good parenting" for their parents. I suggest you Evangelicals and all other people to watch over the film again and seriously and objectively think about the issue again.
Bill Maher Discussion about "Jesus Camp"
Shall the children participating in "Jesus Camp" meet salvation through the camp.......?
I SAY "NO"
Before I stary, I assure that for this writing is a brief summary of the documentary, I shall not analyze the 'three ways to persuade' factors here.
<Brief synopsis of "Jesus Camp">
- The documentary starts with a scenary of a grey, cloudy village featuring with a gloomy background music. Inflammatory quotes- clamoring out as if every thought of theirs is what God says (even when the points are unreasonable and ridiculous) - such as "Pray urgently so that God's will could be done" flow out. And a radio station interviewer ardently claims that they- the people who are clamoring for such nonsense- are just adding " ~in the name of God" on all their conducts; that is not what the Christianity teaches!
- The next scene tapes a Children's Prey Conference hosted by Becky Fischer. Children participating in the camp do a barbarian-like, weird dance performance that reminded me of primitive tribal dances. Everyone says that "God can do anything. Let's fix the world". Children are brainwashed and excited by the instigative ambience that they even cry. They also mutters prayers that sound just like what an Indian magician would murmur in their ceremonies.
- Becky Fischer says that because muslims train their children to be able to use arms and sacrifice for Islam without hesitation, people should open camps and make their children focused on Christianity so that they can fight back to muslims. She says, "Stand up, and take our land back"
- Saying that "God is only possible answer to all questions", Fischer makes all chilren delude that they should view the world in the sight of what she tells them. [However, what she says is NOT what the messages of God!]
- The camp, that was initiated in 2001 with a name "Kids on Fire", ties education with religion and politics. Thus, kids cannot learn proper science, nor can they develop proper ideologies or views.
- I completely agreed with the Mike - the host of "Radio fire" show - that those people do not understand the fundamentals of Christianity and that they are doing HARM.
It was a great SHOCK for me that such people like radical evangelicals exist and I think they are complete idiots....
Photo with Mr. Julian Assange :) (Sorry for the mismatch.... no photoshop in my pc.... ;p )
Some photos of him....
-> coooooooooooool "hi" pose
-> asking, "Am I handsome?"
-> in front of Nilli restaurant; nice garden :)
Date: September 11, 2011
Day: Sunday
Weather: Sunny
Hi Kitty~ how are you doing? :)
How was your day?? I assume that it was a great day for you since it was a very sunny day with clear sky and snow-white clouds.
Today, I had a wonderful day; I had lunch with JULIAN ASSANGE!!
My first impression? Umm... he was... quite nice-looking (though not as good as I am :D )
He had a white hair finely styled with wax and an angel-like smile - this pretty much surprised me because I couldnot believe that this bright gentleman disclosed so much confidential secrets worldwide without sympathy. He was 10minutes late to the appointment, and he said that he had to give the slip to paparazzis and reporters.
We had lunch at Nilli; he ordered Funghi pasta with a potato soup and a cup of coke; I had Bolognese pasta with corn soup. He refused to talk while eating, so we had to silently eat our dishes - without a single question!! Then, I was very worried because he was a busy man and I had to ask so much questions. After swiftly finishing all the food, I poured tons of questions on him! Here are the questions and answers... (I'm not sure I got all of his points... I couldn't adjust to his Australian accent and speaking style ;( )
Me: Tell me about your earlier life.
JA (Julian Assange):
Okay.... I was born in Townsville, Queensland though I spent significant years of my youth in Magnetic Island. I grew up under a step father who ran a touring theatre company but when my mother got divorced once again and remarried to a musician. Though I suffered very much from sudden change in my environment, I surmounted the accident without much backlash. It was in 1982, however, that the worst event in my life occured. My mother broke up with the musician AGAIN; and this time, she was in a very bad situation in which I and my step brother might have had to live with the singer - who I did not know and who was not nice to me at all. In a desperate hope, my mother escaped from home with us and we had to live 5 years hiding secretly from then: I moved 30 times before even turning 14 and live in 50 different towns and attended 37 different schools. It is explicit that my earlier life was not that happy and bright but I think that is the root of my persistent challenge. Also, it is then when I firmly decided that I would try my best to form a healthy, transparent society.
Later, I found out that I had a talent in computer programming and thus, I studied the field and attained professional degrees with many distinctions and honors.
Me: How did you start studying computer programming?
JA:
In 1987, when I was 16, I first formed a hacking community named International Subversives. I hacked others' computers under a fake id of Mendax. Though I recklessly hacked and obtained information, I followed strict rules that reflected my life-long aim: that my computer work should be devoted to form a better, cleaner society. My rules were,
1. Don't damage computer systems you break into (including crashing them)
2. Don't change the information in those systems (except for altering logs to cover your tracks)
3. Share information
I was caught by the Australian Federal Police while hacking into the Melbourne master terminal of Nortel, the Canadian telecommunications company. I pleaded guility to 25 charges of hacking because I was proud of my conducts and had a firm conviction that my hacking had no victims. I paid 2100 Australian dollars and was let go for, according to the judge, "there is just no evidence that there was anything other than sort of intelligent inquisitiveness and the pleasure of being able to—what's the expression—surf through these various computers". Also, my disrupted childhood helped me out a lot.
Me: What are your motivations for founding WikiLeaks?
JA: As I said, it has been my dream to establish a medium that would create an open society. As I became a hacker and a computer programmer, I decided to challenge the governments. Thus, in 2006, I founded WikiLeaks under a firm philosophy; "To radically shift regime behavior we must think clearly and boldly for if we have learned anything, it is that regimes do not want to be changed. We must think beyond those who have gone before us and discover technological changes that embolden us with ways to act in which our forebears could not." The more secretive or unjust an organization is, the more leaks induce fear and paranoia in its leadership and planning coterie. Since unjust systems, by their nature, induce opponents, and in many places barely have the upper hand, mass leaking leaves them exquisitely vulnerable to those who seek to replace them with more open forms of governance. With this belief, I devoted my whole life to WikiLeaks during the past 6years; and I will continue my work until my time in this planet allows me to do so.
Me: What does WikiLeaks do?
JA: WikiLeaks is an international non-profit organization that publishes submissions of private, secret, and classified media from anonymous news sources, news leaks, and whistleblowers. Launched in 2006, WikiLeaks has revealed more than 1.2million classified documents.
Me: How does WikiLeaks work?
JA: Classical whistleblowers release the documents and send such documents to WikiLeaks. The methods to hide their identities are
1. We sometimes use state-of-the-art encryption to bounce stuff around the internet, to hide trails, and to pass through legal jurisdictions like Sweden and Belgium. We get information in the mail, and check the credibility of the stuff. When the truth is confirmed, we format them and release them.
Me: What is your stance on 9/11?
JA: I am constantly ANNOYED that people are distracted by false conspiracies like 9/11. I am utterly disappointed with the obviously faked conspiracies told by governments and also am very willing to reveal all the documents that I am aware of. I actually published more than 500,000 intercepted pager messages on November 25th, 2009. Since the WikiLeaks is constantly working on intercepting even more detailed information from the Pentagon, I assume we will very soon be able to uncover the whole picture of what 9/11 is all about.
Me: How are the governments' responses to your actions?
JA: Well... I didn't expect them to be "GOOD" of course.... (smile)
umm.... the United States vice president referred to me as "high-tech terrorist" at the beginning of this year.... and the U.S. government is always trying to block me from releasing secret information. The Secretary of State has been kind enough to send black mails to me with all the threats.... the government hacked the cctv cameras located in front of my house.... which is clearly a conduct of spying....However, it is not only the United States government that tries to block me. The British government had been kind enough to freeze all my cards and bank accounts - even that from the Swiss bank - with a broadscale threat on the institutions. It banished me from their country and is always looking for an opportunity to arrest me. But, I WILL NOT GET CAUGHT. I have an obligation to uncover all the dirty and unnecessarily hidden information to the public because the public has 'right to know'. I'd like to thank all the supporters of WikiLeaks here for their help.
Me: All your properties were frozen? How did you overcome the difficulty?
JA: Then, I was utterly thwarted. However, I thought that there was always a way to solve out things.... so I sought for a solution and thought of a system of 'donation'. Currently, WikiLeaks is completely operated by donation; information are donated and funds are donated. Again, thank you dear advocates!
Me: What are your and WikiLeaks' future plans?
JA: I am definitely gonna continue my job in the WikiLeaks. My future goal is to feature more on public speeches held in universities, famous squares, and so on. I hope more people recognize the existence and the significance of WikiLeaks and at the same time send more information for the sake of universal democracy.
Me: Thank you so much, Mr. Assange.
JA: Your welcome young man~ :)
[Interview Clips]
-> part of the interview.... soooo memorable!!
What a day.... right?
How does it sound? Pretty exciting huh?
It was a fabulous experience and I can't go to bed for I fear that I might lose even a little fragment of this wonderful recollection!!
Invitation to the Lunch with Gyutae Park at Nilli, an Italian restaurant
Dear Mr. Assange,
On behalf of all Americans who are commemorating the 9/11 terror incident, it is my great pleasure to invite you and WikiLeaks to the lunch on Sep. 11th, next Sunday.
I must first say that I am deeply impressed with the momentous contribution that WikiLeaks is making to the modern society. Especially, your recent report of the Iraq war logs and the Guantanamo files. While searching through such shocking materials, I have came upon your remark about 9/11 affair and the "conspiration theories" that you proposed. Especially your interview with the Belfast Telegraph reporter Matthew Bell piqued my interest a lot. Thus, if your time allows, I'd like to personally meet you and discuss more about the truth hidden behind the 9/11 terror and explain more about the following media report; "From 3AM on Wednesday November 25, 2009, until 3AM the following day (US east coast time), WikiLeaks released half a million US national text pager intercepts. The intercepts cover a 24 hour period surrounding the September 11, 2001 attacks in New York and Washington."
The place for lunch is set to Nilli, a very renowned Italian restaurant in Korea, for I've heard that you enjoy Italian food very much. I believe that our conversation would cover various range of your life - both your personal life, ideology and your public standing. I really look forward meeting you!
The ensuing list of questions I give you to enjoy more fluent and gay conversation with you
1. Tell me about your earlier life
2. How did you start studying computer programming?
3. What are your motivations for founding WikiLeaks?
4. What does WikiLeaks do?
5. How does WikiLeaks work?
6. What is your stance on 9/11?
7. What are your and WikiLeaks' future plans?
<rest of the questions I assume would come out as we talk>
We all believe that documentaries convey us the truth; sometimes a hidden shocking truth and sometimes just a beautiful and miraculous truth concerning the nature. Through such truth, in the mist of information described in documentaries, we seek pleasure, knowledge, and most important of all, morals.
However, WHAT IF THE DOCUMENTARY IS NOT ENTIRELY TRUE?? Does it give hamful effects to people??
The producers of the documentary 'Catfish', Yaniv Schulman and his filmmaker brother Henry, claim that the documentary is a complete truth, without any forms of manipulation of the truth. Nobody can rebut the claim for there is a possibility; the only problem is that the possibility seems to be quite low. It should be a remarkable coincidence...
Dubious factor comes directly from the first. When Yaniv mentions "she seems to be very pretty and talented YET", it sounds as if he knows the whole story and is trying to dramatize it. In addition, why would any filmmaker start making a documentary with so plain story like a photographer meeting a girl who has interest in drawing pictures through social network sites? Does it have anything special to be sold to public? As well, documentaries need motives and goals.... What are they here?? To portray how the plain people become friends?? There comes a reasonable doubt!!
With all due respect to such doubts however, I cannot agree upon the thought that this documentary ultimately does more harm than good.
First clear and obvious reason is that the main figures featuring in this film did benefit a lot by making this film. Yaniv was awarded a very honorable prize and became a celebrity. Angela opened her art gallery and many people are buying them. What a WIN-WIN documentary!!
Some people argue that it gives indirect harm to Abby or facebook company. I do concede that Abby may feel ashamed of her mother. However, Abby didnot instantaneously show any signs of being ashamed, and for Angela is not ashamed of her conducts, she would be able to tell Abby about what she felt, what she had in mind and she would be able to sufficiently excuse herself. In the matter of facebook company, I think the documentary played its genuine role here: warning people of the possible harm of social network sites. For this incident is very rare undoubtedly, the documentary is actually benefiting the Facebook company that the number of future identity crime victims will be lessened. Also, for the users, since they would be very cautious and careful in using facebook, it would raise their sense of safety.
After all, I really enjoyed the documentary, and no matter if it is completely true or forged to some degree, the documentary is not harming the society as some critics argue. Hope the fascinating plot does more good than harm to the society~!
Possible Debate Motions are
1. THBT documentary should be filmed upon only the truth
2. THBT social network sites should ban the creation of multi-accounts (some people- involving some teachers in KMLA make two accounts; one for students and one for private acquaintances)
3. THBT Yaniv is a victim in the documentary
Yesterday, I was watching 'Boston Legal', one of the American dramas dealing with court cases and lawyers' lives. In the episode, the law firm sued a television company for not providing enjoyable programs for the elderly over 50s. In the status quo, television companies, further the social media themselves, recognize and organize their viewers through demographic categories. We often see companies analyzing their viewer ratings by age!!
Johanna Blakley, in the TED video, argues that social media companies should now change themselves and shift their way of categorizing the viewers. Claiming that difference in online activity-engagements come not from demographics but from difference in interests, Blakley suggests that the companies should focus on difference in thoughts, interests, and perspectives when they categorize and target certain viewers. As her speech goes on, she also claims that women are now the leading viewers of media; women are the majority viewers and participants in various social media and networks.
Blakley's speech clearly describes many changes in social trend- especially those regarding gender issues and social media. However, she seems to disvalue the importance of analysis on demographics.
Analyzing viewers by demographics still plays a significant role. Obvious gap between generations exist in the status quo, and different generations, under different culture and tradition, exhibit different preferences to programs. Definite example would be a recent survey conducted by KSI (Korean Statistics Institution) on different preferences of people when they watch televisions. people in the 10s and 20s mainly preferred music programs and entertainment programs whereas most 40s and 50s pursued documentaries, news, and other leisure programs like fishing, travelling, and so forth. Though I concede that difference in interests should be regarded as one of the key factors, the phenomenon is mainly happening within youngsters. As long as cultural differences between generations exist, media companies should still focus on ages.
Possible Debate motions would be
1. THBT the broadcasting companies should be mandated to make programs targetting people over 50s
2. THBT women are leading the social networks expansion
3. THBT age limits on joining online social networks should be abolished
As I was watching the speech of Patricia Ryan, various minds preoccupied my mind. One of them was the economics paper that I am currently working on. I am writing a thesis in ENGLISH..... though I am Korean, and though the paper deals with Korean corporations. Why is this ridiculous pheonomenon taking place?- it's because English is the "global language".
'All the modernized prestigious universities are in United States and United Kingdom, and every person thus has to learn English to pass exams and ace the admission to such schools......'
How sad, and How dare can we say this?
Last week, I engaged in a voluntary service that I am quite sure that I will remember for the rest of my life. I went to the church, which offered after school education service to kids under 12. There I met these small kids who were very bright and playful; but bore huge pain. One of the kids, whose parents were divorced and thus was living only with his father, was very hyperactive. I asked him why, and he said that his mother was visiting him the next day- for the weekend. I asked him how often he sees his mother, and he told me that it was a very rare incident. I was extremely and harrowingly sad and I pitied him very much; a 12 year old boy was being so happy because he finally can see his mother for 2 days..... How blessed I am!!.....??
Another child was even living alone. Her parents were divorced, and were gone. Her only brother was in U.S. The 12 year old girl looked careworn; AT THAT YOUNG AGE... How blessed I am!!.....??
The other child was even more pitiful. He did not have any family, friends, and he even had some mental disease. Looking at him smiling as if the world had blessed him and looking at him smiling at me for trying to help him, I was very very pitiful. How blessed I am!!.....??
I was assigned to teach English to the three kids. They were eager to learn, but the environment was not favorable. We only had one text book, which was not even a new one. For the whole time I was with them, I was concerned with one very serious question; "Is this really a necessary thing?"
In KMLA, all students including me struggle to learn and improve our English. Obviously there are many reasons, but the primary one is to get high scores from tests. We have to take SATs, APs, and IBTs~!! After teaching the kids as hard as I could, I suddenly noticed: "Maybe I am not the blessed one..." If English works as a barrier for such poor kids in succeeding in today's society, if English helps killing a languate every 14days, and if English does not change the world, WHY DO I HAVE TO LEARN ENGLISH??!!
Korean language is an extremely scientific and well-organized language; we Koreans have to protect it from disappearing. Personally I value the purpose of learning English very very much. It is just that...... the modern trend of repudiating and ignoring all non-English using students and of enforcing people to learn English is no good. I see greater value in watching and guiding the kids in unfortunate conditions.
"The children can lead Africa from a dark continent to a good continent", an African student said.
Perhaps, it's not the English that builds up true potential and develops true ability. Always remember how blessed you are and I am, and try somehow to protect own languages and stop putting too much pressure on learning English, for there are way more valuable concepts and qualities.
The "30days" documentary provides an eccentric and somehow interesting environment- such as 'A straight man in gay world', 'A strict christian living with muslims', and 'living with a minimum wage'- and watches the outcome. Though the situation is unlikely-to-happen, people can grasp the distant world and somehow assimilate to the culture. After watching "30days of a straight man in gay world", I, who considered myself a homophobic, noticed that gays are all the same; except for their sexual preference. They eat same food, they play same sports, and they are humane. I was pleased to win from the prejudice that gays are totally disgusting people and that they are not same as straight men in every sense. Thus, I agree that "30days" documentaries are educational, and even further, that they can redress our biases.
Hoping that my "30days" program can teach a meaningful lesson as well, I'd like to propose my idea; "30days of NOT WASHING". 'How dirty the person would get and how displeased people would become to see such filthy scene', you might ask. It does, however, have a clear intention: it not only emphasizes the importance of cleaning yourself, but it can verify such rumors as 'It's better to take a shower only 4times a week to protect your hair and avoid hair loss'.
Before elaborating the specific plan, let's go over some definition and past instances. For "washing", it means 'no showering, no hair washing, no teeth cleaning, and no deodorant." Also, I'd like the participants be MYSOPHOBICS- who are extremely obsessed with cleaning themselves- and normal people- who are not that obsessed with cleaning themselves. (OMG~! I'm really excited to see the results~:) ) There are many past experiments about the "NOT CLEANING" issue.
--http://web.mac.com/jfmori/iWeb/nz/No%20Shampoo%20Experiment/No%20Shampoo%20Experiment.html : This is the 'NO SHAMPOO experiment'. This girl thought that the shampoo can be too harsh for her hair, because it strips all the natural oils from her hair. Thus, she quitted using shampoos and used hair conditioners and other stuffs to rinse her hair. There are many self-confirming photos and 'no shampoo' seems to work very well~!
--http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/health/2013327538_nonbathers02.html : This is an article criticizing those people who are too much obsessed with 'I should not stink at all'. My small opinion on the issue is 'what's the matter if you stink a little? Wouldn't it be better than wearing all the toxic chemicals from deodorants, perfumes, cosmetics and so on?'
--http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-477378/Six-weeks-wash-The-soapless-experiment.html : This is a story of a lady who got sick of using all the odorful chemicals to clean herself and trying to artificially make herself beautiful with excessive usage of cosmetics. She quitted cleaning her self for 40days and decided to use a bar of soap, organic shampoo and conditioner, and a basic moisturiser in cleaning herself. WOW~!
In the program, every participants will get daily health check. It would include hair health testing, skin health testing, mental state testing- for if you don't wash yourself, sometimes you get to hate yourself- and other fundamental health tests. They will be under surveilance for 30days and all their behaviors will be recorded. Hopefully, this program will enable people to notice what happens both physically and mentally when you don't take a shower, what your reaction is, and what is the suitable interval to use shampoo or take a shower, and so on.
It is very hard to anticipate or predict the result, for people usually wash themselves- at least people around me- and thus, don't know what it feels like to not take a shower for 30days. However, my slightest guess is that mysophobics will suffer from extreme mental distress and might have a seizure. Large number of people will try to reach water to clean themselves. And for the rest of the incidents.... LET'S SEE WHAT HAPPENS IN REALITY~!!!!!
2011년 3월 14일 월요일
In 2008, professors at Seoul National University publicly complained about all the application essays being identical in their ideas, contents, and structures. Such standardization comes mainly from the uniform education students receive; they are always told to write the formal answer sheet. In the field of formal tests and college admission, the matter gets even more serious and complicated. In order to attain high scores, students adopt same techniques and styles without having any doubt or hesitating. For example, almost every Korean private education institutes teach their students to write the SAT essay in a very strictly structured form. They are told to use similar contextured examples, vocabularies, and so on. These methods may bring us with high scores. The purpose of writing essay, however, is not to fill the fancy ready-made phrases in a strict form; it is rather about expressing personal ideas. Take a glance at the current situation; where is our individuality and creativity?
Before discussing whether my creativity has enhanced or not, let me clarify the concept of 'creativity'. Creativity comes in many different meanings to various people. Some people define the term as an act of creating any unique things or ideas. Some denote creativity as devising things that had not been thought of. Although the precise definition may be equivocal, the key concept is quite clear: creativity is creating something that is fresh and special.
From my childhood, I had a frequent contact with critical thinking-inducing games such as sudoku and puzzle. People approved me of being creative, and they still do. Due to such efforts to constantly promote rational and logical thinking, I find my creativity quality as it was back in the young ages.
I encounter many unique people in KMLA. Undoubtedly talented, many students have great interest in various fields and they always talk about mind-catching facts or stories. Joining their thoughts, I can imagine and feel the new world and can experience many perspectives of accepting certain situations. Thus, I am very happy with the surrounding of KMLA~!
Now let us go over the speech made by Sir Robinson.
Sir Robinson claims that education thrusts out the children's creative capacities. He argues that even though all people have extraordinary talents in their early days, the modern education system does not develop their aptitudes. It is mostly because the current education system puts huge emphasis on useful subjects, but not on others; dancing class is never treated as importantly as mathematics class. Consequently, many talented kids think they have no latent abilities because underestimated subjects are not valued and are even stigmatized. Sir Robinson, thus, urges the education system to broaden its outlook and acclaim children's diverse capacities. Through such process, the knighted sir contends, children would be able to make valuable advancements in the future that is nearly impossible to grasp or predict.
The idea of developing a favorable environment for children to seek for their talents and to develop such potentials is fabulous. Especially in Korea where math and English are given huge weight, the education system needs to be reformed since it can not fathom extremely diverse talents of children. Then, how should it be changed?
Introduction of a program that helps children to experience variety of things and a program that offers specialized education would be effective. The programs will assist children to find their talents and develop them. Specialized education is not an education where students learn only one thing. They must learn basic knowledge. It's just that they are learning a subject in a very deep depth rather than studying all subjects in comparatively slight depth.
Sir Robinson's speech was very congenial to the status quo where education is deteriorating children's creativity. Although I myself think my creativity is quite developed and even though I think KMLA is a very creative place, it is obvious that the current education system must be changed. Contriving a new program that will help children to gain much experiences and offer specialized education on talented field would open a wider opportunity for success to children.
FOR DEBATE MOTIONS,
1. THBT private institutions should be eliminated
2. THBT specialized education should not be offered to young children
3. THBT all classes must be taught for same period of time
Last year, one of the freshmen in KMLA posted an article expressing his opinion about conflicts between two prevailing Korean school teachers' union(http://www.hani.co.kr/arti/opinion/because/418809.html)
It was rather radical, for the article condemned the fundamental structure of Korean education which had the possibility of conveying the false idea that KMLA itself was supporting these radical views. What was interesting was that the school did not make it an issue that its name came up in the article- when even the students gave full vent to their defiant feelings! At the moment, I was excited by the 'freedom of speech' we students have in school; we are free to share our opinions even if that is a radical political claim!
Having retained confidence in our assured liberty in KMLA, I could not feel empathy for the problem Michael Moore pointed out; it was a distant issue for me (I assume that you know Michael Moore and his arguments^^). Students in KMLA are free to speak or write their own thoughts about school; they are even encouraged to make suggestions under the idea of student autonomy. For instance, current EOP helper system was contrived and settled by students of EOP department; Chicken Day was originally settled by proposals made by students.
Putting aside all the gratifications of freedom I feel, I cannot join Moore's movements. Michael Moore's arguments have critical fallacies.
Moore and his "Highschool Newspaper" is biased. Though he claims to advocate unrestrained share of diverse opinions from students, he puts too much emphasis on 'reforms'- all his articles commend student 'uprisings'. The topics he posts up on his website (http://mikeshighschoolnews.com/) are clearly urging for criticism. How would students stand in a stance in support of government or school when the topic is 'Live from Madison: What's happening now?' and Moore himself is covering his webpage with writings that lauds student protests?- Madison is the place where recent student protests occurred. When the topic fails to embrace all kinds of ideas-both for and against the school policies, it is not an authentic democracy that Moore's movement aims for.
The credibility of information used in his webpage rouses suspicion. Anonymity is an equivocal concept. Its meaning reaches further than just its explicit denotation that your name and identity wouldnot be revealed. It can be used to humiliate certain people and disseminate false information. Founding of restaurants in America experienced sharp decline when one of the web users revealed a false statistic that 90 percent of new-born restaurants go bankrupt in their first years. Words undoubtedly exercise huge power on people. Anonymity often incapacitates people's conscience, and thus, produces great amount of forged information.
As a student attending KMLA, I am very much complacent about the status quo where freedom of speech is guaranteed. However, even if I were a highschool student in America, I would not have joined Moore's movement since it is not truly aiming for genuine democracy, and because the validity of information posted in the website is questionable.
[Possible Debate Motions]
1. THBT students have right to use school's privilege (without school's permission)
2. THW allow student protests
3. THBT people can use anonymous IDs in newspaper websites
Last year, I was preparing for a group presentation at school and found out an interesting report about the relationship between TV advertisements on junk food and childhood obesity published by the Institute Of Medicine (IOM). The research team discovered that television advertising strongly influences what children under 12 eat. J. McGinnis, a senior scholar at IOM, said “The foods advertised are predominantly high in calories and low in nutrition — the sort of diet that puts children’s long-term health at risk”. I could not forget this alarming truth and from then, my whole diet changed; I stopped eating junk food.
While I was watching "The Story of Stuff", I had in my mind that this video will strongly influence minds of most of children who watch it, as the report by IOM affected my mine. Such an astonishing, yet fearful claim that we are buying toxic products and that every product comes along with toxins must have huge impact upon the fragile minds of children. It would not be a really big problem, however, if all the statistics and descriptions in this video were true; yet, they are not. Such exaggerations as pillows being soaked into toxic chemicals are very likely to give false recognition to people, especially children.
Thus, 'The Story of Stuff' should not be used as an educational material. It contains exaggerated and forged pieces of information that is certainly not educational, for a proper education must derive its contents from facts. In addition, the video is too much obsessed with condemning the current production and consumption cycle that it does not show the whole part of the nation's industry. For instance, there are numerous eco-friendly corporations in United States and the U.S. government is trying to regulate the pollution from corporations by enacting legislations and implementing CER (Certified Emissino Reduction) policy.
I donot deny that there are problems in the production and consumption cycle. However, if the problem is to be taught to children, it must be more truth-based and properly stated. Visual materials have huge influence on children's thoughts. An educational video would be more rational that to be radical.
The debate motions that I suggest are:
1. THBT government can restrict freedom of speech when the criticism against government is not truthful
2. THBT government should mandate companies to produce nutritious food when it comes to children-targeted products.
3. THBT United States' helping development of under-developed countries should be stopped
