Opinion: Communist ideologies get too much credit

Written by Reuters

As Zee News expressed in an op-ed titled “Why Communism has propelled the USSR to the top", “the reason the USSR is so successful in developing technology is the streamlined system of Communism. There is no red tape. The Central Committee of the Communist Party knows what the people wants, and works tirelessly to achieve those goals”. We think this is a flawed perspective.

While the USSR may be successful in some aspects, the article does not mention how the Central Committee has struggled to address major food and housing shortage crisis that have been plaguing the USSR. The article also fails to give strong evidence on how exactly the system of communism is the cause of the USSR’s strength.

Zee News calls the United States weak, although the US has achieved many of the same accomplishments as the USSR. Overall, the article pushes a bold claim with little reason why communism has created a strong USSR without acknowledging the clear issues the USSR faces.

Opinion: We must look at the economic fallacies of the Community Party

Written by BBC

On April 5th, Reuters published an article titled, “How to promote growth? Domestic investments? Outward expansionism? The Soviet Union desperately needs both” The Article argued that the USSR should promote both its communist ideology abroad and invest in domestic ventures, claiming that, “both are desperately needed for the Soviet Union’s growth both ideologically and economically.” While the BBC does not take a stance on political ideologies, the economic accuracy of this statement is questionable and deserves addressing.

The USSR, as a communist state still following Stalin’s form of state market controls, prohibits individuals from owning large businesses or having multiple employees outside of their families. This, intentionally, keeps large corporations from forming. Instead, the state controls the markets. Presumably, since this is an integral part of the USSR’s communism, they would be exporting this ideology abroad.

How then, would the USSR invest in domestic ventures? There are no domestic ventures besides those run by the state. If the USSR wishes to make investments, it must do so by investing abroad in countries that have less stringent forms of communism, such as Yugoslavia, or which are not communist. The Article cites plans to invest in domestic agriculture or infrastructure, but these will not aid the USSR’s slow economy beyond what is already being done. The USSR needs to either shift its ideology to repair its economy, or accept less stringent forms of communism in its allies in order to support the parts of the soviet economy which run less efficiently under the state.

Opinion: France 24 completely missed the point on HEADS resolution

Written by Euronews

In a recent op-ed by the France 24, the editorial board criticized the sponsors of HEADS draft resolution from the United Nations Commission on the Status of Women (UNCSW). Their main concern was that the resolution would create “new boards, commissions, and taskforces,” that will “merely exacerbate the problem by creating bureaucratic bloat, and women’s voices will be lost in the process.”

Euronews editorial board believes that this is a short-sighted view on a complex problem. The HEADS resolution, which was also reviewed by this board, is impressive with its inclusion of both Western and Asian countries. The resolution calls out for sending researchers within the region to nations to collect data, which will be used to better inform policymakers on women’s rights issues.

It is an ambitious resolution that requires great coordination among different UN agencies, such as the UNESCO and UNHRC. That’s why the HEAD resolution calls for forming specialized bodies within the UN.

It is true that there are more than two hundred committees within the UN, which has led to bureaucratic backlog. The UN has even been accused by past Secretary-General such as Kofi Annan, that getting simple tasks done like ordering different types of paper can take months. While that sounds like a small problem, it’s consequential when the UN needs to act quickly on urgent humanitarian response.

However, the number of existing committees should not be an obstacle for potential, better committees. The UN is a world governing body. Of course, it has more than a hundred committees. The US Congress alone has more than a hundred!

France 24 completely ignored the substantive part of the resolution and instead just focused on the bureaucratic part. It’s a resolution dealing with promoting women’s rights worldwide. Of course it’s going to be bureaucratic.

Opinion: Positivity about small actions towards combating climate change is dangerous

Written by CNBC

In an the editorial “AOSIS proposes promising solutions to climate change,” published on April 5, 2019, NHK World expressed optimism about the solutions the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS) put forward to address the impact of climate change on their states. Such optimism is unfounded and suggests a lack of knowledge about climate change and the functioning of international bodies.

The NHK World editorial expressed the opinion that the three draft resolutions proposed by the body would be enough to prevent the coastal states from the ever encroaching sea level. Such positivity is downright naive.

The SEED paper proposes creating a new board entitled EASIS to advise nations on implementing legislation designed to effectively combat climate change. Support of the creation of such an institution shows a fundamental misunderstanding of why combating climate change is so difficult. Nations already know that climate change is a problem, and they know that reducing carbon emissions and moving towards renewable energy is one of the most effective ways to accomplish that. What nations need is a push towards implementing policies to this effect. They need to be incentivised, and that is what AOSIS should have focused on this weekend instead of empty solutions that merely sound flashy and seem deceivingly useful.

This optimism is not only ill-founded, but harmful. Problems worsen to the point of no return because of complacency, and complacency is born of hope. The solutions to climate change proposed in AOSIS during its meeting in April are a mere drop in the bucket and not worthy of celebration.

Opinion: What are Beijing’s true intentions in the South China Sea?

Written by Zee News

In an editorial from Russia Today, an organization the Columbia Journalist Review (CJR) calls the “Kremlin’s propaganda outlet,” called out the United States on the country’s intentions on the South China Sea. But RT ignored the countless violations of international norms by China in the region.

RT claimed the U.S. has “imperialistic intentions for intervention,” under the guise of peacekeeping. The United States is keeping the peace. China is vying for regional dominance.

China’s “nine dashed line” is completely unreasonable, and their unwillingness to change is preventing peace. The country is undergoing a massive “island hopping” strategy in the South China Sea. This immoral -- and illegal -- action violates the rights of several neighboring countries.

Beijing is trying to flex their military might, at the dismay of over 200 member states across the world, including India and the United States.

United Nations maritime law states the national sovereignty of member states extends 100 nautical miles from the land border. China claims the entire sea, which encompases the legal sovereignty of Vietnam, Japan and the Philippines.

RT calls out the U.S. in the South China Sea, but what about the biggest player in the region?

Opinion: A system that has murdered millions is no system at all

Written by France 24

If a government today systematically murdered 20 million people, it would be considered the news of the century. War would break out. The United Nations would censure and expel the country responsible. Major powers from around the world would offer condemnation and aid. Countless thought pieces would be written, all asking one central question: how could the international community have let this happen?

The international community did let this happen under the communist regime of Joseph Stalin in the U.S.S.R. from 1922 to 1953. For Secretary of the Party Nikita Khrushchev to argue in ZEE News that communism has “propelled the U.S.S.R. to the top” is to insult the memory of the millions who perished and to ignore the marketplace of innovation that capitalism enables.

A major Soviet newspaper found that nearly 20 million people died in forced labor camps, collectivization, famine, and executions during Stalin’s regime, all in the name of “the streamlined system of communism” espoused by Khrushchev. No economic system is worth the lives of so many. If 20 million people had been murdered under capitalism, the system would rightly be relegated to the dustbin of history. For the U.S.S.R. to continually insist that the goal of communism is “equality” and the prevention of exploitation of the working is to ignore decades of history in which those worst-off in society were systematically abused and oppressed.

One could argue, as Khrushchev does, that the state-operated nature of communism allows for greater innovation due to less competition and “red tape.” While the lack of competition may allow for a state to pool resources and energy into a single idea, this is to its detriment, as it prevents the best ideas from coming to the surface. Is the spacecraft “Chairnobyl,” which Khruschev praises as the first spacecraft to exit Earth’s atmosphere, truly of the best design and quality? Or would various proposals and bids, made by the state as well as private design companies, have resulted in a better overall spacecraft? While the state has a role to play, it functions best when in a competitive marketplace of ideas. This marketplace of ideas, however, is impossible under communism, especially as millions of lives are disregarded.

Opinion: The gods are responsible

Written by Africanews

The op-ed piece published by the BBC about Amun-her-khepeshef being resurrected is in no way reflective of the material conditions of Egypt. The speculation and doubt expressed over the status of the heir-presumptive is borderline treasonous at best. The outside influence of the BBC is laughable as it is a western news source that has no basis to understand the religious magics wielded by the priests of the Egyptian pantheon.

The casting of doubt further de-legitimizes the governing of Egypt because it lacks substantiation particularly when the BBC states “Is the newly resuscitated prince considered to be born before or after his younger brother?” This sort of rhetorical questioning should be seen as quibbling that seeks to cause even more instability than what already exists.

In regards to the concern expressed about the primogeniture, the Prince is alive and that is what matters most. The overall vitality of the Egyptian crown is reliant on the existence of strong rulers who are benevolent, which Amun-her-khepeshef has proven himself as over his short life. He was the first born, and as such he is still the first born, regardless of the period where he died first.

The usage of a peasant's voice in the matters of religion is faulty at best as the peasants cannot truly know the will of the gods. They should follow the instructions of their priests rather than compare the news of the resurrection to their younger days before a Prince was deemed worthy of being sent back to the living.

To question the will of the Gods is to question the Pharaoh himself and is in bad faith. The rule and existence of the Pharaoh are through the blessings of Horus and Osiris, and as such they are above reproach and question.

Opinion: Where is Russia's Amazon?

Written by RT News

RT News would like to agree with NHK upon the fact that “Amazon holds the position of the largest e-commerce platform in the world and has totally dominated the field and expanded internationally throughout the past decade.”

However, RT news does not see any hope for Amazon to service the citizens of our nation for years to come.

What’s unusual about Russia’s e-commerce landscape, different from the e-commerce platform of Japan, is the absence of Amazon, Facebook, Google. Based on recent RT News reports, Amazon and many other big overseas companies have been slow to invest in Russia due to its restricting laws regarding foreign ownership, which as a result, increases economic prosperity and business opportunities for other domestic and international online retailers such as Yandex and Beru.

RT believes that although there might be possibilities of collaboration between Russian enterprises with Amazon, everything is still up in the air as there are barriers that Amazon will have to navigate before entering the Russian e-commerce market.

Opinion: Citing 'too much bureaucracy' is an excuse to ignore viable solutions

Written by Al Jazeera

In their recent opinion article, "Bureaucratic bloat cannot and will not help women's participation in decision-making processes", France 24 argued that the push for bureaucratic agencies within the bloc, “HEADS”, is stripping states from sovereignty, a problematic approach to the situation at hand. However, Al Jazeera responds by stating that it is this catering to the nations’ wish for more sovereignty in solutions that ends up reinforcing these issues.

Currently, members of the UN Commission of the Rights of Women are convening to discuss female participation in politics along with the general issue of gender equality. Several states in this committee are concerningly troublesome in regards to this, as there are no women being represented in their governments today.

Blocs such as HEADS attempt to tackle this issue by proposing solutions such as international standards and quotas for women in government, taking measures to increase the resources allocated to marginalized women.

In their article, France 24 states, “However, creating new boards, commissions, and task forces will merely exacerbate the problem by creating bureaucratic bloat, and women’s voices will be lost in the processes”, as well as calling out the lack of consideration for state sovereignty. What this editorial fails to take into account, however, is that many of these proposed organizations and task forces are being incorporated into pre-existing UN bodies with the goal of taking into account every population of women, from the indigenous to the ones in developed countries.

While state sovereignty is something important to keep in mind, several of the nations that tend to push this issue are the ones not doing anything for the populations within their borders. The Al Jazeera believes that rather than fighting to have the option of whether or not to be held to these standards, they should focus their efforts on changing it to suit them. One thing that the HEADS bloc actually does include in their resolution is calling for more regional-based solutions to fight against ‘one solution fits all’ band-aid approach.

This push for new bureaucratization in the “HEADS” paper does not have the same devastating consequences on state sovereignty that France 24’s article outlines. This paper takes a regional-based approach and takes into account the specific issues that each region faces. Hence, the fight for state sovereignty conveniently focuses the conversation away from bettering these solutions to fit the specific regions and instead searches for a loophole to not implement these standards, and thus reinforcing the issue at hand.

Opinion: In the UN, opinions and collaboration go hand-in-hand

Written by NHK World

CNBC recently published an article about delegates’ poor attitudes in the UNHCR; and while NHK World agrees with CNBC claim that delegate should be willing to cooperate and support one another, it is not necessary for delegates to support aspect that their countries wouldn’t favor. Part of the purpose of the United Nations is to create comprehensive solutions that will support each nation with their agendas.

While it is important to keep up diplomacy and respect while addressing other delegates, it is also important to speak for your country, and to remain honest in ones statements. While it is recognizable that the delegate from Tanzania could have refrained somewhat in his speech, it is also important that he spoke his opinion.

NHK World also agrees with the statement from the delegated of Rwanda that CNBC quoted: “This delegate would like to remind the committee that we can in fact pass more than one resolution.” Our organization also acknowledges that passing one resolution is favorable when there are several resolutions addressing different ways to implement policy. From our understanding after reading CNN’s article about the different draft resolutions in the UNHCR, all of the resolutions have nearly identical aspects.

Perhaps the focus should be more on creating the most comprehensive solution without introducing several unnecessary pages of loose policy.

While NHK has nothing but respect for CNBC, our organization has to disagree on the level of severity this article was written with. While many aspects hold true to the intended nature of the United Nations, it is important to also hold key that the United Nations exists to debate and create strong foreign policy.

Opinion: Automation is the next step in the battle for increased global prosperity

Written by CNN

Amazon’s Vice President and CTO Werner Vogels was right on the mark when he said the best solution for striking workers was to replace them with workers who cannot strike - automated robots.

Contrary to the opinion of the Al Jazeera Editorial Board, CNN believes that automating jobs is the only way to continue to increase utilitarian prosperity in the long term. The Board however understands the short term difficulties for blue collar workers and the concerns over a shrinking middle class.

However, CNN believes that the efficiencies offered by automation leaves room for companies to reinvest in their displaced workers via worker re-education programs, while still turning a profit. These re-education programs can emphasize skills that are not automatable, and help these workers engage in other types of economic activity.

Such re-education programs will also help propel these families into the middle class by providing skills like computer programming and data analysis that are much sought after in the job market.

The problem with automation thus far is not in concept but in practice. If automation is done poorly and workers are completely displaced, then yes, the concerns Al Jazeera puts forth may be realized. However, if done correctly, automation will make everyone more prosperous.

Opinion: The importance of autonomy

Written by China Global Television Network

In a recent opinion, Al Jazeera argued for “the importance of accountability” in the United Nations Commission on the Status of Women (UNCSW), a position mutually exclusive with the rightful sovereignty of member states.

Al Jazeera criticized countries like Iran, historically behind in women’s rights, and claimed that Iran should not be given equal consideration as a sovereign state. The reporter further argued that the United Nations should not cater to these countries’ cultural norms and should enforce sweeping regulations expected to be upheld by member states.

This is a clear compromise of the inherent autonomy of all countries, regardless of their position on the contested women’s rights spectrum. Al Jazeera failed to note that Iran, throughout its efforts in UNCSW, has partnered with other nations from entirely different perspectives, including the United Kingdom. Belittling Iran’s and its peers’ voices in the issue de-incentivizes them from the already uncharacteristic collaboration they are displaying in committee.

Furthermore, Al Jazeera criticized the non-binding, voluntary approach of the Commission in enacting its policies. It is the opinion of CGTN that any other method employed by the Commission would swiftly and painfully dismantle the credibility long built by the United Nations. Imposing on state sovereignty would not only erase the camaraderie of the organization; it could potentially incite greater conflict between currently indifferent member states.

While it is true that the UN is limited in its legislative scope and its goals are inhibited somewhat by that restriction, the UN is not a country; it is an organization. Asserting dominance over states’ own autonomy is unethical, inefficient and dangerous.

Opinion: Marriage brings formation of a promising new House in Italy

Opinion: Marriage brings formation of a promising new House in Italy

Written by CNBC

The great Houses of Borgia and Medici have been joined by a third House, created by the marriage between Pedro Luis de Borgia, formerly of House Borgia, and Giovanni II Bentivogilio, formerly of House Medici. Rather than taking either of their names, the new family has taken the name Carter and shall henceforth be known as the House of Carter. Great things are expected from this house, whose very formation indicated great changes in the societal fabric of Italy.

The holy matrimony occurred under the new religion of Gavelism, a recent religious movement gaining popularity throughout Italy. Gavelism has emerged as the primary competitor of Catholicism. It’s tenants include “rejecting being a power del” and “worshipping the gavel.”

The House of Carter has consolidated territories in northern Florence, northern papal states, and the Duchy of Milan. This region will henceforth been known as the State of Cartera.

The editorial board of CNBC expects House Carter to usher in a new era of prosperity to the State of Cartera for several reasons.

Firstly, the significance of a marriage between members from House Borgia and House Medici. These houses have been in violent conflict for decades. They have killed one another and countless civilians. It’s time this senseless violence stopped, and creating peaceful marital bonds between the two families is a great first step.

Secondly, the marriage of Pedro Luis de Borgia and Giovanni II Bentivogilio marks a milestone in human rights across the world. It is the first legal gay marriage in Europe, a monumental event that seems hundreds of years ahead of its time. With such an impressive social conscience, it is easy to imagine that House Carter will make other significant strides in creating a more tolerant society within Cartera and around the world.

And lastly, the House of Carter supports Gavelism, a progressive religion by any metrics (as evidenced by their support for gay rights), but particularly when compared with the harsh policies of the Catholic Church. We can all agree that the absence of power delegates would be an improvement in everyone's life, regardless of their house membership.

Surrounded by enemies, the House of Carter will struggle to survive, let alone flourish. The international community needs to recognize the efforts of the House of Carter to create a more tolerant and peaceful society and at the very least publicly pledge support for the young house. More wealthy nations should go a step further in their support and reach out to the couple at the heart of this new family and offer to provide them with whatever resources or alliances they may need. It would be an excellent gesture towards forming a more peaceful world in which families no longer kill one another for genetic reasons alone.

Should we hold a funeral for the UN?

Should we hold a funeral for the UN?

Ever since President Trump took over the White House, the world has pondered on what the future of the UN would look like. Throughout his campaign trail, he publicly criticized the organization. “The United Nations is not a friend of democracy, it’s not a friend to freedom, it’s not a friend even to the United States of America where, as you know, it has its home. And it surely is not a friend to Israel,” and he even once labeled the UN as, “So sad!”

So, it was predictable that after the 2016 election, academics and those in the media talked about the death of liberalism. Experts thought it was time to plan a funeral for liberalism.  

Not so fast. Even though leaders like President Trump is disrupting the liberal world order and strong cooperation that has lasted for decades, he is far from destroying it outright. As G. John Ikenberry pointed out in his seminal book “Liberal Leviathan”, the liberal world order is stronger than we think and it will endure even as America’s economic power gets overshadowed by countries like China.

No single nation can solve problems such as climate change and terrorism alone. Also, economic interdependence has created a wide web of trade networks that’s impossible to untangle by pulling out of few trade agreements. We don’t need to hold a funeral. Far from it

The US was instrumental in building the liberal world order we have today. The US led effort on structuring the UN, World Bank and the IMF created a forum where countries can let out their grievances without resorting to violence, in the hopes of finding a compromise. These efforts stabilized the war torn European continent and inspired the great European experiment called, the European Union.  

The effort to achieve concerted cooperation is precisely the reason why the liberal world order endured for so long and attracted both democracies and autocracies alike. Even though the Soviet Union and the US competed for military power, both nations cooperated to reduce the number of nuclear arms when it threatened international security and worked on numerous space programs such as the Apollo-Soyuz test project and Mir Space Station. Today, while the US and Russia seems to be marching into ‘hot peace, both nations have worked together in the Security Council on passing directives to deal with oil spills in the Arctic.

For centuries, liberal ideals have lit the world by enhancing individual lives through spreading technological innovations and encouraging free trade. Technological innovations have allowed for faster travel and communication, which in turn made trading with different countries easier. After 1940s, the liberal order pushed for lower tariffs, free flow of ideas, goods, capital, and people. This in turn made nations that were once foes interdependent towards another which raised the costs of war. One only needs to look at datasets from Correlates of War to see that the rates of interstate war has gone down dramatically since 1945.

The liberal world order will endure because of its ability to adapt to new challenges. It provided economic and security benefits not only to the US but to the world as well.

And in areas where the US has withdrawn its leadership position, other nations and leaders has come forward to carry the baton and lead the way. Japan carried on the TPP project and got eleven Pacific-Rim countries, plus Canada, to ratify it under a new name, Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership.

Leaders such as Emmanuel Macron and Angela Merkel has spoken strongly about the importance of international institutions and liberal values such as open trade. Chinese president Xi Jingping even said in 2017 at Davao that China “should commit ourselves to growing an open global economy.”

The liberal world order we have today, the world we live in today, was shaped by the US but its longevity will not be decided by America’s hegemony. As shown above, America will continue to enjoy the benefits of liberalism and anyone who occupies the Oval Office will recognize that.

However, even as America takes a backseat in leadership role, other nations, because they want to continue and expand the benefits of liberalism, will make sure that the liberal order survives. Graham Allison said in 2017 that the liberal order is a ‘myth’. Well, it turns out others believe in this ‘myth’ and wants to see it succeed.

Iran opens up about women's issues

Written by Euronews

The Islamic Republic of Iran is not kind on women’s rights issues. As a conservative Islamic country, they have laws against women attending sports stadiums, they cannot divorce and work willingly. That requires permission from their male figureheads.

Iranian women have no choice but to wear a hijab, a long headscarf worn by Muslim women. This is a direct form of institutionalized body shaming.

Iran does hold elections but real political power lies with Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the supreme leader of Iran. The Ayatollah is in control of the military, courts and the media. In 2015, the supreme leader even said the concept of ‘gender equality’ went against the core value of the Islamic Republic.

Euronews decided to sit down with the Iranian delegate, who is working at the United Nations Commission on the Status of Women (UNCSW), and ask him questions related to women’s rights in Iran.

Many people in the West views Iran negatively on women’s rights issues, because Iran does rank low on women’s rights. Would you say those views are accurate?

We are a conservative Islamic Republic but that does not mean we are anti-women, we are bad on women’s rights. We just have a different framework on what women’s rights are. We base it off from Islamic teaching. This Western notion of ‘new liberal women’ just don’t line up with this model of contemporary women that Iran proudly represents. Back in 2008, we said that we have a model of contemporary women whose pious promotes the spirituality of family. We are pro-women and we are damn proud of it.

But how can you say that when your country has restriction on women in terms of marriage, jobs, family, just about everything?

Women in Iran are very happy. They are leaders of their own right. They are leaders of their home. Most Iranian men, if not all Iranian men, look up to Iranian women as model of spirituality, chastity, healthy conservatism. Every man in Iran are respectful and proud of their women.

Okay. Well, let’s talk about your resolution. What makes your resolution better than the other three?

HEAD and HerStory, both of these resolutions includes a task force that would collect data. It involves UN mandated team to go into nation states, infringe on their national sovereignty. My resolution respects national sovereignty and would not send invasion forces to another country.

These are teams of scientists, armed with pen and papers.

Pen is mightier than the sword.

BBC Financial Special Issue: Amazon is going to be split up, and the board does not know it yet.

BBC Financial Special Issue: Amazon is going to be split up, and the board does not know it yet.

Written by BBC

Year to date, Amazon stock (AMZN) is up 72%. It is currently trading at 161 times earnings. To put that in context, the average price to earnings ratio is only 20-25. What this means is that the market is betting on Amazon. A lot. Why? Everything comes down to Economies of scale, and monopoly.

Amazon has shown time and time again that they are able to eat up whatever industry their founder Jeff Bezos (or their newly appointed CEO Beff Jezos) sets his mind to. First it was books, then retail, now food and web services. Every time Amazon consumes an industry they strengthen their monopoly power, and with it, their potential to be insanely profitable at the expense of consumers.

No matter who is the president, the FTC simply will not allow Amazon to continue consuming competition at the rate it is. It is impossible for anyone, even president elect and former Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos, to convince the FTC that Amazon is not an increasingly dangerous threat to competition. That is not to say he won’t try.

The Amazon Board declined to comment on whether Bezos was still an Amazon shareholder, but according to a freedom of information request made by a BBC correspondent he has not made an HSR filing with the FTC, which is required to exchange assets of substantial size such as his AMZN stock holding. Therefore, he still holds about 4% of the company.

The Board, though, still seems convinced that Amazon will survive intact for years to come. When asked about anti-trust legislation, multiple members were quick to respond that they already had solutions in the works to convince the FTC that Amazon is not a threat. They clearly are not reading the writing on the wall: that Amazon is just about the definition of a monopoly, and that no amount of lobbying will be able to prevent anti-trust legislation from going through.

Post break-up, it is questionable whether many divisions of Amazon will even remain afloat. Much of the company is profitable due to network effects and economies of scale, which allow the company to minimize operating costs to edge out smaller competition. Additionally, Amazon Web Services (AWS) accounts for over 67% of company profits, which helps prop up less profitable wings.

Though Bezos and the rest of the board stand to lose the lucrative monopoly profits Amazon currently enjoys once the company fails to defend the impending antitrust lawsuit, there is one man who stands to gain. Brian T. Oslavsky, chief financial officer of amazon, is also on the board of Alibaba.

If Amazon is broken up, Alibaba is the one corporation that stands to gain the most, and Brian T Oslavsky, as a board member, will undoubtedly be rewarded for the damage he is doubtlessly doing to Amazon from the inside. Brian T. Oslavsky has survived two consecutive votes to kick him off of board, while publicly serving on the board of Alibaba. When asked how he responds to the obvious conflict of interest, he said, “I don’t.”

Mexican Ambassador holds mother of drug lord Pablo Escobar hostage

Written by Zee News

The Mexican Ambassador to Colombia claims to be holding the mother of infamous drug lord, Pablo Escobar, promoting the Colombian Presidential Cabinet to take action.  

Ambassador Arnulfo Guillermo Rincón is keeping Escobar’s mother, Hermilda Gaviria Berrío, hostage in an unknown location somewhere in Mexico, after the matriarch of the Medellín Cartel escaped prison Friday evening. “Mama Escobar is such a sweet, old lady,” said Rincón. “She is currently safe. Last time I saw her, she was making tapas in the kitchen.”

Rincón has several demands on the Colombian Cabinet, with complete immunity and safe passage to any country he in the world as his no. 1 one priority.

“It is really simple,” Rincón explained. “Just let me out of Colombia, and I will return her to the authorities. If not, there are certain documents about the location of members of this cabinet that Mr. Escobar might be interested in taking a look.”

The cabinet scoffed at this extortion, calling for the complete censure of Rincón, and the ambassador's immediate arrest. “We don’t respond well to threats,” said Gustavo De Greiff, Attorney General. “This is a declaration of war, and we will take action.”

The body took action to remove Rincón from the presidential cabinet, while pondering how this new information can lead to taking down the man himself -- Pablo Escobar.

“We can use his mom as bait to fish (Escobar) out of hiding,” said De Greiff. “Pablo loves his mama. Let’s all work together to find her so we can bring this drug lord to justice.”

Justice was the plan of President César Gaviria, who vows to end the corruption plaguing Colombia. The president created his newly-formed cabinet to try rid the South American nation of Narcos. Gavaria’s advisors were at the cusp of their goal, with the arrest of Escobar’s mother.

Berrío was taken into custody Friday for allegedly assisting her son’s criminal enterprise. The reported Medellín Cartel is reported to supply up to 80 percent of the world’s cocaine supply, earning the Narcos an estimated $70 million -- each day.

The cabinet worked to track Berrío, ending in her arrest by Search Bloc, a unit of the National Police of Colombia assembled by President Gaviria. The charges for Berrío ranged from money laundering to complicity to commit murder, allegations egregious enough to merit extradition to the United States, according to the body.

Rincón claims he did not free Escobar’s mother from prison, instead the ambassador rescued her from the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), who wanted to use her drug ties to “spice up” their operations in neighboring Costa Rica.

“We had nothing to do with mama Escobar’s escape from prison,” said Jim Campbell, CIA Station Chief. “And we had nothing to do with that coop in Costa Rica. Wait, I mean the revolution in Costa Rica.”

The Mexican Ambassador said the CIA kept Berrío in a safe house, where he found her and transported matriarch where she is being held as of Saturday afternoon.

“Just give in, and she is all yours,” said Rincón. “Let’s work together to resolve this issue.”

Is Amazon's smile about to turn upside-down?

Is Amazon's smile about to turn upside-down?

Written by Reuters

As the US Department of Justice (DOJ) pushes antitrust charges and an investigation against Amazon, the executive board remains deeply concerned about the unknown rogue board member who sent out a memo encouraging the worker strike.

Upon being questioned during a press conference, David Limp stated that the rogue board member is “a menace intentionally undermining Amazon” and that “there is no doubt that information will be leaked to the DOJ”.

While the board has taken actions to try and delay the DOJ investigation until President-Elect Jeff Bezos takes office, there is doubt that Amazon will be able to keep ahead of the DOJ with the clear risk of sensitive and possibly incriminating evidence being leaked to the DOJ by a board member.

However, despite the risks of having a rogue board member present and recent public reports that aim to expose them, the board has failed to take any substantive action to investigate who is the rogue board member nor does it intend to. As David Limp said, “we kind of let it go since we figured that we have the DOJ investigation to focus on and we have all done some things that aren’t the best.”

So as the DOJ gets ready to dig in, the Amazon Executive Board is preparing for the signature Amazon Smile to turn upside-down as they brace for the worst.

Uncle Ramesses is the new face of recruitment

Uncle Ramesses is the new face of recruitment

Written by Africanews

Currently, the government of Ramesses II is incapable of protecting themselves from invaders as they have, as a whole, experienced heavy losses throughout their campaigns. Because of this, there is a recruitment and propaganda effort in the cities of Thebes and Memphis to entice people to join the army.

Throughout these cities, there have been posters placed on pillars and walls throughout the cities with an image of the Pharaoh saying that he wants “you to enroll in training” this has had a strong effect on the people and has increased the number of transportation guards considerably.

The image of the poster is a crude drawing of the Pharaoh with the text. There have been promises made that any person from the Assyrian territories would be allowed to join in on the training and may even be allowed to join the chariot driving forces as a further incentive.

This initiative was created by Penre, the commander of the Medjayu militia; Amenhotep, the mayor of Memphis; and Anakhtu, Chief of the Transport Officials. This group is a natural selection of political allies as they are all focused on military protection either as their main responsibility or through their responsibility to protect their city.

Speaking about this recruitment initiative, Penre stated that he is hopeful that this will help to replenish the army and to help provide for the common defense and expansion of the Great Ramesses’ empire. The newly recruited guards would provide great supplements to the Chief of Transport as well and would help to protect the caravans that are the lifeblood of the Egyptian economy.

The work to recruit Assyrians could create a stronger bond with their culture and could aid in the battles against the Hittites. This would be a coup of the entire region if Ramesses II could pull it off. The peace between Egypt and Assyria is already allowing Egypt to flourish.

Opinion: Passing everything in tandem- spirit of collaboration or ineffectiveness?

Opinion: Passing everything in tandem- spirit of collaboration or ineffectiveness?

Written by Al Jazeera

As the UNHCR committee debates the issue of passing all five resolutions on the floor regarding the topic of the climate refugee crisis this Saturday evening, they pose the question of whether this is a sign of collaboration between these blocs or simply a show of ineffectiveness and repetition of the same ideas. Seeing how complementary these papers are to each other, however, the Al Jazeera editorial board believes that this is a sign of collaboration, something often times looked over but should be emphasized upon more.

In theory, passing this amount of substantive resolutions may seem ineffective and to be frank, unfeasible. As the delegation of New Zealand stated, “it would be smooth and transitionary, but I don’t think it will work, to be honest”.

Because of how similar these working papers seem to be, passing all of these resolutions may seem ineffective because they all seem to address these issues in generally similar approaches. Thus, one must ask themselves if the committee is bringing this up just so all of their hard work will come into fruition, or if these resolutions genuinely work well with each other.

However, based on the speeches that were given defending these particular working papers, it seems that it is the latter that is true and that these resolutions actually do complement each other. While both of them take seemingly similar approaches to addressing the issue of Climate Refugees, they each focus on different facets of the topic, displaying a wonderful show of cooperation that is often lost in committees of this manner.

For example, the RAIN bloc places a large emphasis on accurate data collection, and how this will allow for more effective actions taking place in the future, while the Comrades bloc was defined by India as the only paper that takes into account the countries’ economic needs and that addresses agriculture in a way that takes into account GMO implementation.

Of course, some of these papers did run into dispute and debate among the delegations when discussing amendments. Oftentimes in these committees, unfriendly amendments are made in the spirit of tearing down a resolution and rendering it as ineffective as possible. However, as New Zealand explained, several of these amendments led to fruitful debate and many of the more contentious and problematic clauses were revised or cut out, therefore making the committee as a whole more agreeable on several of these working papers.

Thus, while it may seem inefficient to pass five resolutions at once, based on the debate within the committee, it is clear to see that these papers don’t clash, but complement one another. Each of them takes into account specific issues within the overarching topic of climate refugees and comes up with solutions for them that are generally corroborated for by the committee. Hence, passing these resolutions in tandem is a sign of collaboration between these blocs, a sentiment generally lost in committees.

In the opinion of the editorial board of Al Jazeera, the showing of collaboration between these blocs proves that when the spirit of cooperation, not sabotage, is in the air, countries can work with each other to create a comprehensive and effective of a solution as possible. If the world is able to follow in this committee’s footsteps, several pressing issues will hopefully be resolved in a similarly comprehensive manner.