Which of the following 2 articles is real? And more likely to make the front page of American newspapers? Why?
1. April 2, 2008 WASHINGTON -- Iran remains the world's leading source of money for Al Qaeda and other extremist networks and has failed to take key steps requested by U.S. officials to stem the flow, the Bush administration's top financial counter-terrorism official said Tuesday. 2. April 2, 2008 WASHINGTON -- Saudi Arabia remains the world's leading source of money for Al Qaeda and other extremist networks and has failed to take key steps requested by U.S. officials to stem the flow, the Bush administration's top financial counter-terrorism official said Tuesday.
Politics - 6 Answers
Random Answers, Critics, Comments, Opinions :
1 :
#2 It has been for some time.
2 :
The second one is real, the first one is more likely to show up in the papers. I'd call it spin, but you can't really attribute sheer factual lies to spin.
3 :
#2 is real, but #1 is more likely to be reported on Fox News.
4 :
#2, and neither.
5 :
I am guessing the second one is real only because I think most of the 9-11 terrorists were from Saudi Arabia.
6 :
#2 is real. #1 would never happen, as al Qaeda is Sunni organization, while Iran is Shiite.
Thursday, February 28, 2013
Thursday, February 14, 2013
Is the US protecting the Saudi Arabian Oil Industry (in light of WikiLeaks info)?
Is the US protecting the Saudi Arabian Oil Industry (in light of WikiLeaks info)?
Is it viable to ask if the United States' military and intelligence are directly protecting the Saudi Arabian oil industry? Let's consider: * The BUSH family has ties with the Royal Family going back decades * We know that it was the Saudi Arabians who brought down the World Trade Center (with the US intelligence help perhaps - but that's for another time) * We know that King Abdulah met with President Bush at the White House just days after 9/11 * We know that the American people were snow jobbed and popular opinion was swayed into attacking Iraq right after 9/11 * We just learned from WikiLeaks that Saudi Arabia is the biggest financial supporter of al Qaeda. * We just learned from WikiLeaks that Saudi Arabia is repeatedly urging the US to attack Iran. So, are we being used as the muscle to keep big oil producing countries in the middle east in check therefore making sure the Saudi Arabian Oil Industry maintains its dominance on production and exports - while suppressing other major potential oil producers such as Iraq and Iran? Just something to think about. We are certainly not looking to win any wars - we seem to be there to make sure that the wars we are fighting go on forever. We are staying there forever. Why? What's the real objective in being involved in a perpetual war? Is to protect the money interest of the Royal Family and everyone that eats from that same trough?
Politics - 3 Answers
Random Answers, Critics, Comments, Opinions :
1 :
Yes Liberals like Obama love to send all our jobs overseas - especially oil jobs Obama banned all oil drilling in the gulf and no new rigs have come back - Obama lives to destroy high paying US jobs
2 :
Exactly. Thanks just for knowing. *We also know from new Wikileaks info that Saudi is still the number one money lender to Al Qaeda. And keep in mind everyone, the US government and military is not stupid. They know their tactics will only increase terrorism. So why do they do it? See above question.
3 :
Two faced diplomacy are the stocking trade of just about every large nation on earth , America never seems to get the idea that if you support enemy and foe somehow they will all love you while they stab you in the back , Seems to me there are a lot of people running America with an IQ,s of about the level of a squashed amoeba , and all working against each other
Is it viable to ask if the United States' military and intelligence are directly protecting the Saudi Arabian oil industry? Let's consider: * The BUSH family has ties with the Royal Family going back decades * We know that it was the Saudi Arabians who brought down the World Trade Center (with the US intelligence help perhaps - but that's for another time) * We know that King Abdulah met with President Bush at the White House just days after 9/11 * We know that the American people were snow jobbed and popular opinion was swayed into attacking Iraq right after 9/11 * We just learned from WikiLeaks that Saudi Arabia is the biggest financial supporter of al Qaeda. * We just learned from WikiLeaks that Saudi Arabia is repeatedly urging the US to attack Iran. So, are we being used as the muscle to keep big oil producing countries in the middle east in check therefore making sure the Saudi Arabian Oil Industry maintains its dominance on production and exports - while suppressing other major potential oil producers such as Iraq and Iran? Just something to think about. We are certainly not looking to win any wars - we seem to be there to make sure that the wars we are fighting go on forever. We are staying there forever. Why? What's the real objective in being involved in a perpetual war? Is to protect the money interest of the Royal Family and everyone that eats from that same trough?
Politics - 3 Answers
Random Answers, Critics, Comments, Opinions :
1 :
Yes Liberals like Obama love to send all our jobs overseas - especially oil jobs Obama banned all oil drilling in the gulf and no new rigs have come back - Obama lives to destroy high paying US jobs
2 :
Exactly. Thanks just for knowing. *We also know from new Wikileaks info that Saudi is still the number one money lender to Al Qaeda. And keep in mind everyone, the US government and military is not stupid. They know their tactics will only increase terrorism. So why do they do it? See above question.
3 :
Two faced diplomacy are the stocking trade of just about every large nation on earth , America never seems to get the idea that if you support enemy and foe somehow they will all love you while they stab you in the back , Seems to me there are a lot of people running America with an IQ,s of about the level of a squashed amoeba , and all working against each other
Thursday, February 7, 2013
BANNING CHRISTIANITY: What are pros and cons?
BANNING CHRISTIANITY: What are pros and cons?
China essentially does that right now, and of course, Islamic countries essentially do that for ALL RELIGIONS OTHER THAN ISLAM. Saudi Arabia makes it law, the rest do the same with custom. Why not ban Christianity in America? You would have to amend the consitution, something like: The government may ban or censure any religion whereby the religious doctrines advocate annoying preaching against unbelievers with present tense scriptural language, and the religion creates a sense of national identity. Courts of law would then flesh in the methodology for determining whether this standard is met. So "all religion" wouldnt be effected, only annoying forms. Imagine all the money we would save on twat prevention? We wouldnt even have to tell Christians to sod off anymore because the whole reason for belief in God is to proactively irritate sane people. If we ban Christians, they cant get us here anymore cause they wont be here!
Religion & Spirituality - 28 Answers
Random Answers, Critics, Comments, Opinions :
1 :
banning would mean less hypocrits and losing would mean less morals
2 :
You didn't copy paste correctly.
3 :
That sounds like kind of a bad idea to me.
4 :
IDK?
5 :
I'm for banning it in the U.S.... where do I sign?
6 :
BANNING CHRISTIANITY: What are pros and cons? It did not work in Russia, the USSR or in China! Praise THE LORD/JESUS!
7 :
I have a better idea, why don't you just move to China. I hear the people there just love it! Freedom is overrated anyway.
8 :
This nation was founded on Christian principals. Jesus is the truth, the way and the life! "Hear O Israel, the Lord is our God, the Lord is One" (Shema Yisrael Adonai eloheinu Adonai ehad)
9 :
The United States was founded on FREEDOM of Religion, that means NO BANS on ANY religion. If you don't like Christianity then don't follow that path. But you have no right to keep those who do out of the U.S. because that is against our law. How about if we ban YOU?
10 :
Pros: You can live your own life and live your own purpose, make your own rules so you can get comfortable on Earth... Let's see... You can basically justify everything you do for the 80 years you live. Cons: You wont be living the plan and purpose from the creator of the universe specifically designed to bless and fulfill your life... You'll... well, go to hell for eternity. WHY NOT BAN GAYS WHY NOT BAN MUSLIMS WHY NOT BAN ATHIESTS WHY NOT DERSTROY THE WHOLE IDEA OF AMERICA BEING DIVERSE WHY NOT BE THE HYPOCRITE YOU'RE TRYING TO DESTROY WHY NOT CHALLENGE THE CREATOR OF THE UNIVERSE SOME MORE ...:(
11 :
That is stupid. It voids freedom of religion. I don't exactly agree with Christianity but I do believe in freedom of religion.
12 :
You're welcome to move anytime. Bye!!
13 :
people would still remain Christians tho, so the gov would have to use valuable police forces to break up underground churchs, Bible studies, ect. besides, our founding fathers founded our country on religous freedom, that's why people came to america in the first place. so i doubt that that would ever happen.
14 :
If we ban Christianity in America, we become a Communist and intolerant nation. America was settled by people wanting to escape religious persecution. How sad that this nation has reverted to persecuting Christianity and other religions!
15 :
Yes, but besides going against bill of rights, we'd also lose many of our citizens out of fear of losing the right to their religion. As for how Christians would be affected...that's 90% of the American population right there. But I would have to agree, we would save a whole lot of money that can be recycled back into our educational system as well as social security. But, if we keep Christianity, we will continue to grow in size, including illegal aliens because of freedom from religious prosecution... So either way, it's a lose/lose situation... But hey, look at china. They banned christianity and they're almost at the top economically. Russia did it, and they rival us in military power...is this simply coincidence or am I noticing a connection...
16 :
Nah. As much as I dislike their in your face style of religion, this is still a free country and if we ban any religion (or belief) none are safe.
17 :
There are still Christians in China anyway, so why don't you move to China if you think it's all that, I'm sure you would be happier there.
18 :
Boy we must really scare you. All the talk of hell, spooking you out . You already live in a godless country, and that is why the USA will fall some day.
19 :
It had been tried before, it didn't work. Trying to outlaw a faith only makes it more dangerous
20 :
China was never a highly Christian country. Their crime has always been low. While we are the highest Christian percentage country in the world, and we also have the high crime rates :O
21 :
They tried it already in the Roman Imperial world. When they saw that the people were becoming greater and greater, they adopted and corrupted it. The waldenses and other groups worshipped in the catacombs. Today, American christians would do the same if a law banning christianity were passed. But, the powers that be, continue the tradition of accepting it for their own gains. Christians keep worshipping for theirs.
22 :
to ban christianity would remove the largest argument for social advancement, the down side would be there would be another conservative faith based group to follow up right behind them, back to square one, unfortuneately, looks like christianity is going to along for the ride to the social utopia. thomas
23 :
Pros: you'll be happy living life with Satan(I guess. Isn't that who you like?) Cons: When you die, you'll go to hell and you'll be spiritually lost.
24 :
UM...this IS the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA!!! The constitution gives us the right to freely express our religion. People like you ought to consider going to live in countries that don't tolorate Christianity because this one was actually founded on Christian beliefs!!! To anyone else who thinks Christianity is annoying I have only two things to say. You either thinks it's anoying because you don't like hearing the truth about sin and how much it offends God YOUR CREATOR, or you've had a bad incounter with someone who say's they are Christian. For the latter of the two, don't lump everyone into one big steriotype!! Not all Christians are hypocritical, cheating, lying, money hungry without faith. There are those who are serious about their walk with God and do all they can to observe the faith in a loving and righteous way. But even they should not to be expected to take in all the insults and hate thrown at them without retaliating. WE ARE NOT DOOR MATTS!!! WE WILL FIGHT BACK IF WE HAVE TOO!! But those of us who are serious would rather be at peace with all of those who don't name the name of Christ Jesus as Savior and Lord. However and once again it would depend on how we are treated on a consistant basis. The peace is really not up to Christians. If Christians are walking out their faith correctly they are alway's seeking to be at peace. Rather the peace is up to all of those who hate and/or don't believe in God and Christians!!
25 :
Cons=War
26 :
When Christians are under persecution, the news spreads. So really, if you are trying to stifle Christianity, don't outlaw it. Making it illegal would be the best thing for Christianity. Isn't it interesting that everyone hates us? Doesn't that prove that we have something important to say, since everyone is desperately trying to make us stop? People don't like being told that they can't do whatever they want without any consequences.
27 :
IT WON'T HAPPEN!
28 :
Once that happens, the nation goes down the toilet. One of the greatest blessings of living in the United States is freedom, freedom to chose, freedom to speak. Once that freedom is taken away we'll become a tryranny, and despotic. You guys think it will be a utopia to get rid of us. In fact in a situation like that, everything will become a living nightmare. A living hell so to speak. The reason you don't realize this is because we're still with you. You won't miss something till you actually don't have it. What is more sane to go to heaven or to go to hell. You make that choice, I hope it's the sane one.
China essentially does that right now, and of course, Islamic countries essentially do that for ALL RELIGIONS OTHER THAN ISLAM. Saudi Arabia makes it law, the rest do the same with custom. Why not ban Christianity in America? You would have to amend the consitution, something like: The government may ban or censure any religion whereby the religious doctrines advocate annoying preaching against unbelievers with present tense scriptural language, and the religion creates a sense of national identity. Courts of law would then flesh in the methodology for determining whether this standard is met. So "all religion" wouldnt be effected, only annoying forms. Imagine all the money we would save on twat prevention? We wouldnt even have to tell Christians to sod off anymore because the whole reason for belief in God is to proactively irritate sane people. If we ban Christians, they cant get us here anymore cause they wont be here!
Religion & Spirituality - 28 Answers
Random Answers, Critics, Comments, Opinions :
1 :
banning would mean less hypocrits and losing would mean less morals
2 :
You didn't copy paste correctly.
3 :
That sounds like kind of a bad idea to me.
4 :
IDK?
5 :
I'm for banning it in the U.S.... where do I sign?
6 :
BANNING CHRISTIANITY: What are pros and cons? It did not work in Russia, the USSR or in China! Praise THE LORD/JESUS!
7 :
I have a better idea, why don't you just move to China. I hear the people there just love it! Freedom is overrated anyway.
8 :
This nation was founded on Christian principals. Jesus is the truth, the way and the life! "Hear O Israel, the Lord is our God, the Lord is One" (Shema Yisrael Adonai eloheinu Adonai ehad)
9 :
The United States was founded on FREEDOM of Religion, that means NO BANS on ANY religion. If you don't like Christianity then don't follow that path. But you have no right to keep those who do out of the U.S. because that is against our law. How about if we ban YOU?
10 :
Pros: You can live your own life and live your own purpose, make your own rules so you can get comfortable on Earth... Let's see... You can basically justify everything you do for the 80 years you live. Cons: You wont be living the plan and purpose from the creator of the universe specifically designed to bless and fulfill your life... You'll... well, go to hell for eternity. WHY NOT BAN GAYS WHY NOT BAN MUSLIMS WHY NOT BAN ATHIESTS WHY NOT DERSTROY THE WHOLE IDEA OF AMERICA BEING DIVERSE WHY NOT BE THE HYPOCRITE YOU'RE TRYING TO DESTROY WHY NOT CHALLENGE THE CREATOR OF THE UNIVERSE SOME MORE ...:(
11 :
That is stupid. It voids freedom of religion. I don't exactly agree with Christianity but I do believe in freedom of religion.
12 :
You're welcome to move anytime. Bye!!
13 :
people would still remain Christians tho, so the gov would have to use valuable police forces to break up underground churchs, Bible studies, ect. besides, our founding fathers founded our country on religous freedom, that's why people came to america in the first place. so i doubt that that would ever happen.
14 :
If we ban Christianity in America, we become a Communist and intolerant nation. America was settled by people wanting to escape religious persecution. How sad that this nation has reverted to persecuting Christianity and other religions!
15 :
Yes, but besides going against bill of rights, we'd also lose many of our citizens out of fear of losing the right to their religion. As for how Christians would be affected...that's 90% of the American population right there. But I would have to agree, we would save a whole lot of money that can be recycled back into our educational system as well as social security. But, if we keep Christianity, we will continue to grow in size, including illegal aliens because of freedom from religious prosecution... So either way, it's a lose/lose situation... But hey, look at china. They banned christianity and they're almost at the top economically. Russia did it, and they rival us in military power...is this simply coincidence or am I noticing a connection...
16 :
Nah. As much as I dislike their in your face style of religion, this is still a free country and if we ban any religion (or belief) none are safe.
17 :
There are still Christians in China anyway, so why don't you move to China if you think it's all that, I'm sure you would be happier there.
18 :
Boy we must really scare you. All the talk of hell, spooking you out . You already live in a godless country, and that is why the USA will fall some day.
19 :
It had been tried before, it didn't work. Trying to outlaw a faith only makes it more dangerous
20 :
China was never a highly Christian country. Their crime has always been low. While we are the highest Christian percentage country in the world, and we also have the high crime rates :O
21 :
They tried it already in the Roman Imperial world. When they saw that the people were becoming greater and greater, they adopted and corrupted it. The waldenses and other groups worshipped in the catacombs. Today, American christians would do the same if a law banning christianity were passed. But, the powers that be, continue the tradition of accepting it for their own gains. Christians keep worshipping for theirs.
22 :
to ban christianity would remove the largest argument for social advancement, the down side would be there would be another conservative faith based group to follow up right behind them, back to square one, unfortuneately, looks like christianity is going to along for the ride to the social utopia. thomas
23 :
Pros: you'll be happy living life with Satan(I guess. Isn't that who you like?) Cons: When you die, you'll go to hell and you'll be spiritually lost.
24 :
UM...this IS the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA!!! The constitution gives us the right to freely express our religion. People like you ought to consider going to live in countries that don't tolorate Christianity because this one was actually founded on Christian beliefs!!! To anyone else who thinks Christianity is annoying I have only two things to say. You either thinks it's anoying because you don't like hearing the truth about sin and how much it offends God YOUR CREATOR, or you've had a bad incounter with someone who say's they are Christian. For the latter of the two, don't lump everyone into one big steriotype!! Not all Christians are hypocritical, cheating, lying, money hungry without faith. There are those who are serious about their walk with God and do all they can to observe the faith in a loving and righteous way. But even they should not to be expected to take in all the insults and hate thrown at them without retaliating. WE ARE NOT DOOR MATTS!!! WE WILL FIGHT BACK IF WE HAVE TOO!! But those of us who are serious would rather be at peace with all of those who don't name the name of Christ Jesus as Savior and Lord. However and once again it would depend on how we are treated on a consistant basis. The peace is really not up to Christians. If Christians are walking out their faith correctly they are alway's seeking to be at peace. Rather the peace is up to all of those who hate and/or don't believe in God and Christians!!
25 :
Cons=War
26 :
When Christians are under persecution, the news spreads. So really, if you are trying to stifle Christianity, don't outlaw it. Making it illegal would be the best thing for Christianity. Isn't it interesting that everyone hates us? Doesn't that prove that we have something important to say, since everyone is desperately trying to make us stop? People don't like being told that they can't do whatever they want without any consequences.
27 :
IT WON'T HAPPEN!
28 :
Once that happens, the nation goes down the toilet. One of the greatest blessings of living in the United States is freedom, freedom to chose, freedom to speak. Once that freedom is taken away we'll become a tryranny, and despotic. You guys think it will be a utopia to get rid of us. In fact in a situation like that, everything will become a living nightmare. A living hell so to speak. The reason you don't realize this is because we're still with you. You won't miss something till you actually don't have it. What is more sane to go to heaven or to go to hell. You make that choice, I hope it's the sane one.
Friday, February 1, 2013
will somebody correct and grade my junior cert essay?
will somebody correct and grade my junior cert essay?
On December 10th, 1948 the General Assembly of the United Nations adopted and proclaimed the Declarations of Human Rights. Eleanor Roosevelt said ''Unless these rights have meaning there(the world of the individual person), they have little meaning anywhere. Without concerned citizen's action to uphold them close to home, we shall look in vain for progress in the larger world.'' It is clear that Roosevelt was a firm believer in the effect individual's everyday action's have on the wider community. She believed that in order to achieve an equal world, individuals must first adjust their everyday lives and consider how their first word routines effects the larger global community. The central basis of this idea is that to achieve peace and equality in the wider world, one must first achieve peace in the neighborhood he lives in; the school or collage he attends and the factory, farm or office where he works.''Such places are the places where every man, woman and child seeks equal justice,equal opportunity, equal dignity without discrimination.''These rights were introduced to promise each and every citizen of the world equal rights and opportunities. But how far are we, the first world, willing to go in order for equality and human dignity throughout the world to become a reality? Apparently, this is not something we are prepared to do, but why? In Twenty First Century society, high tech advancements and technology have become the focus of most of the population and many people have forgotten the importance of lending a hand to someone who needs it. Even the fact that society needs a set of rules, a declaration on how humans should be treated and people should treat each other is the first indicator that civilization is not prepared to allow inequality to be a thing of the past and certainly not if it will disadvantage our lives in any way, even if only slightly. After natural disasters is places such as Haiti, New Zealand, Japan, and so on, the governments of most nations make a public appeal to help those worst effected, they send their regards to the people devastated by such disasters . But are these appeals just for show or are they genuine, do governments, the voice of their citizens, actually care about the well being of the population of other, such unfortunate countries, or is just part of the routine? Americans believe that their government spends 24 percent of the federal budget on aid to poor countries, but the actual figure is less than one percent. And if the governments are issuing funding, how much is actually going to the direct necessities of the poor families needs such as clean water, food and shelter? In contrast how much of this money is going straight back, to the first world countries who ''donated'' it, to pay off interest of the national debts, to buy back food and raw materials which were possibly produced in that very country? How many people in this world are suffering and starving as a result of selfishness and foolishness of the western world? How many people, in this world are dying, each day from easily treatable and curable diseases? The numbers are staggering but are absolutely real. Behind each number, is a human being: a mother,a father,a sister or a brother. In the face of such enormous external influence, the governments of poor nations and their people are often powerless. As a result, in the global context, a few get wealthy while the majority struggle. This is a reality throughout the entire world as inequalities exist in every society, in every country, in every city, in every town. Human rights being ignored isn't just a problem effecting poverty. Discrimination in places such as Saudi Arabia makes it impossible for woman to achieve any standard of life. Women are perceived and treated as second-class citizens. Woman's actions and choices frequently depend on the permission or wishes of their husband or closest male relative. Even in Ireland huge divisions and much discrimination exists all around us. Most of us don't even notice it as it has become part of our culture and is a common acurance of everyday life. The divisions and social gaps in many societies throughout the world are frighteningly large but will this division ever be reduced? This seems an unlikely occurrence, in fact the opposite is most likely to occur in many circumstances around the world. We have the means and the intelligence as a race to end discrimination and inequality in the world but we lack the determination and the ability to overcome the ignorance of the wealthy western world. This could be a result of improved technologies and further modernizations, which makes it far easier to ignore and forget these issues. Roosevelt's had a theory that for basic human rights to become a practiced way of life that individuals must first introduce these rights to the
Primary & Secondary Education - 1 Answers
Random Answers, Critics, Comments, Opinions :
1 :
Did you copy and paste? Its seems FAR too long for the JC :/ and seriously, are you going to be able to come up with something to that standard in the actual exam? its like what, 5 days now? it's a bit late to be learning off something like that :L Sorry i didnt correct and grade it, but maybe you should print it out and drop it into your school with a note attached asking your english teacher (or another, if your teacher is as bad as mine) to correct and grade it. it's their job, they should do it. my teachers are always willing to correct any extra work we do :)
On December 10th, 1948 the General Assembly of the United Nations adopted and proclaimed the Declarations of Human Rights. Eleanor Roosevelt said ''Unless these rights have meaning there(the world of the individual person), they have little meaning anywhere. Without concerned citizen's action to uphold them close to home, we shall look in vain for progress in the larger world.'' It is clear that Roosevelt was a firm believer in the effect individual's everyday action's have on the wider community. She believed that in order to achieve an equal world, individuals must first adjust their everyday lives and consider how their first word routines effects the larger global community. The central basis of this idea is that to achieve peace and equality in the wider world, one must first achieve peace in the neighborhood he lives in; the school or collage he attends and the factory, farm or office where he works.''Such places are the places where every man, woman and child seeks equal justice,equal opportunity, equal dignity without discrimination.''These rights were introduced to promise each and every citizen of the world equal rights and opportunities. But how far are we, the first world, willing to go in order for equality and human dignity throughout the world to become a reality? Apparently, this is not something we are prepared to do, but why? In Twenty First Century society, high tech advancements and technology have become the focus of most of the population and many people have forgotten the importance of lending a hand to someone who needs it. Even the fact that society needs a set of rules, a declaration on how humans should be treated and people should treat each other is the first indicator that civilization is not prepared to allow inequality to be a thing of the past and certainly not if it will disadvantage our lives in any way, even if only slightly. After natural disasters is places such as Haiti, New Zealand, Japan, and so on, the governments of most nations make a public appeal to help those worst effected, they send their regards to the people devastated by such disasters . But are these appeals just for show or are they genuine, do governments, the voice of their citizens, actually care about the well being of the population of other, such unfortunate countries, or is just part of the routine? Americans believe that their government spends 24 percent of the federal budget on aid to poor countries, but the actual figure is less than one percent. And if the governments are issuing funding, how much is actually going to the direct necessities of the poor families needs such as clean water, food and shelter? In contrast how much of this money is going straight back, to the first world countries who ''donated'' it, to pay off interest of the national debts, to buy back food and raw materials which were possibly produced in that very country? How many people in this world are suffering and starving as a result of selfishness and foolishness of the western world? How many people, in this world are dying, each day from easily treatable and curable diseases? The numbers are staggering but are absolutely real. Behind each number, is a human being: a mother,a father,a sister or a brother. In the face of such enormous external influence, the governments of poor nations and their people are often powerless. As a result, in the global context, a few get wealthy while the majority struggle. This is a reality throughout the entire world as inequalities exist in every society, in every country, in every city, in every town. Human rights being ignored isn't just a problem effecting poverty. Discrimination in places such as Saudi Arabia makes it impossible for woman to achieve any standard of life. Women are perceived and treated as second-class citizens. Woman's actions and choices frequently depend on the permission or wishes of their husband or closest male relative. Even in Ireland huge divisions and much discrimination exists all around us. Most of us don't even notice it as it has become part of our culture and is a common acurance of everyday life. The divisions and social gaps in many societies throughout the world are frighteningly large but will this division ever be reduced? This seems an unlikely occurrence, in fact the opposite is most likely to occur in many circumstances around the world. We have the means and the intelligence as a race to end discrimination and inequality in the world but we lack the determination and the ability to overcome the ignorance of the wealthy western world. This could be a result of improved technologies and further modernizations, which makes it far easier to ignore and forget these issues. Roosevelt's had a theory that for basic human rights to become a practiced way of life that individuals must first introduce these rights to the
Primary & Secondary Education - 1 Answers
Random Answers, Critics, Comments, Opinions :
1 :
Did you copy and paste? Its seems FAR too long for the JC :/ and seriously, are you going to be able to come up with something to that standard in the actual exam? its like what, 5 days now? it's a bit late to be learning off something like that :L Sorry i didnt correct and grade it, but maybe you should print it out and drop it into your school with a note attached asking your english teacher (or another, if your teacher is as bad as mine) to correct and grade it. it's their job, they should do it. my teachers are always willing to correct any extra work we do :)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)