Taleban releases all S. Korean hostages

Taleban releases all S. Korean hostages
Aug 30, 2007

GHAZNI (Afghanistan) - THE Taleban movement freed three remaining South Korean hostages on Thursday as part of a deal with the Seoul government, said witnesses.
Like the previous 16 captives freed since Wednesday, the two women and a man were handed over to the International Committee of the Red Cross in Ghazni province, from where the Taliban seized 23 South Koreans on July 19.

The two women and one man were covered in dust as they walked out of the desert, accompanied by three armed men, and were turned over to waiting officials of the International Committee of the Red Cross, a reporter at the scene said.

Earlier, Qari Mohammad Bashir said that four people - two male and two female - have been handed over to tribal elders.

They were handed over at an area called Janda, which is about 100km south of the town of Ghazni.

'Three others, all females, will be handed to them in another place on their way back to Ghazni,' Bashir said.

A tribal leader involved in negotiations to free the hostages confirmed that 'three or four' had been handed over to other elders and would be delivered to the International Committee of the Red Cross.

'They are driving towards us,' the elder, Haji Mohammad Zahir, said. He was with an ICRC convoy that had travelled down from Ghazni to collect the hostages.

Twelve other hostages were released in three separate groups on Wednesday after negotiations between the insurgents and South Korean negotiators.

The Taleban captured 23 South Korean hostages on July 19. They shot dead two of them, both male, and freed two women on August 13.

Safety concerns
Prior to the kidnapping, South Korea had warned its citizens not to travel to Afghanistan and blocked many of its growing legion of evangelical Christians from going there due to safety concerns.
The church that sent the Christian volunteers on a bus trip across war-torn southern Afghanistan said the government has told it to help foot the bill for the rescue.

The father of one of two hostages shot dead earlier in the crisis accused church leaders of being 'reckless', while newspapers said the government would suffer diplomatic damage for negotiating directly with the extremists. -- AFP, REUTERS, AP

It is indeed great relief that the nineteen South Korean hostages have been released by the Afghan Taliban en masse, safe and sound, after six weeks of harrowing misadventure in captivity, hopefully returning home appropriately transformed by their traumatic trip to Afghanistan, from which two from their faction will never make it home.

Unfortunate, however, unlikely are hospitable welcomes by their compatriots, many of whom felt their entire nation had been held hostage to the fates of this diminutive faction of puerile evangelists, who thinly obscure their proselytising intents under the fragile mantle of "aid workers".

It was a moral dilemma that South Korea faced: to pay the ransom to save nineteen lives and be the subject of criticism from global community for encouraging similar terrorism-driven abductions, or simply to turn a cold shoulder to its citizens, leaving them in the lurch to be slaughtered at whim and fancy, in the refusal to succumb to the terrorists’ overwhelming grasp.

Either ways, South Korea is in the blame. There is neither a right nor painless option.

With the pressure of public petitioning for the hostages’ lives to be spared, it is difficult and entirely inhumane to ignore the desperate pleas of these entrapped souls. Struggling to strike balance between the international norms and custom and the absolute premise to save the people's lives, the South Korean government have my empathy for their decision to forfeit the ransom fee.

Seoul denies it, but the Taliban’s trumpeting triumph is apparent, having collected ransom money to the tune of more than a million dollars per head for its South Korean hostages, along with scheduled withdrawal of all of South Korea’s non-combat troops in Afghanistan.

Compassion, nevertheless, would translate to financial nourishment for the growth of a powerful anarchic militia, confidence boost in future abductions given the recent success, and elevation of the Taliban insurgents to unprecedented legitimacy, with direct negotiation without reference to the administration of President Hamid Karzai , whose authority is effectively reduced while his chaotic Islam nation reverts to control of the Taliban.
I personally feel the spared missionaries ought to hang their heads in shame and guilt, their obstinate defiance and naivety being the ultimate cause of the tragedy. The irreverent concession is attributed to the utter disregard of their responsibility and accountancy as a citizen of South Korea. Their innocent impudence and audacious contempt of the Islamic religion is unforgivable, causing national and international distress.

As if Afghanistan’s accountancy for approximately ninety-three per cent of the world’s opium production alone is insufficient to provide the Taliban with superfluous arms and supplies needed to escalate its continuing insurgency, the hapless South Koreans may well have pioneered new revenue streams for the Taliban.

Having a microscopic viewpoint of a secondary school student, I may be unaware of other considerations that might be of paramount importance to the above issue.

South Korea must take cognisance of the unwelcome fervour of its nationals seeking to rush in where angels would fear to tread.

(500 words)

Child star wins university place

Child star wins university place
Story from BBC NEWS:http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/asia-pacific/6961865.stmPublished: 2007/08/24 12:23:47 GMT

A nine-year-old maths prodigy has won a place at Hong Kong's Baptist University (HKBU) after gaining two grade As and a B in his A-levels.

He is the youngest ever student to enrol in a university in Hong Kong.

March Tian Boedihardjo told reporters he struggled to communicate academically with his own age group.

March, an Indonesian-Chinese boy resident in Hong Kong, will start his specially designed five-year course at the university in September.

He told reporters that in his spare time he liked "to read books, but on the weekends I like to go out to play with friends".

"We can play games together but academically, we can't communicate," he added.

He said they played chess, Monopoly and cards.

Asked why he was not going to study in the United Kingdom - where his older brother is at Oxford University - he replied in English: "Because my father does not have sufficient money."

March's father said the university had given him confidence it could cope with the demands of teaching a nine-year-old.

"I will advise parents in Hong Kong there's no need to know the IQ of your children. Just try to do your best to nurture them and give them space to develop," Tony Boedihardjo said.

Franklin Luk, president of HKBU, said the decision to admit the boy was based on his excellent examination results and a "commitment to nurturing gifted students".

Dr Tong Chong-sze, Associate Professor of Mathematics at HKBU has arranged several professors to be March's mentors.

"The very first concern of course is - academically can he handle the mathematics at university. So that was the purpose of the first interview and he did very well. He handled himself very well, one against four professors," said Dr Tong.

The admittance of this nine-year-old mathematics prodigy into Hong Kong's Baptist University (HKBU) evinced that no longer is age a limiting factor hampering one’s intellectual development in the modern milieu.

Ostensibly, our current education system has evolved to accommodate talent development. Individuals with exceptional capacity are distinguished and nurtured so as to requite the society with a higher value in the future as a professional – benefiting both the individual and the cultivating community.

By abolishing the age limit hurdle, which stereotypically signifies one’s maturity, a student is enabled to access unbounded knowledge, opening up their horizons from multiplication tables to the possibilities of complex calculus calculation.

With another pebble in the shoe removed, a child with potential can achieve greater distances. Often than not, an precocious child such as Boedihardjo who are set for great achievements is forced to assimilate into the slow-pace curriculum, thereby wasting precious time that can be used to develop his talent instead of revising already-grasped concepts.

A child’s youth is the period of maximum ease of information absorption, when the learning-curve is the steepest and the mind the most malleable. Appropriate utilisation of this timeframe can lead to optimum development for the child.

The debate is whether gifted children should be pushed so far ahead and beyond their physical age.
I personally object to the worry of stunted personal and social development. March, given his young age, possesses the searing curiosity to learn – something that would be nearly impossible in a class of typical nine year-olds. He would face at least two problems if he were to fit in the norms of the education system.

Firstly, he would possibly receive negative attention from his schoolmates (teased or discriminated) for being an anomaly in school. With similar age group yet differing intellect, interactions aiding would be difficult, causing anti-social behaviour instead.

Secondly, boredom might result, causing lost of interest in the subject as well as divulging one’s attention to unconstructive distractions to satisfy his curiosity, having a toll on the individual’s and class’s learning process. One might conclude that work is unnecessary for learning. By extension, complacency might manifest.

However, flexibility of the education system would invite social discontent and jealousy as the disparity of calibre would seem more palpable. Evidently, the education has evolved from inequality (prejudice of female students in the past) to equality. Yet, ironically, we are moving back to inequality.

Hence, we must empathise with the lower rungs of the social ladder for they ultimately make up the majority, bearing in mind exceptional cases are uncommon. I feel while possibilities are explored, we must not neglect the mainstream education. Rare geniuses are but bonuses to the social construct of our community.

I understand that I am in no position to discuss the issue for I am neither a prodigy nor an accomplished educationalist. With the microscopic perspective of a secondary student, I am aware of assumed responses of a prodigy in the alternative case in my argument, which might lead to biasness.

(500 words)

Bring Your Own Bag, Or Buy Your Own Bag.

Bring Your Own Bag, Or Buy Your Own Bag.

100,000 plastic bags saved on Bring Your Own Bag Day
By Julia Ng, Channel NewsAsia Posted: 19 April 2007 2028 hrs

SINGAPORE: Singapore's first Bring Your Own Bag Day on Wednesday managed to save an estimated 100,000 plastic bags.

According to leading supermarket chains NTUC Fairprice and Cold Storage, they cut the number of plastic bags by up to 60 per cent.

They also sold about 20,000 reusable bags.

At one Cold Storage outlet, most shoppers say they do not mind if they have to donate 10 cents to environmental projects for every plastic bag they take.

"If they donate it, it's up to them, right? But I think I'll bring my own bag. It makes more sense," said one lady shopper.

"I have no objection because it's contributing to the eco friendly system. I think it's good! For us businessman, for shopping we don't carry a bag! But for housewives, yes, if they have time to bring their own bag then it would be a good idea," said another shopper.

But not everyone agrees.

"In the first place it's an inconvenience to me. On an everyday basis, some of us [are] in a rush, then it'll add up to a big amount. But I guess as a habit it's always good to recycle," says one customer.

Some viewers told Channel NewsAsia that paying "10 cents per bag is way too expensive".

One viewer said she saw "two women who went shopping at a mart without shopping bags and brought the (NTUC) baskets home".

Others argued that for families who shop in bulk, it is "not feasible to bring over 20 reusable bags just for that one outing."

There were also suggestions for supermarkets to waive the charges for plastic bags if you spend $50 or more.

So it looks like the habit of bringing your own shopping bag to cut down on the use of plastic bags will take some time to cultivate.

But with so many reusable bags available in all shapes and sizes, sometimes all it takes is a little planning in your shopping schedule and you too can do your bit for the environment.

One shopper says she has some 10 reusable bags, and keeps one in her car at all times.

"You know you're going shopping. You know you're going to need bags, so why don't you just use [or] bring them!"


Some retailers, like furniture store IKEA, plan to charge shoppers five to 10 cents for its plastic bags from this Sunday.

Therefore paying for the convenience may just be the start of a new trend in Singapore.

The initiation by the National Environment Agency (NEA) is a motivating and inspirational tactic to rouse the community’s innate conservationism, rather than the customary placid imploration.

We have all been annoyed by pesky environmentalists who embark on a futile attempt to convince us that plastics bags are harmful to our world and literally killing Mother Nature. Yet, the blinding advantages of plastic bags are so tempting we keep going back to them, addicted to annihilating our only planet. Do we listen? No. We think it can’t be that bad. Besides, it is so convenient, so light, so waterproof and elastic, and so abundant such that its storage ability is complementary to what we can afford.

Bring Your Own Bag Day is definitely one of the idealistic and forceful solutions to counter the popular demand head on, justifying the hoo-hah generated from the public and media. On this day, people use reusable bags, or pay for every plastic bag utilized.

Fines do make Singapore a fine city. Money-minded and obdurate Singaporeans prefer the wicker to the inducement; they refuse to display any consideration unless forced to.

I cannot deny that this is an efficient way of setting the ball rolling. However, I feel the compelling pressure by NEA is detrimental as it restricts our freedom and thus might induce negative feelings about concerns of the environment. I am worried it might generate an impression that Singaporeans are simply going-with-the-flow and financially-driven. On the other hand, it is important that we acclimatize to this healthy cultivation. Inconveniences are inevitable, but it is ultimately for a good cause.

Yet, I think the effort remains insufficient. Ambitious as I may be, I feel that the campaign should last for at least a month instead of a measly twenty-four hours, but failure looms for we can already perceive the intolerance for just a Wednesday. Moreover, this campaign can reach out to other organizations other than supermarkets.

There was a great commotion due to ignorance of the issue as customers are welcomed by shock when they have to pay for their consumption of plastic carriers. Thus, more publicity is required in this aspect.

Nevertheless, we must still put ourselves into the patrons’ shoes. It is demanding to expect them to cope with the hassle of lugging reusable bags for their shopping, or suffer the consequence of an abyss in one’s purse. There is definitely much more to do to placate the disgruntled.

A suggestion, given the multitudinous advantageous properties of plastics, is to utilize used plastic bags instead of buying new reusable carriers so as to reduce the consumers’ burden and demolish the reputation that retailers are doing it for a profit, although given thought, they actually suffer a loss of patrons during BYOBD.

Judging from the response, it would still take some time for response to get from lukewarm to searing. Till then, maybe we would be able to waive the charges for plastic bags.

The step is small but it's in the correct direction.

(500 words)

The National Service Tragedy – National Service, the Tragedy

The National Service Tragedy – National Service, the Tragedy

Soldier's parents' plea: No more overseas duties
Request is for Fan's NS-bound younger brother
Monday • May 14, 2007
Lee U-Wen
u-wen@mediacorp.com.sg

Before 21-year-old polytechnic student Fan Yao Ren enlists for National Service (NS) next year, his family plans to make a special request to the Ministry of Defence. Their plea: Don't send him on any overseas missions.

The Fan family does not want to risk losing another son. His older brother, Private Fan Yao Jin, 24, was one of two Singaporean soldiers killed when a fighter jet crashed into a Taiwan military base on Friday.

At the wake at Toa Payoh East Road yesterday, the private's eldest brother Yao Zhong, a 25-year-old regular with the Singapore Navy, said: "My parents and I would prefer (Yao Ren) to remain in Singapore and not fly during NS. We've mentioned it in passing, and Mindef has said they will look into it closer to the date."

Asked how his parents were coping, he replied: "I think we can only use one word: Devastated."

About 80 people paid their respects to Private Fan, whose body arrived home yesterday at 8.30pm. Former classmate Daphne Seah told Today she was still in "a state of shock". Recalling their last conversation on his birthday last Wednesday, she said: "I told him, 'I haven't seen you in over a year', and we made plans to go out when he came back. Now, we'll never get the chance to meet up."

Meanwhile, the two badly-burnt Singaporean soldiers — Lance-Corporal Calvin Chow and 3rd-Sergeant Ramakrishnan Karthigayan — have undergone several operations at Singapore General Hospital's Burns Unit.

Lance-Corporal Chow remains in critical condition with 50-per-cent burns and respiratory burns, while 3rd-Sergeant Karthigayan's condition is serious but stable.

Blamed on ageing jets, the accident injured seven other Singaporean soldiers and killed the two Taiwanese pilots.

According to Taiwanese newspaper United Daily News, aircraft pilot Wei Tze-yuan was last heard shouting "Up!" before the accident occurred.

As the aircraft lacked a black box, investigators looked for clues in accident debris, evidence and conversation with the control tower. However, from the pilot's single word to the ground, nothing more could not be deduced. A military source told the Taiwanese newspaper that, due to security reasons, the use of wireless communications is minimised in such air force activities.

Like 3rd-Sergeant Isz Sazli Sapari, the other SAF serviceman killed in the accident and buried on Saturday, Private Fan will be accorded a full military funeral. He will be buried at Bright Hill Crematorium tomorrow.

“No amount of compensation will ever be enough to alleviate the suffering of servicemen who are injured, or the loss their families feel for their loved ones”, said Defence Minister Teo Chee Hean.

On that basis, a simple request for exclusion from highly-treacherous operations should most certainly be readily accepted. Yet, this issue has triggered many comments, infuriated and compassionate, from fellow Singaporeans.

The cruel fact is: if you happen to be a Singaporean, a perfectly healthy male, and you’re eighteen, National Service (NS) is a statutory requirement. Every boy, including myself, must grow to be a man and be prepared, physically and mentally, to lay down their lives for the country. This is a common response from advocates of equality of treatment.

Nobody is disputing that.

Private Fan’s family did not appeal for NS exemption for their other son who is due to be enlisted next year. They solely appealed for him to be given a less dangerous vocation, a reasonable cause given that few die in-training in NS.

The reality is that with the rapid advance of technology, crude manpower will not be required in the near future should any war break out. Instead, high-technology nuclear weapons that are capable of annihilating the entire human race would be utilized in place of fragile organisms who attempt a futile rage on opponents with their expertise on jungle warfare.

National Service’s existence serves only as a pledge of vigilance. Let us question: Is it worth it to sacrifice lives for a circumstance that is doubtful to realize? Moreover, we have the assistance of powerful allies in times of peril.

The unfortunate demise of Private Fan in the line of duty and service to nation definitely deserves our empathy.

On compassionate grounds, I feel that rules are synthetic, and if necessary, exceptions should be made. The exception serves also as reasonable compensation, one that is not monetary but as assurance on the psychological level, so as to mitigate their distress and loss after the trauma.

He would still serve a useful role but only exposed to less jeopardy of injury and bereavement.
The impracticality of purposeless sacrificing of soldiers for unwaged wars only reduces the chance of us wining a combat with another country, given our minute capacity.

However, if everyone advocates such an attitude our education for national defense fails. Moreover, the tragic death of Fan is merely an accident, which could not have been prevented, similar to fateful victims struck by falling trees.

The only consideration is the emotional factor of the family, to risk their sons again after a painful loss. Thus, as mentioned earlier on, exceptions should only be made in special circumstances.

Yet, I do have my reservations for ultimately, I will have to face the challenge of NS.

Not to say that I am unwilling to, but the concept of sacrifice is outdated, and I am perturbed by the hazards in NS.

It is a fear that every boy has to face in their lives.

(500 words)

Too Late to Abort

Too Late to Abort
Source: http://newpaper.asia1.com.sg/news/story/0,4136,124000,00.html

I was appalled by the failure of sex education in Singapore, which is reputed to be watertight, with stringent censorship of any forms of media, insulating the young generation from any exposure of sexual themes.

Yet, such audacity still prevails.

Times have indeed changed. Kids in primary school are dating. It would have never been the case a generation ago.

As people try to assimilate into the Western culture that permeates our society, they are subconsciously influenced by the media that manipulates their malleable mindset.

The only reason for music videos being such a popular hit nowadays, featuring beguiling females with disproportionate attributes promiscuously-dressed that serve only as eye-candy to tantalize the taste buds of lustful lechers, is that sex sells, despite being a torture to the eardrums.

Another contributing factor would be the boundless, omni-potent Internet.

On this sea of information, everything, including pornography is readily available. Moreover, born in the Computer Age, kids nowadays, unlike us, are especially Net-savvy.

They are so vulnerable, constantly bombarded by subtle messages of ‘sex’ when they yet mature enough to soak up the fullisade. As such, parents, as guardians, are responsible in providing adequate guidance in ‘the birds and the bees’. This means restricting accessibility to sources with explicit sexual content and instilling progenies with the sombre ideas of love, one step at a time.

Sex is not just physical intercourse, but rather a emotional commitment to a lifelong partner – an idea not easily accepted by physically mature but mentally naïve youths. They must be taught to exercise self-control and not treat sex, which used to be a taboo topic, as a casual joke, otherwise, dire consequences follow.

It is a current trend the puberty is occurring at a younger age. Rumours attribute growth hormones present in our modern-day diet – fast-food as the cause for explaining the pregnancy at nine years of age.

Hence, it is necessary to introduce sexual education earlier before disaster strikes.

However, I find that early sexual education may not be completely beneficial. Conversely, it could have been the exposure from sexual education that sparked the curiosity of these adolescents to explore and experiment. Perhaps, we should review when the time is ripe for the revelation of truth.

I feel that parental guidance is the crucial important factor in preventing the catastrophe as it eliminates the prerequisite conditions by preventing exposure to sexual contents that are detrimental to their mental health.

Juvenile delinquents often develop with parental negligence. This leads me to question whether parents in Singapore have been fulfilling their duty in family education and spending adequate quality time with their kids, rather than dedicating themselves to the frantic rat race for money against time.

If this trend persists, the situation might exacerbate, leaving multitudes of homeless orphans abandoned in rubbish chutes in the near future – a bleak future.

I do sympathise the victims of this incident, for it would take a lifetime of counseling to overcome this widely-publicized incident.

Sometimes, ignorance is bliss for tender ages.

(500 words)

Scuffle for organs sparks donor debate in Singapore

Scuffle for organs sparks donor debate in Singapore
Source: http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070228/od_nm/singapore_organs_dc

I personally believe that fault lies in the recently amended Human Organ Transplant Act (HOTA), that allows for mandatory harvesting of healthy organs should any non-muslim Singaporean or Permanent Residents demise – unless the person has specificallty opted out beforehand— so as to ease the current organ shortage.

The organ, ultimately, belongs to the donor, and hence it should only be just if he, or his family, has the right to decide whether he will take it along to the coffin or save another life.

Instead of legally “impounding” the organs, the government should attempt a softer approach and display flexibility in such circumstances, so as to reduce distress felt by the family members.

I feel that the choice of donation should be voluntary and never be an obligation “forced” upon by the government. We should empathise with the reluctance to donate the deceased’s organs and respect their decision. What’s more: there is absolutely nothing to gain in this unfair trade we call – charity. It is simply not pragmatic.

The fact is: humans are selfish by nature. Ugly as it is, face it. With the exception of humanitarians, who would risks their lives to donate their organs without any gain except a thank-you letter in return? This leads me to wonder: Should organ trading be legalised? Is money the only measure for fair trade?

National Neuroscience director Associate Prof Lee Wei Ling, the princess of the Lee Empire, argued that incentivising a potential donor with money is ethical, for the end result, she said, is still another life saved.

I beg to differ.

First of all, it is immoral transact parts of the human body as if any other commodity. Indeed, it can save more lives, but who can ensure that the recipient’s life is worth saving? He could well be a serial murderer with kidney failure, but so happens to be filthy rich.

Besides, domination of the wealthy and the deprivation of the poor of organ transplants opportunities would be inevitable.

Secondly, one cannot define how much an organ is worth, for they are not meant to be traded. One cannot price Einstein’s brain and trade for his intelligence’s worth with a MasterCard. That is, unless, he is willing to trade.

As such, unfair transactions arise. People in the Third World countries might trade off their organs at low prices as a desperate resort to egress the poverty cycle, benefiting organ traffickers when organs are sold to the wealthy at exorbitant prices.

Hence, I feel that the government has its reasons to enforce the HOTA for I believe Singaporeans are willing to donate their organs even before their eternal sleep, only that they are lacking a driving force.

Evaluating various viewpoints, I feel the Sim’s family is stubborn and inconsiderate not to donate to the needy – for they had nothing to lose. Neither did they have anything to gain.

There are two solutions to organ shortage: HOTA or organ transaction.

Or simply, you can choose not to donate at all.

(500 words)