Skip navigation.

Log in | Sign up

Cho một ngày mới...

Cuốn Making democracy work

Making Democracy Work là tác phẩm cổ điển của GS Robert Putman, trường Harvard. Hơn 20 năm liền, ông và các đồng nghiệp nghiên cứu về cải tổ chính trị, tản quyền và dân chủ hóa ở nước Ý. Tác phẩm được xuất bản lần đầu năm 1993.

Mục đích cụ thể của cuộc khảo sát là: Các định chế mới có thay đổi tác phong các nhà chính trị vùng hay không? Có thay đổi cơ cấu ảnh hưởng chính trị địa phương không? Dân chúng có thấy sự thay đổi nào không? Định chế mới ảnh hưởng đến sự phát triển kinh tế như thế nào? Ảnh hưởng đến đời sống cộng đồng, tinh thần tham dự và tính chất bình đẳng của đời sống dân chúng như thế nào. Sau khi thấy kết quả khác biệt về Thành Quả cuộc cải tổ giữa các vùng, ông đi tìm nguyên nhân, trong đời sống xã hội, và trong lịch sử.


Making Democracy Work chính là tài liệu nghiên cứu đặc biệt hữu ích cho những ai chuyên về Chính trị học.

Dưới đây là một số đường link tới các trang viết tiếng Việt về cuốn sách này của ông.

Read more...

American "strategic hedging" policy to China?

,

"Strategic hedging" hay còn gọi là chiến lược phòng hờ của Mỹ với Trung Quốc trong thời gian gần đây. Có thể hiểu "strategic hedging" là vừa giả làm bạn tốt, vừa đề phòng khi Trung Quốc "phát hỏa". Tờ "world politics review" vừa có bài với tựa đề "Managing China's growing assertiveness in the South China Sea" với nội dung như sau:

Read more...

Why I chose Political Science?

Với background là International Studies và kinh nghiệm làm việc với tư cách là reporter, editor mảng quan hệ quốc tế, mình cũng dự định apply vào chuyên ngành International Relations. Tuy nhiên, mọi sự thay đổi khi ở Canada Political Science bao gồm chuyên ngành này. Hầu như ai nghiên cứu về IR cũng vào Political Science trước khi bước ra nghiên cứu về IR.

Một số người bạn hỏi học PSCi để sau này làm gì? Thực ra có lẽ bạn mình hiểu rằng PSCi tức chỉ chuyên nghiên cứu về lý thuyết chính trị học. Song trên thực tế, nghiên cứu về PSCi có rất nhiều đề tài mở. 2 môn học bắt buộc hay còn gọi là core course cho Master program chính là Các phương pháp và lý thuyết của việc nghiên cứu Chính trị và môn Nghiên cứu chính trị quốc tế.

Ngòai 2 môn bắt buộc đó ra, SV còn phải học thêm 4 courses chính nữa, course này được tự chọn theo học kỳ, kéo dài 1 năm (3 học kỳ). Học kỳ đầu bắt buộc phải học 3 courses (trong đó có 1 môn bắt buộc, 2 course còn lại tùy chọn theo lịch của Khoa yêu cầu). Job của PSCi vì vậy cũng rất mở, có thể làm cho các tổ chức phi chính phủ, các tổ chức quốc tế như UN, UNICEF, các viện nghiên cứu, trường học... hay cũng có thể là Bộ ngoại giao. Tất nhiên, mình cũng có những người bạn tốt nghiệp PSCi nhưng vẫn loay hoay chưa tìm được việc. Biết đâu mình cũng như họ sau này nhỉ... Hopefully that will not happen, lolz.

Có lẽ Fall 2009, mình sẽ chọn 2 courses là Conflict and conflict resolution và Crime and Politics.

- Vì sao mình lại chọn Conflict and Conflict Resolution chứ không phải các môn khác như Democracy hay Globalization? Bởi Conflict and Conf Resolution bao gồm trong đó là một đống các mối quan hệ quốc tế, mà theo đó mình có thể phát huy được tốt nhất những gì mình đã biết. Tuy nhiên, requirement cũng khá mệt, bởi một chồng sách và tài liệu sẽ cần phải đọc trong thời gian giới hạn. 50% của research paper sẽ là rất hấp dẫn, bên cạnh đó, hàng tuần cũng sẽ phải báo cáo, giống như một slide presentation ngắn với 30% thang điểm + với% còn lại của việc discussion trên lớp. Kể cũng hấp dẫn đấy chứ. Năm 2008, nghe nói học về arms control and disarmament. Không biết năm nay sẽ là gì, nhưng dù gì thì cũng rất hấp dẫn và thách thức thú vị.

Ngòai ra, mình chọn đề tài này cũng bởi vì đây là một trong những chuyên ngành mạnh của Waterloo, với chủ của mảng nghiên cứu là Prof. Ramesh Thakur, người nổi tiếng của UN và hiện là Director of Balsillie School, chuyên nghiên cứu về hòa bình. Hy vọng một ngày nào đó được làm việc cùng ông.

- Còn đối với Crime and Politics, đó là một trong những sở thích nghiên cứu của mình. Đề tài nghiên cứu tốt nghiệp ĐH mang tên "Tham nhũng tại Trung Quốc và bài học với Việt Nam" đã cho mình cái nhìn rõ hơn về vấn đề này. Vậy Crime and Politics nghiên cứu về vấn đề gì? Đây cũng là một chuyên ngành mở, gồm các vấn đề như tham nhũng, buôn lậu, buôn bán người, tội phạm có tổ chức xuyên biên giới, rửa tiền, khủng bố... nói chung liên quan đến vấn đề tội phạm và các xử lý của các Chính phủ.

Requirement cũng khá mệt với 1 research paper chiếm 30% thang điểm +20% oral presentation cho final research paper này, 3 oral presentation chiếm 30% thang điểm; bên cạnh đó là oral commentary on classmate's paper 5% và seminar participation 15%. Tuy nhiên, cái nhẹ của môn học này là tài liệu đọc bắt buộc là các báo chuyên ngành, trong khi chỉ phải đọc chừng 4 cuốn sách mà thôi...

Bên cạnh việc xác định Crime and Politics là chuyên ngành ưa thích, còn phải kể đến Dr. Lo Shiu Hing, chủ nhiệm của chương trình. Ông chính là người khiến mình apply vào Univ of Waterloo khi search chuyên ngành phù hợp và thấy ông chuyên nghiên cứu về tham nhũng, hiiii. Hy vọng sẽ được cộng tác nhiều với ông trong những tháng tới.

8 quy tắc cơ bản trong phát âm tiếng Anh

Many thanks to Ms Jude Quick (a.k.s Mother Duck), Instructor for Business Communication Strategies Course, for letting me publish 8 rules of English pronunciation. We can not find it in any books. This is the result of her 2 months working with students in YMCA (Windsor, ON, Canada) and I am lucky enough to have it in 6 months study in W.E.S.T (Women's Enterprise Skills Training of Windsor Inc.), Enhanced Language Training (ELT) for Internationally Trained Professionals.

This is my Mother Duck and me
As well, many thanks to my classmates. I miss you guys so much...Quack Quack Quack

Dưới đây là 8 quy tắc áp dụng cho khỏang 85% tiếng Anh Mỹ, 15% còn lại là bất quy tắc, chỉ có thể nhớ từ nào phát âm ra sao mà thôi. Hy vọng bài viết này có ích cho người luyện phát âm tiếng Anh Mỹ (Anh- Anh khác à nha, cái này tui không có biết)...


1.Stress is usually on the first syllable, except: ion, cion, sion, ic, ical, ity, ify, grapher, graphy
- Trọng âm sẽ nhấn là âm tiết đầu tiên, ngoại trừ một số trường hợp ngoại lệ như trên.
VD: conflict, trọng âm nhấn ở "con" vì nó là first syllable.


2.All unstressed vowels become ð (similar to sound ơ in Vietnamese).
- Tất cả những âm tiết đứng sau sẽ biến thành âm giống như "ơ" hết (khi đọc giống kiểu lưỡi ngắn và phát âm ở cuống họng).


3.Vowel + r -> vowel disappear, except: ar
Eg: bird
burn
hurt
Except: war; car…
Chính vì vậy mà khi người ta phát âm, mình nghe thấy âm "r" ở cổ họng. Các chữ như "i", "u" như ở trên sẽ biến mất. Vì vậy, khi đọc, sẽ không còn âm đấy nữa mà chỉ còn "brd" hay "brn". Vì cái này mà tôi bị đuổi ra khỏi lớp học, hiii, vì tội nói với cô giáo là hình như trong cổ cô rõ ràng có âm "i" hay "u"...


4.“i” in the middle - ð
- Nếu chữ viết mà có "i" đứng giữa, khi đọc sẽ tự biến thành âm hơi giống "ơ".

VD: Emily (tên con gái mình), sẽ được đọc giống như "E-mơ-ly", hay bang "Florida" của Mỹ sẽ được đọc giống như "Flo-rờ-đờ", tất nhiên âm "ơ" được đọc rất nhanh, lướt nhẹ.


5.Ge and Gi sound J ; Ce and Ci sound S
- "Ge" và Gi" phát âm giống như âm "Zờ- J" trong tiếng Việt. Còn "ce" và "ci" thì giống âm "sờ-S". Chính vì vậy mà khi phát âm, ta hay nghe thấy âm "sì, hiiiiiiii".
VD: ceiling
Practice
George


6.Vowel- Consonant- Vowel -> first vowel is long
- Nếu chữ có thứ tự: nguyên âm- phụ âm- nguyên âm thì nguyên âm đầu sẽ là âm dài. Để rõ hơn về cách phát âm, click vào link sau: abc
learn to read

Eg: take
hope
Exept:

7.2 vowels together -> 1st vowel is long; 2nd vowel is silent (disappear)
Eg: meat
Pail, Boat, Day, Jail...
15%: young; choice, bear, against...

-Trong trường hợp 2 nguyên âm đi cùng nhau, thường thì người ta sẽ đọc nguyên âm thứ nhất theo kiểu đọc chữ cái, nguyên âm thứ 2 sẽ trở thành âm câm, không đọc. Cũng nên nhớ phải đọc cả âm cuối cùng của chữ, ví dụ như "l", "t" ở trên. Tuy nhiên, vẫn có 1 số trường hợp ngoại lệ nằm trong số 15% ngoại lệ của tiếng Anh.

8.When the word is verb, stress is on the 2nd syllable
Eg: relate
record
- Khi từ cần đọc là động từ thì trọng âm sẽ nhấn ở âm tiết thứ 2. Ví dụ như trên.

GOOD LUCK EVERYBODY!

The Rise and Fall of Communism

Jul 2nd 2009
From The Economist print edition- By Archie Brown. Ecco; 736 pages
Mankind’s biggest mistake

WHY did communism take root? Given its sorrowful harvest, why did it keep spreading? And what ever enabled it to last so long? Archie Brown’s new history of communism identifies three big questions, perhaps even the biggest, of the past century.

At first sight, all seem puzzling. Communism was an impractical mishmash of ideas, imposed by squabbling zealots that promised much, delivered little and cost millions of lives. It is striking that 36 countries at one time or another adopted this system and that five—Cuba, Laos, North Korea, Vietnam and the biggest of them all, China—still pay lip service to it.Communism’s first big advantage was that it played on two human appetites—the noble desire for justice and the baser hunger for vengeance. Mr Brown, emeritus professor of politics at Oxford University, traces communism’s idealistic roots in the struggle against feudal oppression and beastly working conditions. The moral weight of Karl Marx’s criticisms of 19th-century capitalism even won him praise from the high priest of Western liberalism, Karl Popper, a Viennese-born philosopher who emigrated to London. But the intoxicating excitement of revolutionary shortcuts attracted the ruthless and dogmatic, who saw the chance to put into practice Marx’s muddled Utopian notions—and settle some scores on the way. “The more representatives of the reactionary clergy and reactionary bourgeoisie we succeed in killing, the better,” wrote Lenin in 1922. Even so, many still resist the idea that the founding fathers of communism were murderous maniacs. Revolutions against corrupt and ossified regimes in countries such as Russia and China stoked a steamy enthusiasm that took decades to dissipate.

The communist block also had two bits of good fortune. The economic slump of the 1930s discredited democracy and capitalism. Then came Hitler’s disastrous attack on the Soviet Union. The victory over fascism in Europe gave the Soviet Union, an ally of America and Britain, renewed moral weight. Given what had happened in Russia under Stalin in the 1930s, that hardly seemed deserved. As Mr Brown notes, Stalin trusted the Nazi leader more than he trusted his own generals. The Soviet Union killed more top German communists than Hitler’s regime did. Yet in some countries, Czechoslovakia for example, Soviet forces were initially welcomed as liberators, and Stalinist regimes took power with a degree of popular consent. In other countries, such as Poland and the Baltic states, it looked different: one occupation gave way to another.

The promised communist nirvana brought a mixture of mass murder, lies and latterly the grey reality of self-interested rule by authoritarian bureaucrats. But it was a bit late for second thoughts. Communist regimes proved remarkably durable, partly thanks to the use of privileges for the docile and intimidation of the independent-minded. Another source of strength was tight control of language and information that deemed most criticism unpatriotic. Cracks came as information spread, especially about the system’s bogus history and economic failings. Nationalism was a potent solvent too, particularly in places such as the Baltic states, that felt they were captive nations of a foreign empire.

Mr Brown deals conscientiously with communism in Asia and the solitary Latin American outpost of Cuba. But his main expertise, acquired over decades of scholarly study, is in the Soviet Union and its east European empire. His account is studded with delightfully pertinent and pithy personal observations and anecdotes: the censors in tsarist Russia decided that Karl Marx’s “Das Kapital” was so boring that it wasn’t worth banning. Lenin thought 1917 was too early for revolution in Russia. At the Battle of Stalingrad, 50,000 Soviet citizens, including turncoats, volunteers and conscripts, were fighting on the German side. An American communist agitator once began a speech with the immortal lines: “Workers and peasants of Brooklyn”. Nikita Khrushchev hated putting things in writing because he couldn’t spell.

It is easy to be polemical about communism. Mr Brown strives to be fair-minded. He gives careful weight to the achievements of the Soviet regime, particularly in bringing mass literacy to Russia, and unparalleled social mobility. But he is sometimes too lenient. Was the Soviet Union under Leonid Brezhnev really just an authoritarian regime, rather than a totalitarian one? Saying that the Soviet Union “repossessed” the Baltic states in the secret Hitler-Stalin pact in 1939 would strike most people there as a glaring misreading of history. And his discussion of economics is skimpy and clichéd.

Yet as a single-volume account of mankind’s biggest mistake, Mr Brown’s book is hard to beat. Readers over the age of 40 will find it an uncomfortable reminder of a dangerous and dismal past. For most younger readers, it will seem all but unimaginable.

http://www.economist.com/books/displaystory.cfm?story_id=13940919

Think again: Asia's rise



Minxin Pei, the author, is senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Mr Pei have identified a set of 7 reasons that we might have mistake about the rise of Asia, especially the assumptions in the recent years that Asia will take over the West to dominate over the world. Take a look at his assumptions:


1- "Power Is Shifting from West to East."- NOT REALLY

2- "Asia's Rise Is Unstoppable."- DON'T BET ON IT

3- "Asian Capitalism Is More Dynamic." - HARDLY

4- "Asia Will Lead the World in Innovation." - NOT IN OUR LIFETIME

5- "Dictatorship Has Given Asia an Advantage."- NO

6- "China Will Dominate Asia."- NOT LIKELY

7- "America Is Losing Influence in Asia."- DEFINITELY NOT



Below are additional reading sources we should read:


1) In “The Dark Side of China’s Rise” (FOREIGN POLICY, March/April 2006), Minxin Pei examines the corruption and waste threatening China’s dizzying economic growth.


2) Well before the “Asian century” fervor exploded, Nicholas Kristof and Sheryl WuDunn predicted in Thunder from the East: Portrait of a Rising Asia (New York: Knopf, 2000) that the “center of the world” would eventually “settle in Asia.” Kishore Mahbubani’s The New Asian Hemisphere: The Irresistible Shift of Global Power to the East (New York: PublicAffairs, 2008) has become the foundational text of the Asian-century school of thought.


3) The China vs. India debate shows no signs of abating. In “The Next Asian Miracle” (FOREIGN POLICY, July/August 2008), Yasheng Huang makes the case that India’s democratic institutions will give it a long-term growth advantage over China. Razeen Sally dismisses that suggestion in “Don’t Believe the India Hype” (Far Eastern Economic Review, May 1, 2009) on the grounds that India continues to neglect its labor-intensive sectors and avoids reforming its institutions. University of California, Berkeley, economics professor Pranab Bardhan has been one of the few respected analysts to reject both the China hype and the India hype, for reasons he lays out in “China, India Superpower? Not So Fast!” (YaleGlobal Online, Oct. 25, 2005).


3) Not everyone thinks that Asia’s rise implies an inexorable decline in American influence. Anne-Marie Slaughter argues in “America’s Edge: Power in the Networked Century” (Foreign Affairs, January/February 2009) that the 21st century will, in fact, be an American one because the United States enjoys unrivaled “connectedness.”

When China Rules the World

Review by David Pilling

Published: June 13 2009 02:11 | Last updated: June 13 2009 02:11
When China Rules the World: The Rise of the Middle Kingdom and the End of the Western World
By Martin Jacques
Allen Lane £30, 550 pages
FT Bookshop price £20

Books about China ruling the world used to be prefaced by “if”. Now, more often, they are preceded by the assumptive “when”. Such is the age we live in. Martin Jacques’ 550-pager on the ascent of China finds little space to consider the question of whether its rapid economic progress is unstoppable. It ignores almost entirely the other popular – and perfectly plausible – premise for books on the Middle Kingdom: “When China’s miracle goes phut”.

Jacques’ book is based on the extrapolation that, by 2050, China will be the biggest economy in the world, surpassing the US and India which, by then, will be third. By virtue of what Jacques calls the “merciless measure” of gross domestic product, China will be politically and militarily the most powerful country in the world.

We might argue about these two central premises, namely that China’s GDP will inevitably surpass that of the US, and that there is an almost mechanical relationship between economic output and power. These are legitimate points of debate for other books. Yet Jacques can be forgiven for making this leap of faith and asking what will happen to the world if, indeed, China becomes a dominant power.

Jacques’ thesis – argued clearly and logically, if somewhat laboriously – is that China’s rise will overturn “western” assumptions about what it is to be modern. To date, the world’s only successful economies of any size – with the exception of Japan – have been European or, in the case of the US, of European pedigree. The knee-jerk assumption of globalisation, he argues, is that as countries modernise they take on western characteristics. “We are so used to the world being western, even American, that we have little idea what it would be like if it was not,” he writes.

Jacques contends, not unreasonably, that China’s continental size, huge population, racial homogeneity and confidence in the centrality of its own civilisation make for a country capable of redefining what it is to be modern.

If Britain was a maritime hegemon and the US an airborne and economic one, then China will be a cultural one, he predicts. As Chinese confidence grows apace with its decisive emergence from two centuries of humiliation, its overriding attitude will not be one of catching up with the west, but rather of regaining its rightful place as the world’s pre-eminent civilisation. “As the dominant global power, China is likely to have a strongly hierarchical view of the world, based on a combination of racial and cultural attitudes,” he writes.

China will draw on its Confucian roots, a paternalistic ethos that, he argues, is not readily compatible with western democratic principles. He goes so far as to suggest that it would be best for China, indeed the world, if the “present regime continues” for some time, a verdict that this former editor of Marxism Today might not have advanced, say, about the Chile of Augusto Pinochet.

Much of the future Jacques foresees for China can be found in its past. He expects it to reassert elements of its ancient tributary relationship with neighbouring countries, leaving them alone so long as they pay cultural obeisance. China’s idea of itself as a living civilisation – what he calls a “civilization-state” as opposed to a nation-state – means it will never yield to assaults on its unity, particularly when it comes to Taiwan.

Jacques’ overriding point is that, in future, “the debate over values will be rooted in culture rather than ideology, since the underlying values of a society are primarily the outcome of distinctive histories and cultures”. His contention is that, since China’s culture and history are so formidable, it will not bend to western norms. If there is any bending to be done, it is the west that must yield.

That makes the book a useful corrective to those who assume that emerging superpowers, principal among them China, will recreate themselves in America’s image. Yet Jacques puts too much faith in culture as the ultimate arbiter of a nation’s destiny. He dismisses the argument of Chris Patten, the last British governor of Hong Kong, that the divide between east and west is more a question of time lag than intrinsic cultural difference. But in doing so, he goes too far the other way. He overemphasises Asia’s cultural predilections for community over individual, for social relationships over law, and for stability over freedom. In both south-east and north-east Asian culture, he writes, “the individual finds affirmation and recognition not in their own individual identity but in being part of a group”. These are sweeping statements that, at worst, sound like a Singaporean advertisement for Asian values.

Jacques’ writing on racism is revealing. Contrasting China with multicultural America, he presents it as an inherently racist culture more or less incapable of summoning a multicultural view of the world. “The fact that the Chinese regard themselves as superior to the rest of the human race, and that this belief has a racial component, will confront the rest of the world with a serious problem,” he writes. In what he describes as the “Middle Kingdom mentality”, he presents China as uniquely conflicted in its simultaneous feeling of superiority to other cultures and its inferiority to westerners who have overtaken it. These conflicted attitudes, for example, are common, and describe feelings of frustration and national inheritance denied (or at least postponed) in countries as far apart as Argentina and Japan.

In China’s rise, Jacques tends to see menace, albeit of a cultural rather than a militaristic nature. China’s view of itself as the centre of civilisation will, he says, lead to a “profound cultural and racial reordering of the world in the Chinese image”. But Jacques is more on the right lines when, elsewhere in the book, he talks about competing modernities. If, as he expects, China emerges as a world power to challenge the US, then modernisation is likely to be a two-way street, even a multi-lane highway, on which different versions circulate of what it means to be modern.

In the future, Americans may indeed watch more Chinese films and study Mandarin. But, by the same token, the Chinese will continue to learn from the west as its wholesale import of western capital, business practice and technology demonstrates. Just as Europeans and Americans may read more Confucius, so the Chinese will study more Shakespeare. It sounds like fun. The world is more likely to become multi-polar and culturally layered than recreated in China’s image. That is the whole point: China will not rule the world.

David Pilling is the managing editor of the FT’s Asia edition

Source: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/b9c0c852-56de-11de-9a1c-00144feabdc0.html

Great Depression 1929- 1933

1. What is/was G.D?

2. Background to the G.D
1920s: Roaring Twenties

3. Why did it happen?
+ Over production/ Under-consumption
+ Overuse of credit and lending
+ The int'nl situation

4. The Int'nl financial situation during the 1920s
- After First World War, Germany had to pay Britain, France and Belgium billions of dollar
- Britain, France owned billions of dollar in loan to the United States
- In order to keep Germany economy going, US lent money to Germany.
* Black Monday and Black Tuesday- 28 Oct and 29 Oct 1929

5. The immediate effect of the G.D
- Banks closed throughout the world
- Unemployment increased (in US, from 3,2% in 1929 to 24,9% in 1933)
- Government increased taffifs

6. Other effects
- Anti-immigration laws passed in US, Britain, Canada...
- Increase in crime
- In Germany -> Nazi party -> Hitler
- Civil unrest
- Japan's Gov became more aggressive

7. More effects of the G.D
- Gov became more involve in economy/ employment and banking (The New Deal in the US- 1933 Roosevelt)
- Countries delivered more social services, creating "social safety net"
- People became distrustful of banks and had a lingering fear of poverty, hunger and unemployment.

8. G.D in film
- Modern times (1936)
- The Grape of Wrath (1940)
- It's a wonderful life (1946)
- Bonnie and Clyde (1967)
- Annie ( 1982)
- O Brother where art thou (2000)
- Road to Perdition (2002)
- Cinderella man (2005)

Teenage daughters sold into sex slavery

Yeah, they are poor, young and pretty. That's why they are the prey for human brokers, who pay families to marry off their daughters to men in Korea, Taiwan and China; others are linked directly to human trafficking. Parents often ignore the dangers to their daughters in pursuit of a better life.

That's some aspects of life in my country. Thương lắm ViệtNam ơi:(





Read the article in Mercurynews:

First time I drive

Lần đầu tiên cầm vôlăng lái xe...:yes: Kể cũng tuyệt vời, không sợ nhưng hơi run. Cảm giác chế ngự, thích thú.

9 giờ tối, Food Basic vắng teo. Bãi gửi xe vì vậy cũng chẳng có khách. Tự nhiên chồng hỏi thích lái không, gật đầu liền :wink: . Trên xe có con nhỏ, vậy mà mình gật đầu với con nói "Mẹ chở hai Bố con đi 1 vòng nhé", hii, y như thật vậy...

Lúc đầu là chạy dọc đường thẳng, không hề gì. Được 1 lúc thấy thích quay lái. Thế là bẻ lái sang phải, rồi chạy tiếp. Chẳng dám vụt ga, mà chỉ giữ chân phanh thôi.

Được 1 lúc thấy thích chạy nhanh hơn, hiii, thế là đạp chân ga :ko: Thích thú...

Thế là các bước đã biết rồi: đạp ga, nhấn phanh, chạy thẳng, bẻ lái. Giờ chỉ còn bước nữa là tập nhìn gương cho quen nữa nhỉ...

Dù sao cũng ghi lại cảm giác ban đầu này. Tận tháng 11 này mới được thi lái cơ mà nhỉ.

Iran's election- June 12, 09

Iran's Interior Ministry announced Saturday that incumbent President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad had won 63.29% of the vote in the country's presidential election — a landslide. But Iran's opposition leader Mir-Hossein Mousavi says he won and that the result had been rigged; Mousavi supporters have taken to the streets in Tehran and other cities to protest the official outcome.

The politico had an article about the election and gave it as a "sham":

First, only candidates screened and approved by the mullahs in the Guardian Council could run — in this case, exactly four presidential candidates out of nearly 500 who applied.

Second, Iran’s highest official is not the president but, rather, the supreme leader, currently Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

Third, Iran’s election officials are not independent but rigorously controlled by the supreme leader.

Fourth, the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps and other security forces stand ready, willing and able to preserve public safety if the “wrong” candidate appeared to win or protestd in defeat.

Fifth, whoever won wasn’t going to change Iran’s 20-year campaign to acquire deliverable nuclear weapons or its role as the central banker for international terrorism.

Pirates

:D Hom qua chac tay presenter cu tui minh lam nhi:lol: . Vi cu noi luyen thuyen va khong neu het duoc cai ma nguoi ta can la gi. Du sao thi cung tot cho no thoi, coi nhu tap duot voi 1 ban giam khao kho tinh:yes:

What did/do they do?

Who'd be a pirate?

Organization of the pirate crew

The Slave trade

Moving back into society

Pirate partying

Women pirates

Captain Mission

Downfall of piracy

Symbolism of the flag

Privateering

Modern day of pirates

Pirates in popular culture

Internet piracy

The Pirate Party (Sweden)

Political Accountability

Poor standards of behaviour – corruption, lack of transparency and accountability – in public institutions are a major cause of low public confidence in the political process in many countries. Look at the definition from Wikipedia by the link:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accountability

And on TVO

Obama P.R policy and Muslim

There has been ongoing tension between majority Muslim nations and western countries.

Obama's speech: try to answer in part the question: What is America going to do to try and fix its relationship with Muslim lands?

What does America have to do to reduce Western-Muslim tension? What do Muslims living in Muslim lands have to do? And what are the obligations of countries such as Canada, that can disassociate itself from the United States but which is still a beneficiary of the current global situation?

Try the link: http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/NewBeginning/
in Vietnamese

[URL=]episode in TVO

Negative political advertising

Được nhiều chính trị gia sử dụng trong các chiến dịch tranh cử

North Korea, the Korean peninsula and nuclear weapons

- Korea 1870- 1950
+ Sino- Japan War 1894- 1895
+ Russo- Japan War 1904- 1905

- Japanese occupation of Korea 1910-1945
+ 1910: Korea was officially made a part of Japan
+ Japan erased Korean culture and replaced with Japanese culture

- Korea and the S.W.W

- The division of Korea

- The Korean War 1950- 1953

Saturday, 23 May, 09

Friday, 22 May 09- Last day in Windsor Star

My 5-week internship in Windsor Star finally comes to the end. I would like to say thank you to Roseann Danese for her help. She is so skilled to get past my flaw in my writing. She is not only my supervisor but my friend, my sister. We shared our experience and stories and then laugh...

The last day, I came to rewrite press release as usual. Then said goodbye to the staffs in News Room. I love to talk with Sarah, Roberta, Julian...

I had no chance to say goodbye to Craig Pearson, Ellen, Dalson Chen... as they were not there.

I regretted that I passed Donald MacArthur without saying goodbye although I love to talk to him most. He is the only one that I talked to directly when we went up to the News Room by the elevator( Roseann introduced me to others). Don, I just scare of saying goodbye and think that if we are lucky enough we can meet each other. But I don't know when, where and how... I will keep in touch with him through his blog in the Windsor Star.

5 weeks in Windsor Star, I had approximately 40 brief news. I am so happy and learned a lot from them.

Windsor Court House

http://www.windsorstar.com/news/todays-paper/Party+turned+into+melee/1611201/story.html

This is the link to the article that I accompanied Sarah to Windsor Court House May 19. I just attended for 2 hours and then went home to take care of Emily, for OX went to school. Sarah had to attend the whole day to have that news...:D. I just can't believe it.

If it is in Vietnam, I don't need to waste my time for the whole day to have that article...:confused:

Thursday, 21 May 09

December 2009
S M T W T F S
November 2009January 2010
1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30 31