PETA going crazy about fly-swatting

Oh. My. God.

I thought Obama swatting the fly was just a humorous incident, but apparent PETA is making a fuss out of it in the US.

Absolutely crazy. (This happaned a day right after the fly-swatting incident)

Take a look here to see the article on PETA's views.

Signing off... ...

Taxi Driver dumps 2 teenagers in forested area

This is absolutely OUTRAGEOUS. A few days ago, a taxi driver dropped 2 teenage girls at a deserted, pitch-black forested area after claiming that he was "afraid of the dark" and didn't know the way to the destination they wanted to go to.

He told them to pay for the cab fare and get out of the car. He claimed that he would guide them out using the car's headlights, but drove off after that. The girls were lost in the pitch-black area with nothing but their handphone lights to guide them, and what of the taxi driver? He got off with just a reprimand! Pardon my language, but WHAT THE HELL????!!!

I seriously am going to write in to the company, once I figure out what their email is. I can't believe this. I would go as far to say that the taxi driver deserves to be jailed! Taking into account that HE was the one who brought them to such a place, HE should take RESPONSIBILITY for their safety! How could he even drop them off in a FORESTED AREA that was far from the main road and had no lights??! They could have easily DIED! Mind you, they were no more than 14 year olds!

Thank the gods for handphones. Thank the gods that they HAD handphones with them. I cannot imagine what would have happened if they didn't have any way of contacting anybody. They came out of this traumatised and are in need of counselling, but at least they're alive.

I am absolutely disgusted.

Read about the full article here.

Signing off... ...

Inhumane Interrogation

This is utterly crazy. I can't believe that they did this... I can't believe that they could have been so cruel, when they were supposed to be civillised people.

I am glad that President Obama has stopped all further such methods from being used. I just hope this doesn't spark off any retaliation from Al Qaeda...

Refer to the article below:

WASHINGTON — Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) interrogators used waterboarding — the neardrowning technique that top Obama administration officials have described as illegal torture — 266 times on two key prisoners from Al Qaeda, far more than had been previously reported. The agency waterboarded Sept 11 attack mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed 183 times and another terror suspect, Abu Zubaydah, 83 times, according to a 2005 Justice Department legal memorandum.

The New York Times reported in 2007 that Khalid Sheikh had been barraged more than 100 times with harsh interrogation methods, causing CIA officers to worry that they might have crossed legal limits and to halt his questioning. But the precise number and nature of the interrogation methods was not previously known. The release of the numbers is likely to become part of the debate about the morality and efficacy of interrogation methods that the Justice Department under the Bush administration declared legal even though the United States had historically treated them as torture.

A footnote to another 2005 memo released last Thursday said waterboarding was used more frequently and with a greater volume of water than CIA rules permitted. The Senate Intelligence Committee has begun a yearlong, closed-door investigation of the CIA interrogation programme, in part to assess the claims of Bush administration officials that brutal treatment was necessary to get information, in part to assess claims of Bush administration officials that brutal treatment, including slamming prisoners into walls, shackling them in standing positions for days and confining them in small boxes, was necessary to get information.

CIA officials had opposed the release of the memo, which was one of four secret legal memos on interrogation that President Barack Obama ordered released last Thursday. Mr Obama said last week that officers who had used waterboarding and other harsh interrogation methods with the approval of the Justice Department would not be prosecuted. He has repeatedly suggested that he opposes Congressional proposals for a “truth commission” to examine Bush administration counterterrorism programmes.

An NYT article last Saturday said Abu Zubaydah had revealed a great deal of information before harsh methods were used and after his captors stripped him of clothes, kept him in a cold cell and kept him awake at night. 

It said interrogators at the secret prison in Thailand believed he had given up all the information he had, but officials at headquarters ordered them to use waterboarding. He revealed no new information after being waterboarded, the article said. It appears to be supported by a footnote to the Justice Department memo saying the use of the harshest methods appeared to have been “unnecessary” in his case.

AFP, The New York Times

To view the full article on NY Times: Click here

Signing off... ... 

Transactions over fare gates an offence??!

This article is taken off the New Paper site

(http://newpaper.asia1.com.sg/news/story/0,4136,193975,00.html)

YOU put something up for sale on an auction website. You arrange to meet the buyer at an MRT station.

One of you is inside the fare gate, and the other is outside.

For convenience, you pass the item over the fare gate to the buyer, and he passes you the money.

Do you know that you can be fined up to $2,000 for doing that?

The New Paper found out that under SMRT regulations, it is an offence to conduct a business transaction over a fare gate.

Earlier this month, Rediffusion deejay Gan Yeok Thiam wrote about this issue in the forum page of a newspaper.

On 18 Jan this year, the 43-year-old was waiting for a friend at the Tampines MRT station when he saw a middle-aged man pass some pastries over the fare gate to some people on the other side.

'The man was carrying a basket with some Chinese New Year pastries inside,' Mr Gan told to The New Paper.

'Some people were buying the pastries from him, and they had planned to meet there.'

Mr Gan said the man was inside the paid area of the MRT station, while the buyers were on the other side.

He saw the man hand over a box of pastries to a buyer who then paid him.

At this point, two SMRT employees approached the man. Mr Gan said he overheard them telling the man that he was not allowed to sell items over the fare gate.

So the man tapped his ez-link card and went out into the station's unpaid area.

There, he continued his dealing with his buyers.

Again, another two SMRT employees approached him, Mr Gan claimed.

'They looked like they were going to chase him away, so he quickly finished what he was doing and went back into the (paid area of the) MRT station.'

Curious, Mr Gan approached the man to find out more. The man told him he had done transactions over the fare gate before, but that was the first time he had been warned by SMRT staff.

When contacted, an SMRT spokesman confirmed it is indeed against their regulations to conduct business transactions over the fare gate.

The spokesman said the maximum penalty for such an offence is a $2,000 fine.

When asked if transactions are allowed if both parties are in the paid area, or the unpaid area, a spokesman for the Land Transport Authority (LTA) said: 'Other factors such as the effect of business or trade on passenger flow, safety and security considerations are taken into consideration.'

So far, no one has been fined as most commuters heed the advice given by the SMRT staff.

Is this necessary?

So why is there a need for such a rule?

The LTA spokesman said: 'The purpose of the rapid transit system is to transport passengers.

'Hence, the regulation discourages the carrying of goods or articles for the purpose of trade or business, unless the article or good is taken by a person through the fare gate.'

But Mr Gan feels the rule is too stringent.

'It's not as if the man was soliciting for buyers at the station,' he pointed out.

'We're living in difficult times now. Shouldn't we be more compassionate towards people who are just trying hard to make a simple living?'

Do commuters know about the rule?

Of the 16 whom The New Paper spoke to, 11 did not know about the rule, while 12 of the 16 were not bothered about it.

But Mr Ragendran, 26, an operations leader, supported the rule, saying that it's reasonable, as 'it will inconvenience others if such transactions are carried out'.

Honestly, some rules are quite ridiculous... As long as commuters don't get in the way of others, I feel that there is no need to enforce such a rule. Even then, if it was done during peak hour, wouldn't a warning suffice? Is there really a need to impose a fine on the people for every little thing? Transactions are not literally made across the gantry, where you would stand in the way of commuters trying to get in and out- It's done over the barrier, usually reasonably far away from the gantries proper.

And seriously, some staff should know when to be lax with the rules. My neighbour and I once stopped near the entrance of the station to finish up our snack (it wasn't the kind that would drop all over the place and make a mess either) so that we wouldn't be eating on the platform/in the train, and we got warned by one of the staff. He had played the 'EATING AND DRINKING IS NOT ALLOWED IN STATIONS AND TRAINS' announcement, and when we were still trying to finish our small snack up he came up to us and said "That announcement was played for you, you know? You're not supposed to eat in the station."

So we apologised (obviously for the sake of doing so), and walked 5 steps away so that we would be out of the station and behind the wall. Ridiculous.

Singapore-- A fine city indeed. At least some of the rules made some kind of sense. But this one with transactions in stations? This just goes past my understanding.

Signing off... ...

Wastewater into pure water in space

Saw this article on Slashdot:

"Astronauts flying aboard space shuttle Endeavour are delivering a device to the International Space Station that may leave youwondering if NASA is taking recycling too far. Among the ship's cargo is a water regeneration system that distills, filters, ionizes, and oxidizes wastewater — including urine — into fresh water for drinking or, as one astronaut puts it, 'will make yesterday's coffee into today's coffee.' The US space agency spent $250M for the water recycling equipment but with the space shuttles due to retire in two years, NASA needed to make sure the station crew would have a good supply of fresh water.

The Environmental Control and Life Support Systems uses a purification process called vapor compression distillation: urine is boiled until the water in it turns to steam. In space, there's an additional challenge: steam doesn't rise, so the entire distillation system is spun to create artificial gravity to separate the steam from the brine. The water has been thoroughly tested on Earth, including blind taste tests that pitted recycled urine with similarly treated tap water. 'Some people may think it's downright disgusting, but if it's done correctly, you process water that's purer than what you drink here on Earth,' said Endeavour astronaut Heidemarie Stefanyshyn-Piper."

It's cool, and practical, and just like the Newater plants here in Singapore. But if you ever want me to drink that, please don't tell me it came from my urine. =/ Or someone else's for that matter.

Signing off... ...

Stealing a law studen'ts laptop

I thought I'd share this article I saw in my friend's (Karen's) shared items cause it was hilarious. In my opinion, at least.

A thief learned the mistake of trying to steal a law student’s laptop last week after after becoming a punching bag for an Arizona State student he tried to rip off. Armed with a baseball bat, the intruder, Gabriel Saucedo, allegedly climbed through an open window into Alex Botsios’ apartment, waking the student and threatening to smash his head in. 

Botsios was willing to let Saucedo take his wallet and guitars. Then the robber made the mistake that ultimately landed him in the hospital — he went for the laptop. According to Botsios, he said “Dude, no — please, no! I have all my case notes…that’s four months of work!” Saucedo, obviously underestimating the fury of an overstressed, overworked first-year, was unsympathetic. That’s when Botsios could take no more.

Wrestling Saucdeo to the floor, Botsios separated the bat from the thief and repeatedly punched him in the face. When it was all over, police had to get Saucedo stitched up before charging him with armed robbery and kidnapping, while Botsios only suffered some scrapes and a bruised knuckle. Most importantly, at least to the student, is that his laptop, which he called “his baby,” escaped unharmed. Next time, Saucedo might want to try robbing a third-year student, as they’re generally more docile.

Seriously, the amount of stress the lot of us have to endure while schooling, especially in a university. I can imagine the distress the student must have felt when he saw the laptop about to be stolen.

Wrong move on the robber's part.

I still find it funny though =X Especially at the closing note of the article.

Signing off... ...

Robots: Showing Emotion

Technology has now improved to a point where it seems that our dreams of having humanoid robots are coming true.

[R]esearchers at the University of the West of England’s Bristol Robotics Laboratory (BRL) have begun investigating ways to make robots seem more human.

Indeed.

They published two videos with their prototype, and one of the videos is just creepy. It's slightly funny, but creepy all at the same time. They really seem to be getting a kick out of scaring people >_<

Don't worry, the words aren't really coming independently from the robot's 'brain'. It was recorded by someone else.

But still... Hm.

To see the full original article, click here.

Signing off... ...

White Tigers attack Zoo Cleaner

I heard about this incident this morning, so I decided to search online for the report on it. To my surprise, this is what most reports say on this incident (globally):

A newspaper says three Bengal white tigers have mauled to death a Singapore Zoo cleaner who fell into a moat surrounding their enclosure.

The Straits Times says the tigers pounced on Nordin Mondong of Malaysia when he fell into the moat Thursday. Terrified zoo visitors screamed, alerting zoo workers who managed to distract two of the tigers.

However, the third tiger continued to maul the 32-year-old Nordin. The report says he died on the way to a hospital.

Each of the tigers weighs more than 220 pounds (100 kilograms).

Bengal white tigers in the wild are found in South Asia, mostly in India.

(Taken from Yahoo News)

Over-Aggressive Tigers?

I was appalled when I read that version above (which appeared most frequently - if you don't believe me go google), so I went to search for the full story within Singapore websites.

Of course, the tigers were not being 'over-aggresive'. I found a more representative article here on what happened.

The more important parts of the article are:

According to eyewitnesses, Mr Nordin, who was seen shouting and flinging items about shortly before the incident, vaulted a low wall and landed in a moat in the enclosure, four metres below.

Carrying a yellow pail and a broom, he then crossed the 1.75m-deep moat, walked up to a rocky ledge near where the animals were and began agitating them by swinging the broom.

As two of the tigers approached him, he covered his head with the pail, lay down on the ground, and curled himself into a foetal position, two eyewitnesses, an Australian couple, told police.

and :

His colleagues later told zoo staff that the contract worker, who had been working at the zoo for about 4 1/2 months, had been behaving strangely minutes before the incident.

He had thrown his cutters and meal coupons about before telling them in Malay: 'Goodbye, you won't be seeing me again.'

He then rode off on his bicycle.

This incident sounds to me like suicide. He was already acting weirdly before the incident, and he had even told his colleagues "Goodbye, you won't be seeing me again". He left the zoo, then returned 5 minutes later to aggravate the white tigers, jump into their moat and just lie there with a pail over his head. All these were done when he was not even in charge of cleaning the tiger enclosure.

The tigers, I felt, were just acting naturally. They were not at fault.

The Zoo's Role

Of course, the zoo could have handled things better to avoid the death. There were men who held guns, but nothing was done. Some have posted on forums saying that they needn't have shot to kill, but could have just fired warning shots to scare the tigers. I agree with them on that.

Alternatively, since the zoo will be dealing with possibly endangered animals, they could have used tranquilisers instead of bullets. That way, you can still do something when emergencies like these arise. What is the point of having people there with arms when they are not well-equipped to handle emergencies?

Signing off... ...