How Beijing is likely to respond to escalating Hong Kong protest violence


AMNA NAWAZ: Police in Hong Kong tightened
their siege of a university campus tonight, where hundreds of protesters remain trapped
inside. It’s the latest bout of violence the city
has seen in nearly six months of protests. In other parts of the city, protests fueled
by the stand-off continue. Nick Schifrin has the latest. NICK SCHIFRIN: Overnight and through the morning
darkness, the streets of Hong Kong remained a battlefield. The police pushed to retake the campus of
Hong Kong’s Polytechnic University. And students used any means necessary to hold
their ground. Through masks that protect them from tear
gas, they plead for help. WOMAN: I really hope that someone could give
a helping hand. NICK SCHIFRIN: In a predawn raid, Hong Kong
police arrested a student journalist and repeatedly asked the student to stop recording. Some protesters fled on motorcycles. The police arrested more than 400 trying to
flee. Protesters tripped over barricades and were
tackled to the ground. This is the crescendo of six months of protests
that started against the law that would have extradited criminal suspects to mainland China. But, today, demonstrators are calling for
fundamental reform. And mainland China is threatening to escalate. For the first time since the protest began,
this weekend, Chinese soldiers left their Hong Kong barracks and cleaned up debris wearing
T-shirts and shorts. And, today, China’s ambassador to the United
Kingdom blamed the West for instigating the protests and warned the protesters. LIU XIAOMING, Chinese Ambassador to the United
Kingdom: To restore law and order, violence must end, and the violent perpetrators must
be brought to justice. This is the only way to safeguard the interests
of the public and secure a better future for Hong Kong and cement the foundation of one
country, two systems. NICK SCHIFRIN: The two sides are on a cycle
of escalation. Police say they’re defending themselves and
warned they could begin using live ammunition. But protesters say they are responding to
police brutality and demand the city give in to their demands. OLIVIA, Protester: We want a peaceful Hong
Kong to be back, but I think, before that, the government has to listen to the people,
and the police has to stop whatever they’re doing. And I hope that Hong Kong can go back to the
previous Hong Kong as soon as possible. NICK SCHIFRIN: For more on what this standoff
means for Hong Kong, and mainland China, we’re joined by Kurt Tong, who just finished a 29-year-career
in the State Department. He was the most recent U.S. consul general
to Hong Kong, who served there from 2016 to July 2019. He’s now a partner at the Asia Group, an international
business consulting firm. And welcome to “NewsHour.” Thanks very much. KURT TONG, Former U.S. Consul General to Hong
Kong: Thanks, Nick. It’s a pleasure to be here. NICK SCHIFRIN: What is the significance of
this we’re looking at right now, this standoff in this university, one of the first times
where we have seen protesters actually try and hold a little bit of ground? KURT TONG: Well, I think that’s right. It’s a departure in strategy by the protesters
to establish, essentially, a situation where they’re under siege, rather than using their
old philosophy of move like water, have a protest, and then leave before they could
get arrested. So I think it creates some new risks, both
for the protesters, but also for how the police handle it. NICK SCHIFRIN: So the police handling of not
only this moment, but throughout this process, the protesters have talked about things like
police brutality. That’s the language that they use. And we do see videos of police beating up
protesters, for sure. Do you believe that some of the police actions
over the last few months have fueled the protests? KURT TONG: I think that’s right. I think that the police have been under intense
pressure. Personally, I don’t think that they were particularly
well-trained for this kind of circumstance. And so they’re having an emotional response
to people coming at them violently and, in some instances, responding inappropriately. Inappropriate is a such a weasel word. I mean responding violently in ways that they
shouldn’t have. That is something that the protesters are
now calling for an investigation of. And that probably makes sense to do that. It is important to remember, at the same time,
that the protesters have, if you will, taken first blood in terms of making this a violent
situation. NICK SCHIFRIN: Of course, behind the police,
literally in a garrison in the middle of Hong Kong are PLA soldiers, or Chinese soldiers,
and we saw them out in T-shirts and shorts… KURT TONG: Right. NICK SCHIFRIN: … in response to this in
the last day or so. Talked to some people who fear that it could
be some kind of test run of some sort. Do you share that fear, that the Chinese military
could respond in some way, if this violence continues? KURT TONG: The fact of the matter is that
there is a significant military presence in Hong Kong, which is not designed for crowd
control or for police activity. China, of course, has immense police resources
across the border that are not, again, prepared for working in the Hong Kong environment under
Hong Kong law. So I think that the options for the mainland
in terms of direct intervention are limited and bad. And so I don’t anticipate that happening. But they have from time to time — for example,
earlier this fall, they released a video of them practicing this kind of activity. And I think that was — that was intended… NICK SCHIFRIN: And we have seen the rhetoric
increase from Chinese officials, including Xi Jinping. KURT TONG: And that’s intended to scare people. NICK SCHIFRIN: Scare people as a level of
deterrence. You don’t think it will go beyond that? KURT TONG: I certainly hope not. And I think it would be a mistake if it did. NICK SCHIFRIN: Which brings us to the U.S.
response. The U.S. has, in fact, warned China not to
go further than it has gone. And we have saw Secretary of State Mike Pompeo
today in the State Department say two things. One, he endorsed the idea of that police investigation. And he also gave a little bit of a reference
to some — one of the protesters’ key demands. Let’s take a listen. MIKE POMPEO, U.S. Secretary of State: We call
on Chief Executive Carrie Lam to promote accountability by supplementing the Independent Police Complaints
Council review with an independent investigation into the protest-related incidents. As the United States government has said repeatedly,
the Chinese Communist Party must honor its promises to the Hong Kong people, who only
want the freedoms and liberties that they have been promised in the Sino-British Joint
Declaration. NICK SCHIFRIN: Must honor its promises and
police investigation. Is that an adequate U.S. response? KURT TONG: I think that’s a good response. Certainly, I think what Secretary Pompeo said
is right. And that — we need to keep in mind that there
is some limits to the reach of the United States to influence events within Hong Kong. But, certainly, calling for a thorough investigation
of what has taken place is a natural thing to do in this circumstance and an important
thing to do. And the reference to the 1984 Sino-British
Joint Declaration, I think, is spot on. It’s really important for everyone in this
circumstance to really think carefully about, what are we trying to achieve? What are they trying to achieve? What are the protesters trying to achieve? What does China want? What does Hong Kong? What does the United States want? NICK SCHIFRIN: And quickly, in the time we
have left, U.S. officials are weighing even more drastic options, for example, even removing
some diplomats from Hong Kong, some kind of sanctions. Would those moves be positive, do you think? KURT TONG: I think that it depends on who
the sanctions are on. Removing diplomats, I don’t think, is necessary
unless it’s unsafe. The — I would… NICK SCHIFRIN: Could it send a signal, though,
to remove diplomats? KURT TONG: It could. But it — would it be effective? I would question that. I think that the bigger question here is,
whatever the U.S. does, a matter of U.S. policy should be carefully designed to really have
an impact on the situation in a positive way, not an emotional response to short-term exigencies,
but, rather, how do we reinforce this idea of a Hong Kong that’s part of China, but is
very different from the rest of China? To be specific on that, it’s important that
the United States not do something that actually ends up hurting the Hong Kong people more
than the intended target, which would — in the case of a bad situation there would be
the Beijing government. If Hong Kong is — no longer has autonomy,
then we should treat it like it no longer has autonomy. But if it has autonomy, I don’t think we should
take away our recognition of that autonomy because of a short-term situation, because
Hong Kong serves the United States’ interests, being a great place to do business and a communication
point for dealing with China. And it’s also a place where seven million
people live, that — most of whom we like. And we don’t want to take away their livelihood
just to spite Beijing. NICK SCHIFRIN: Kurt Tong, until July consul
general in Hong Kong, thank you very much. KURT TONG: Thank you.

Mindy Kaling’s Speech at Harvard Law School Class Day 2014


[APPLAUSE] MINDY KALING: Thank you, Connie. Good afternoon, everybody. Graduates, parents,
faculty, this is really such a
remarkable day– obviously for you,
but also for me. Because after spending a life
obsessing over True Crime, the impossible happened. I was asked to speak at the
Harvard Law Commencement and accept an
honorary legal degree. Yes, isn’t that
the American dream? Me, Mindy Kaling,
daughter of immigrant– ERIC JORDAN: So there’s
no actual– you’re not getting a– just not happening. MINDY KALING: I’m not? OK. [LAUGHTER] OK. So apparently, there is a
little miscommunication. I am no longer Mindy
Kaling, Esquire, Attorney at Law, Comedian, Actress. I’m just– that’s cool. No, I’m just supposed to stand
up here and give funny remarks. And then I’m
supposed to sit down. That’s OK. That doesn’t seem fair. But that’s OK. I’ll do that. I know what you’re
probably thinking. Mindy Kaling– why
did they ask her? She’s just a pretty
Hollywood starlet. What does that quadruple
threat know about the law? Sure, she seems really down
to earth, and pretty in, like, a totally accessible way. And yeah, she was on People
magazine’s most beautiful people list this year
and also in 2008. But what intelligent
remarks could she possibly make about the law? She’s probably too busy
doing shampoo commercials. But I’m not too busy. In fact, I would kill to
do a shampoo commercial. So if anyone from
L’Oreal is out there, please just Snapchat
me after this. But I’ll have you know, I
do know a ton about the law. Because I sue everybody. [LAUGHTER] And excuse me, there is a burger
named after me at Bartley’s. And they have
guaranteed me that is going to be there until another
tertiary member of the cast of The Office gets
their own TV show. And they don’t just name
burgers after anyone there. Noted chef Guy Fieri has one. Noted drunk driver
Justin Bieber has one. [LAUGHTER] OK? So that’s pretty good company. Thank you. Look, I get it. On the surface, it
would appear that I am an unconventional
choice to speak here today. To be honest, I don’t
know much about the law. I graduated in 2001
from Dartmouth College– AUDIENCE: Woo! MINDY KALING: Thank you. That man is drunk. [LAUGHTER] –an academic institution
located in lawless, rural New Hampshire, where,
when you arrive, you are given a
flask of moonshine and a box of fireworks. And you are told simply
to, quote, “go to town.” [LAUGHTER] Except there is no town. There is only a forest and
a row a fraternity houses that smell like urine. [LAUGHTER] Actually, little know fact–
Dartmouth has a law school. It’s just one semester. And its coursework is entirely
centered on how to beat a DUI. [LAUGHTER] But I am not here to extol the
virtues of the Dartmouth Red Bull School of Law. I’m here to talk to you. So even though I
have no idea why I was asked to speak here
today, I prepared this speech very carefully, the
way that any good Dartmouth-educated
graduate would. I drank a 40 of Jagermeister. Then I called my dad to see
if he would get me out of it. He’s here today. He could not get me out of it. So I tried to hire
a college freshman to write it for me in
exchange for a $200 gift card to Newbury Comics. That didn’t work out. Finally, seeing that I
absolutely had to do this and couldn’t get out of
it, rolled up my sleeves, sat down at my
computer, and tried to buy a commencement
address off of
movingcommencementspeeches.com. My credit card was declined. So I had to write
the thing myself. And here we are today. There are many, many
distinguished speakers who have spoken here today. I am sharing the stage with
Preet Bharara, US Attorney for the Southern
District of New York. We’ve heard what
a great guy he is. In 2012, he was named
by Time magazine as one of the 100 most
influential people in the world, which apparently,
they’re just giving out. [LAUGHTER] According to Time, he
has battled terrorism, as evidenced by his conviction
of the Times Square Bomber. He’s crippled international
arms dealers, drug traffickers, and Dublin financial fraud. Clearly, Harvard
wanted you to see the full range of what
India can produce here. [LAUGHTER] Mr. Bharara fights finance
criminals and terrorism. I meet handsome men in cute
and unusual ways on television. And next season, my character
might get a pet puppy. So is one more important
than the other? Who can say. [LAUGHTER] Dean Martha Minow is here. She has fought for
women, families, refugees and is a champion for education. She has published over 15 books,
such as Not Only for Myself– Identity, Politics, and Law. Dean Minow and I
have a lot in common. I, too, wrote a
book, as you know. It was called Is Everyone
Hanging Out Here Without Me? You can buy it right around
the corner at Urban Outfitters, next to a book called The
Marijuana Chef’s Cookbook. [LAUGHTER] So I digress right now. What I really wanted to say
is that I am extremely honored to be with such a
spectacular gathering of very smart and dedicated people. This graduating class has three
Rhodes Scholars, 11 Fulbright Scholars, and four members
of the Peace Corps. This group before
me is bristling with ambitious young
people, many of whom have already started
charities and philanthropic organizations. And now, with this diploma
in hand, most of you will go on to the
noblest of pursuits– like helping a cable company
acquire a telecom company. [LAUGHTER] You will defend BP from birds. [LAUGHTER] You will spend hours arguing
that the well water was contaminated well before
the fracking occurred. [LAUGHTER] One of you will sort out
the details of my prenup. A dozen of you will help me
with my acrimonious divorce. And one of you will fall
in love in the process. I’m talking to
you, Noah Feldman. [LAUGHTER AND CHEERS] And let’s be honest,
Harvard Law is the best of the Harvard
graduate programs. OK, I can say this. We’re amongst friends, OK. The Business School
is full of crooks. The Divinity School is just
a bunch of weird virgins. [LAUGHTER] The School of Design is
like European burnouts. And don’t get me started
on the Kennedy School. What kind of degree do you get
from there– public policy? OK, right. You mean a master’s in boring
me to death at a dinner party. I’m sorry. Let’s just be honest. The Med School is just a
bunch of nerdy Indians. I can say that, by the way. Hey, hey, I can–
Preet can say that. The rest of you–
you are out of line. That is racial. How dare you? [LAUGHTER] But I digress, again. I think I’m just really
excited to be here. The real reason I am
here is, as Connie said, I am obsessed with justice–
not so much with the law, but with justice. Actually, in my mind,
law is that pesky thing that often gets in
the way of justice. I believe in the Clint
Eastwood school of the law. An eye for an eye? I don’t think so. That solves nothing. You take my eye, I take
your life, my friend– [LAUGHTER] –OK, in a dual,
Aaron Burr style. I don’t want your stupid eye. For what, my eye collection? You’re dead. [LAUGHTER] Yes, duels are the
first thing that you learn when you enter my
graduate program, the Harvard School of Vengeance. But again, that is not what I
came here to talk to you about. That’s for the reception after. We can talk about that more. The Harvard Law
School crest, which you can see in front
of you, has the word “veritas,” which means
“truth” in Latin. I know this because
though I have been known as Mindy
my whole life, my first name is actually
Vera, which also means “truth.” It’s true. It’s actually too boring
to make that fact up. And if you look at
the crest, you’ll notice that under
this hallowed word, there are three
bunches of asparagus. [LAUGHTER] Because asparagus is the
tallest and the proudest of the vegetables– the pillar
of the vegetable kingdom. And it’s– it’s like the Lat– OK that is not asparagus. That is– that is
wheat, which makes also not a ton of sense, either. [LAUGHTER] OK, well that was like
three pages of my speech. [LAUGHTER] Nope– OK, that was– that’s
a call back to asparagus. I have this really funny
run about Hollandaise. You’ll never get to hear that. You know, this isn’t
going anywhere. I’m going to move past
trying to make sense of your crest, which
makes no sense. Harvard Law has an incredible
number of illustrious alumni. President Barack Obama attended
Harvard Law– or so he says. Elle Woods went here, from
the trenchant documentary, Legally Blonde. [LAUGHTER] It’s a very moving film. Dean Minow, you
should check it out after you read my
book, actually. Six of the nine
Supreme Court Justices are graduates of Harvard Law. The other three, I don’t
know where they went. I think it was, like,
University of Phoenix. I’m not sure. [LAUGHTER] No, no, no. As we all know, they
attended your friendly rival, Yale Law School. OK, let’s just–
can we take a moment to talk about this
rivalry, everybody? I know that you have a
chip on your shoulder. OK? Yale Law is always number one. And you are always number two. Sometimes Stanford
comes in there, bumps you down to number three. But listen. Let me tell you something. From where I stand from
an outsider’s perspective, here’s the truth:
you are all nerds. [LAUGHTER] OK? All of you. Except here’s the difference. The only difference
is that you are the nerds that are going to make
some serious bank, all right? Which is why I’m here today– [LAUGHTER] –to marry the
best-looking amongst you. [LAUGHTER] And back to this beautiful
diploma– this Harvard Law degree. It’s not just a piece of paper. You can do whatever
you want now, and this institution will
follow you everywhere. OK? If you kill someone, you are
the “Harvard Law Murderer.” [LAUGHTER] If you are caught in a lewd
act in a public restroom, you’re the “Harvard Law
Pervert,” my friend. [LAUGHTER] And then you can
represent yourself. And you’ll probably
get acquitted. Because you went to Harvard. In fact, the only
downside of this degree is when you run for
Senate, you will have to distance
yourself from it to seem more like
a regular person. You’ll tuck in
your flannel shirts into your freshly pressed
jeans that you just bought. And still, this institution
is going to haunt you. No matter how many
diners you eat at, no matter how many guitar solos
you do with Rascal Flatts, you are Harvard to the grave. You won’t be able to buy a
pickup truck rusty enough to distance yourself from
this place, all right? Mitt Romney– he preferred
to be known as the Mormon Guy to distract himself
from his Harvard past. Now I’d like to get a little
serious for just a moment. I am an American
of Indian origin whose parents were
raised in India. My dad is actually here. They met in Africa,
emigrated to America. And now I am the
star and the creator of my own network
television program. The continents traveled,
the languages mastered, and the standardized
tests prepared and taken for over and over again,
and the cultures navigated are amazing, even to me. My family’s dream about a
future unfettered by limitations imposed by who you know and
dependent only on what you know was only possible in America. Their romance with
this country is more romantic than any romantic
comedy that I could ever write. And it’s all because
they believed, as I do, in the concept of the
inherent fairness that is alive in America
and that here, you could aspire and succeed. And my parents believed
that their children could aspire and succeed
to levels that could not have happened anywhere
else in the world. And that fairness
that my family and I have come to take for
granted– and all Americans take for granted–
is, in many ways, resting on your
shoulders to uphold. You represent those who will
make laws and effect change. And that is truly
an amazing thing. And more than any of the
others graduating this week from Harvard, what you decide
to do in the next 5 to 10 years will affect the rights
of people in this country in a fundamental way. I’m now at the part
of my speech where I am supposed to
give you advice. And I thought, what advice
could I give you guys? Celebrities give
too much device. And people listen
to it too much. In Hollywood, we
all think that we are these wise advice-givers. And most of us have no
education whatsoever. Actresses can become
nutritionists, experts in baby care and
environmental policy. Actors can become governors,
pundits, or even high-ranking officials in religions made up
a mere 60 years ago. [LAUGHS] [LAUGHTER] For two years, I have played an
obstetrician and gynecologist on TV, and damned if I don’t
think I can deliver a baby. So then I was
thinking, well then, who should be giving advice? And the answer is
people like you. You’re better educated. And you’re going to go
out there in the world, and people are going to
listen to what you say, whether you’re good or evil. And that probably scares you. Because some of you
look really young. [LAUGHTER] And I’m afraid a couple
of you are probably evil. That’s just the odds. [LAUGHTER] And to be honest, it scares me. Because you look like
a bunch of tweens. I mean, this is ridiculous. Look at these kids
in these suits. So please, just try to be the
kind of people that give advice to celebrities, not
the other way around. You are entering a
profession where, no matter how bad the
crime or the criminal, you have to defend the
alleged perpetrator. That’s incredible to me. Across the campus, Harvard
Business School graduates are receiving diplomas. And you will need to defend
them for insider trading, or possession of
narcotics, or maybe both if Wolf of Wall
Street is to believed. And the thing I find
most fascinating is that you are responsible
for the language of justice, for the careful and
precise wording, and all those boring
contracts that I sign while I watch
Real Housewives. You wrote the terms
and conditions that I scroll through
quickly while I download the update
for Candy Crush. Terms and conditions
are the only things keeping us from the
purge, everybody. I don’t read them. I just hit Accept. iTunes may own my
ovaries, for all I know. [LAUGHTER] “Employees must wash their
hands before returning to work.” A lawyer wrote that. “You have the right
to remain silent. Anything you say can and
will be used against you in a court of law.” A lawyer wrote that. “Mindy Kaling may not
come within 1,000 feet of Professor Noah Feldman.” A lawyer wrote that. [LAUGHTER] These are protections
that we take for granted. Your dedication to
meticulous reading is a tedium that I
find just so admirable. You take words,
and you turn them into the infrastructure
that keeps our world stable. The seductive Southern
lawyers in John Grisham novels get all the glory– your
Noah Feldmans of the world. But the rest of you,
you form the foundation of our day-to-day lives. It’s back-breaking. And often, there’s
not much glory in it. And in that way,
a lot of you will become the quiet
heroes of our country. However, those of
you who go on to work for Big Pharma
and Philip Morris, you will be the
loud anti-heroes. And someone is certain to make
an AMC series glamorizing you. So congratulations. [LAUGHTER] But basically, either
way, you can’t go wrong. I look at all of you and
see America’s futures– attorneys, corporate lawyers,
public prosecutors, judges, politicians, maybe even the
President of the United States. Those are all positions
of such great influence. Understand that
one day, you will have the power to
make a difference. So use it well. Thank you, graduates. Thank you faculty, parents,
professors, families, everyone. Thank you. Thank you,
movingcommencementspeeches.com. Congratulations. [APPLAUSE AND CHEERS]

Parallelogram Law of Vectors – MeitY OLabs


Parallelogram Law of Vectors Aim: To find the weight of the given body
using the Parallelogram Law of Vectors Let’s understand the main parts of Gravesend�s
Apparatus. Place a paper on the wooden board.
Take pins from the box. Firmly fix the paper on the board using the
pins. Take a thread and pass it over the pulleys
and hang equal weights, say, 20grams, to both ends. Mark it as P and Q. An unknown weight
attached to a third string is tied to the middle of the first thread and marked as O
and S. Hang another 20 grams to both ends.
Place a mirror strip beneath the thread and mark the points with a pencil at the edges
of the mirror where its image coincides. Do this for other two threads.
Remove the paper from the board by releasing the pins.
Place it on the table. Join the marked points with a pencil and a
scale. Assuming a scale of 20 grams, OA=4 centimeters,
OB=4 centimeters to represent P=80 grams weight and Q=80 grams weight respectively. Measure
the either sides of point O with a scale. Measure 4 centimeters on a compass using a
scale. Draw an arc from point B and another arc from
point A joining the previous one and mark it as C. Complete the parallelogram AOBC.
Draw OC. It is found that OC=4.3 centimeters Record the observations in the observation
table. Measure the angle AOB with the help of protractor
and note it. Complete the tabular column with the observations
. Unknown weight, S is equal to eighty six grams
weight. Unknown weight, R is equal to eighty five
point nine six grams weight. Unknown weight is equal to S plus R divided
by two. That is equal to eighty five point nine eight
grams weight. Which is equal to eighty five point nine eight
into ten raise to minus three kilo gram weight.

140 years Bulgarian-Belgian Diplomatic Relations


Welcome to the House of Belgians! (In Bulgarian) Your Excellency, this year we celebrate an important anniversary – 140 years since the establishment of diplomatic relations between the Republic of Bulgaria and the Kingdom of Belgium Belgium played a major role in the economic, trade and educational development of our country right after the Liberation in 1878. It is known that the Belgian constitution served as an example for the creation of the Tarnovo Constitution. Bulgaria also borrowed from Belgium
its national motto – „Unity makes strength“. Are there any other historical facts and figures, which are not so well known in the history of our bilateral relations? I think we can distinguish three big periods in the development of our diplomatic relations. The first, after the Liberation in 1878
until the First World War, was a really golden time. Belgium was still a young nation – it was founded in 1830. It had received a progressive democratic constitution and was the first industrial country in continental Europe, which extended outwards, including in Bulgaria. Belgium developed industry and infrastructure here –
this is the time of the first electric tram. Also in the academic field – one third of Bulgarian engineers received their education in Belgium. The second period is pretty dark. The two countries had joined hostile alliances
and bilateral relations were frozen. The third period marks a renewal – after World War II and especially after the fall of the Berlin Wall and the integration of Bulgaria into the European Union. The Belgian industry returned here, but in many more areas. In the textile and food industries,
in construction and infrastructure. But also in the services sector.
Today UBB is the third largest bank in Bulgaria. The exchange in the field of innovative technologies
is also developing. Our companies not only produce here, but also develop high technologies with the help of
wonderful Bulgarian engineers and mathematicians. Regarding the historical figures,
I would like to congratulate all those Bulgarian citizens – professors, employees, engineers, artists, who have contributed to the deepening of bilateral relations. The difference today is that our relations
are now developing within the EU. We share the same values ​​and principles and together we build rules and directives,
which we must observe. Also, due to the democratization in our relations,
citizens communicate easily and quickly and this fosters bilateral relations. Is that the biggest change in the spirit of our relationship? – Yes. How would you describe the current state of affairs and future prospects for development of our bilateral relations? Is there unused potential for their deepening and progress? I will use diplomatic wording – our relationships are at least excellent. But they can improve in different directions. First, in the area of ​​economy and investment –
Belgian companies have major development projects. But in order to be realized, two conditions are needed. First, there must be a more transparent
and secure legal and regulatory framework especially in public procurement. The second condition is skilled workforce. However, many young graduates emigrate. I urge the Bulgarian government to give more hope to young people to stay here by investing more in education and healthcare. The second direction of development is university exchange. I repeat – we are two nations with many engineers
and there is room for close cooperation between us. The third opportunity is about balancing trade relations. Today, Bulgaria is ahead of Belgium in export. Development is very good in the area of ​​investment. In the last two years Bulgaria made major investments in Belgium in the area of ​​electricity. If Belgium does not want to sink into the darkness, this is partly due to a Bulgarian company,
which invests in the Vilvoorde gas station. The next area is tourism, which is related to many people. You have an exceptional country offering
not only beaches, but also mineral springs. There is a need to develop this area, to develop SPA tourism. SPA is a Belgian word – coming from the name of a Belgian city, which has successfully developed health tourism,
as could be the case here. Your Excellency, during your diplomatic career you have worked in many parts of the world – from Seoul to New York. What were your expectations for the Bulgarian people
before the beginning of your posting to Sofia? Is there anything that surprised or impressed you
after your arrival here? I chose this posting for various reasons. The first is that in the diplomatic system of Belgium the posting in Sofia is regional. It’s with great jurisdiction spreading from Illyria to Istanbul and from the Danube to the Dardanelles. Most of the countries are from the Western Balkans. Four countries – the main one, of course, is Bulgaria, but also Albania, the Republic of North Macedonia and the Republic of Kosovo. These are four separate countries
at a different stage in EU integration. I found it very interesting. This is also a very important geostrategic area, influenced by the great powers, as well as regional ones such as Russia and Turkey. The stake for the European Union here is to direct these forces towards European interests. It was also interesting for me that Bulgaria had been an EU member for 10 years. I want to be present during the political and economic transition in the process of integration. I am undoubtedly impressed by the exceptional Bulgarian Presidency of the Council of the EU. Bulgaria has shown courage and wisdom by focusing on an important political priority – the long-term perspective for the integration
of the Western Balkans into the EU. In doing so, Bulgaria offers a good future, a third path, different from anarchy or autocracy, with which the Balkans are often associated. Nowadays, Bulgarians associate Belgium with the excellent chocolate and beer, but also because it is in the heart of Europe, because of the headquarters of most of the
EU and NATO institutions in Brussels. Is there anything else that Bulgarians don’t know about your country yet? First of all, thank you for associating Belgium with more than chocolate, beer, fries, diamonds or movie animation. For example, now we are talking in French. But Belgium is a federal multicultural country with three national languages ​​– Dutch, French and German. Belgium was a battleground for all European powers. It developed a sense of realism and pragmatism,
but it also created surrealism in painting and poetry. All these elements – multiculturalism, the battlefield,
pragmatism and visioning, have made us kings of compromise. We have developed a structured way to prevent conflicts,
by patiently reaching consensus. This is Belgium’s motto at the UN Security Council: “Fostering consensus, acting for peace”. For this reason, Belgium was chosen as the seat of the EU and NATO. And that’s probably why it’s so often invited
to preside over the Council of the EU… Maybe another little known fact is That, besides being a country of engineers and intermediaries, we also have 11 Nobel Prize winners – five Peace Prizes, five in Natural Sciences – Medicine, Chemistry and Physics, and one in Literature. What Belgians still do not know about our country? Just as Belgium is more than a country of chocolate and beer, Bulgaria is more than a country of rakia, rose water or yogurt. In fact, it plays a significant role in a geostrategic area. This is where the evangelization of Western Europe began. Bulgarian is the Latin of Slavic languages. Belgians do not know that Bulgaria is also a country of engineers. I recently learned that a Bulgarian invented the airbag. Also, a Bulgarian engineer created the computer. А Belgian, on the other hand, contributed to the design of the web space. So we can imagine what the result would be from our collaboration in new technologies. Of course, Bulgaria also has wonderful personalities. In Philosophy – Tzvetan Todorov… In Psychoanalysis – Julia Kristeva… The world-famous artist Christo… Elias Canetti – winner of the Nobel Prize for Literature, born in Rousse. Mr. Ambassador, would you please share with us what inspires and excites you beyond your diplomatic career? First of all, I am inspired by my wife, who has been following me in my career for 30 years, as well as my three children. For me, this is a priority and a source of inspiration.
Also philosophy, motorcycling, bicycles. Bulgaria is also a country of bicycles –
something else that can be further developed. Visiting Orthodox monasteries and Thracian tombs also inspires me. You mentioned your wife – I know she is an excellent cook. What is your favorite Bulgarian dish? Difficult question. Bulgarian cuisine seems a little close to me to Korean – from my wife’s home country. I love all kinds of dishes with cheese on the oven and large plates with different vegetables. In the Bansko area they are prepared especially well. What will you miss the most after the end of your posting here? It’s too early to talk about this because I haven’t left yet. I think I will miss them the most the nice faces and magnificent landscapes of Bulgaria. One last question: this year the Bulgarian Diplomatic Service celebrates its 140th anniversary. In your opinion, which is the most significant achievement of the Bulgarian diplomacy? As I pointed out, this is the Bulgarian Presidency of the Council of the EU. Bulgaria has played a leading role in this geopolitical region. It can continue doing so if the EU does not look at the region just as a field for the big players. Bulgaria needs to establish itself as a force,
to build a world that fits its vision – the development of democracy, the rule of law and human rights. Bulgaria can play a role in building a stronger European Union. Thank you.

ND Student Researches at the Diplomatic Archives of Korea


I’m here in Seoul this summer for 10 weeks.
I’ve been doing archival research at the Diplomatic Archives of Korea
which is in the Gangnam district of Seoul. I’ve been taking a look at some microfilms, also some digitized records, all produced by the South Korean foreign
ministry. My senior thesis is on the bilateral relationship between South Korea and the
United States, particularly during the late nineteen seventies to early
eighties when South Korea was going through a very tumultuous period. There
was this massive movement for democracy that clashed with an authoritarian
government that was supported by the United States. The existing historiography is
mostly based on U.S. government documents and U.S. sources. Part of what I’m trying to do is to
take a look at the South Korea sources and see how they match or how they differ. The Undergraduate Research Opportunity
Program at Notre Dame has afforded me this opportunity to really delve into a topic
that I’m interested in. I hope this experience is a springboard toward either further research or
further study. And eventually I hope to do something in the realm of international affairs. Someone could easily say that South Korea was bound to go from
a dictatorship to democracy but I think that doesn’t take into account all the
twists, all the uncertainties, all the close moments that took place. So
my job is to take all these things into account and produce my own interpretation
that will hopefully explain these things in a way that is accessible and that is also insightful.

Why North Dakota Wasn’t Technically a State Until 2012


This video was made possible by Skillshare. Start learning new skills for free for two
months at skl.sh/hai28. North Dakota is the type of place most people
don’t know much about—if you were to ask a random person on the street to name a fact
about North Dakota, they’d probably say to you, “hey man, it’s really weird that
you just came up to me on the street and demanded that I tell you a fact about North Dakota.” If you really pushed them, the best answer
they’d be likely to muster is that North Dakota is located north of South Dakota. But despite its oft-overlooked status, North
Dakota is much more than just a sparsely populated hat that sits on South Dakota’s head. It has the nation’s lowest unemployment
rate, it’s where the world’s largest hamburger was eaten, it produces most of the wheat that’s
in American-made pasta, and there’s probably other interesting stuff about it too beyond
the first three Google results for, “North Dakota Facts.” For example, until recently, it may not have
been a state at all. To understand why, we have to first look at
Article VI of the US Constitution, which says, “The Members of the several State Legislatures,
and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States,
shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution.” While that might be less readable than Moby
Dick, what that section means is actually pretty simple: state officers from all three
branches of government—legislative, executive, and judicial—have to take an oath that they
will support the US Constitution, but here’s the problem: until recently, the North Dakota
state constitution didn’t require its executive officers—like the Governor—to take an
oath of office. That may seem like a minor issue, but if there’s
one thing autocorrect has taught us, it’s that small mistakes can have a big impact. Because of that omission, some experts argue
that North Dakota didn’t actually meet the qualifications for statehood, which means
that, until the state constitution was fixed, it was never actually a state. Now, to be clear, not everyone agrees with
that argument. After all, when it comes to the US Constitution,
getting everyone to agree is kind of like trying to have a nuanced debate in a YouTube
comments section: it’s scientifically impossible. Some Constitutional scholars argue that while
North Dakota’s state constitution did violate Article VI, that doesn’t mean it wasn’t
a state, as violating Article VI doesn’t affect Congress’ power to admit states to
the Union, which is laid out in Article IV, which says, “New States may be admitted
by the Congress into this Union; but no new States shall be formed or erected within the
Jurisdiction of any other State; nor any State be formed by the Junction of two or more States,
or parts of States, without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as
well as of the Congress.” That section gives Congress the power to make
new states, and says not to put a state inside of another state, or to combine or separate
states without their permission. If only the British and French believed in
this whole, “not dividing pre-existing states,” thing when the took out the crayolas and drew
a bunch of arbitrary borders around the Middle East leading to much of the ethnic and geopolitical
conflict of tod… oh, sorry, too much? Those aforementioned restrictions are the
only ones on Congress’ state-making power, except, of course, for the unofficial rule
of, “no shirt, no shoes, too many democrats, not enough swing votes, no statehood.” Damn, who would have thought that this politics-related
video would get so… political? Given that Congress’ power to make states
is so broad, the question is, because Congress said North Dakota is a state, does that make
it a state regardless of whether or not it violated the Constitution? Normally, the answer would most likely be
yes—it’s still a state. After all, states violate the US Constitution
sort of all the time. When they do, there’s a lawsuit, and it
gets taken to the courts. For example, if Texas amended their state
constitution to require everyone to always root for the Dallas Cowboys, that would violate
freedom of expression, and thus the US Constitution, and the Supreme Court would strike it down—but
that would just mean that people in Texas don’t have to cheer for the Cowboys, not
that Texas wasn’t a state. In other words, the argument goes, the issue
of statehood and Constitutional compliance are separate. But here’s where things get tricky: North
Dakota’s statehood issue doesn’t stop with Article VI. See, the original law that made North Dakota
a state was something called the Enabling Act of 1889, and Section Four of that Act
declared that in order to become a state, North Dakota must make a state constitution—which
they did—but also that, “The [state] constitution shall not be repugnant to the Constitution
of the United States,” which is where we run into problems. That’s because, by violating Section VI
of the US Constitution, one could argue that the North Dakota state constitution was, in
fact, “repugnant to the Constitution of the United States.” It just depends on your definition of repugnant—something
I might call repugnant, other people might call, “Taco Bell.” But, if we believe that violating Article
VI is sufficiently repugnant, that would mean that not only did North Dakota violate Article
VI of the US Constitution, but by doing so, it also failed to meet the qualifications
for statehood set out by the Enabling Act of 1889, which was supposed to make it a state
and because of that, its statehood has always been illegitimate. Ultimately, the issue is now moot—a North
Dakota historian named John Rolczynski noticed the problem in 1995 and spent the next 17
years lobbying the state legislature—or, I suppose, what was then the territorial legislature—to
fix it. Eventually, in 2011, a North Dakota legislator
took up his cause, and got a constitutional amendment put on the ballot, which was approved
in 2012. So not to worry—North Dakota is definitely
a state now, which means we can all go back to treating it the way we always have: ignoring
it completely. You know, all of these problems probably could
have been evaded if only the writers of the North Dakota constitution were just… better. See, part of the issue was probably that back
then, they didn’t have Skillshare. That’s because Skillshare’s writing courses,
whether Storytelling 101, Creative Writing for All, or Creative Nonfiction, each help
you hone your writing skills which can help you in work, at school, or just with your
own projects. Effective writing is just one of countless
skills you can learn with any of Skillshare’s tens of thousands of courses. A membership to Skillshare is quite reasonable,
it works out to less than $10 a month, but by going to skl.sh/hai28, you’ll get two
months completely for free, and you’ll even be helping support Half as Interesting.

“Copy & Paste’ – Hidden Asperger’s– Girls with Aspergers | Niamh McCann | TEDxDunLaoghaire


Translator: Leonardo Silva
Reviewer: Raissa Mendes What do you think
when you hear this phrase: “He bent over backwards”? Or this: “She was on the ball”? What you probably
didn’t imagine was this. Or maybe this. The English language is full
of colorful expressions, metaphors, slang, and we use these in the conversations
that we have every day. For 99% of the population, it’s a comfortable means of communication. For the remaining 1%, however, all that colorfulness
is not only uncomfortable, but extremely confusing. And not only because people
bend over backwards or are on the ball, but because a simple wink
can have different meanings in different contexts. And sometimes, a friend will say something
to another friend which sounds like an insult, but it makes them laugh instead of cry. Who are these people
who see funny pictures of flexible men or who can’t understand sarcasm? These people have a condition
called Asperger’s syndrome, which is a type
of high-functioning autism. Now usually, when I say “autism” and I ask people
what they understand by it, they tell me it looks
something like this, your quirky genius type, stimming, bouncing, flapping, rocking, or my personal favorite: restricted interests. Yes, it is true that there are people
with Asperger’s who display these traits. It is also true that these
are only stereotypes and a small part of the entire picture. If Asperger’s were
as easy to spot as this, then there would be
no problem at all in diagnosing it. Unfortunately, Asperger’s, like life,
is far more complicated. And if you’re a girl with Asperger’s,
things get even more tricky because all the diagnostic tools
that professionals use were designed to spot Asperger’s in boys. Now, this gender bias leaves
thousands of Asperger girls undiagnosed, unsupported, sometimes even after
they’ve taken the test. My younger brother was diagnosed
as being on the spectrum when he was three and a half. His autism was obvious, or stereotypical. He was late to talk, he bounced and flapped his hands, and he wouldn’t make eye contact. My parents took him
to get an assessment done. Within two months, he was diagnosed, and the proper supports
were put in place to help him. Fast-forward eight years,
and he’s doing just great. And then, there was me. I didn’t bounce, I didn’t flap. I was a shy but diligent student, I got good grades
and I didn’t cause trouble. But what I did do
was hide under the table and cover my ears at lunchtime because the noise of my chatting peers
was too much for me to cope with. I was quiet, I let others make up the rules
of the games we played, and I shared my sparkly pens
when no one else would. And it took 14 years for anyone
to notice that I was struggling, desperately. For many high-functioning girls,
it takes even longer. Why is this? Shouldn’t our confusion
around other people be obvious to our teachers, our friends, let alone our parents? And what I find is that there is a very
simple, if unfortunate, reason for this. It’s because of something we do to cope. We do it subconsciously, but it results in us
camouflaging our autistic traits, and it is called “masking”. Asperger girls are usually
bright and sensitive, and when we’re younger, we use these qualities to achieve
a kind of superficial social competence. Like detectives, we watch, and we listen, and we try to make sense
of the things people do and why they do them. It’s a hard job. It’s exhausting. We work both day and night shifts. The clues often lead us wrong. But we don’t have any other choice, because it’s our means of coping in a world which is
so socially confusing to us. When I was younger, I would mimic
my favorite cartoon characters: their way of walking, the words they used and how they spoke to one another. I absorbed this information and then applied it
to my social interactions, almost like copying and pasting. But I quickly learned
that life is not a cartoon, people are not characters
who behave predictably, and imitation can only take
an Asperger girl so far. By the time they reach adolescence, trust me, they are mentally exhausted
and emotionally wrecked. Social relationships become
so much more complicated, and for an Asperger girl, every conversation becomes
like a math problem. And I remind you here
that we are not all quirky genius types. I managed to mask
my Asperger’s for 14 years, and then, I crashed. The loving people in my life
rushed in to help. And one day, I found myself
sitting in a room with two occupational psychologists, a bag of feathers, thumbtacks and a book about flying frogs. This apparently was the ADOS test, the standardized test
used to identify autism, the same test that my brother took
seven years previously. They set me some simple tasks, and they asked me questions
about my life, my family, my interests. I responded to these
in the only way that I knew how: by copying and pasting the correct answer. So I smiled, I shook hands, I gave eye contact, as I knew I was supposed to. I’m not sure what the story with the flying frogs
was meant to tell anyone about me, but apparently it told them
that I wasn’t on the autistic spectrum. In fact, I scored a zero. I failed. I “really, really, really”
didn’t have autism. But it wasn’t me who had failed the test. It was the test that had failed me. And there are women in their thirties,
forties, fifties, and even older, who are only just getting diagnosed now, usually after identifying
their difficulties themselves by taking online quizzes. And this simply isn’t good enough. These women have spent
decades of their lives not understanding
a crucial part of themselves. They can end up
in the mental health system, being misdiagnosed
with mental health disorders, medicated and treated
for things they don’t have, and then suffering the consequences
and the complications of these medications. In a recent survey, 23% of girls with anorexia were
subsequently discovered to have autism. Twenty-three percent. A further 40% have
coexisting anxiety disorders. Countless more are being
treated for depression. And I wonder: how many of these girls might have been spared
these mental health difficulties had their underlying Asperger’s
been identified sooner? I got the correct diagnosis in the end; not through ADOS, but in spite of it. I am one of the lucky ones, and I don’t want any more girls
to slip through the net like I did. We need to become better
at identifying difficulties in girls, even if they’re subtle. We need an accurate and broader tool
to diagnose autism in all its many forms. Because autism is not black and white; it is a spectrum of color. And we need to open our eyes
to see all of it. Thank you. (Applause)