According to ProPublica, it’s commonly done using Leahy Laws:
The recommendations came from a special committee of State Department officials known as the Israel Leahy Vetting Forum. The panel, made up of Middle East and human rights experts, is named for former Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., the chief author of 1997 laws that requires the U.S. to cut off assistance to any foreign military or law enforcement units — from battalions of soldiers to police stations — that are credibly accused of flagrant human rights violations.
…
Over the years, hundreds of foreign units, including from Mexico, Colombia and Cambodia, have been blocked from receiving any new aid. Officials say enforcing the Leahy Laws can be a strong deterrent against human rights abuses.
https://www.propublica.org/article/israel-gaza-blinken-leahy-sanctions-human-rights-violations
It wasn’t me!
Just pointing out the headline seems to imply it’s from WaPo when in fact it was written by RT.
This is a repost of an RT article. https://www.rt.com/news/594456-biden-israel-indiscriminate-bombing/
Agreed. Here’s some more context:
Korea has the second-lowest number of physicians among members of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, leading to some of the highest doctors’ wages among surveyed member nations.
Doctors in Korea earn the most among 28 member countries that provided related data. Following Korea, the highest earners are in the Netherlands, Germany, Ireland and the UK. The US was among the countries for which data was not provided.
Measured by PPP, which takes into account local living costs, salaried specialists earned an average of $192,749 annually in 2020, According to the 2023 OECD Health Statistics report. That was 60 percent more than the OECD average. Korean GP salaries ranked sixth.
… The country also ranked low in the number of medical school graduates – 7.3 per 100,000 people, which is the third-lowest after Israel and Japan, and nearly half the OCED average of 14 graduates for every 100,000 people.
These doctors are not telling the whole story. More context from the article:
Public surveys show that a majority of South Koreans support the government’s push to create more doctors, and critics say that doctors, one of the highest-paid professions in South Korea, worry about lower incomes due to a rise in the number of doctors.
Officials say more doctors are required to address a long-standing shortage of physicians in rural areas and in essential but low-paying specialties. But doctors say newly recruited students would also try to work in the capital region and in high-paying fields like plastic surgery and dermatology. They say the government plan would also likely result in doctors performing unnecessary treatments due to increased competition.
Your comment seems to suggest that the boat was far away from Taiwan, which was not the case. For context, the boat was touring Taiwan’s Kinmen Islands, which are just a few kilometers/miles from the Chinese mainland (Wikipedia says 10 km/6.2 mi), and had to veer toward the Chinese side of the water to avoid shoals.
According to the article, this seems like an escalation by the PRC:
For years, sightseeing boat tours between Kinmen and Xiamen, the closest city on the Chinese mainland, have offered Taiwanese tourists a chance to gaze at China’s dazzling skyline without the hassle of border checks, with China operating similar tour boats for its citizens too.
…
Ian Chong, a political scientist at the National University of Singapore, said the latest measures are part of China’s “gray zone” tactics, referring to coercive or aggressive state actions that stop short of open warfare – something Beijing has used increasingly in recent years in the East and South China Seas, as well as toward Taiwan.
The inspection of a Taiwanese tour boat by China’s coast guard, which Chong said had not happened before, was meant to provoke Taiwan and see if it would either escalate or accept this sort of behavior as given.
To be more specific:
Asbestos is a known carcinogen to humans, meaning it is capable of causing cancer. When asbestos fibres become airborne and are inhaled, they are known to lodge in the lungs and other parts of the airways, where they can cause scarring, inflammation, asbestosis – an inflammatory condition leading to permanent lung damage – and cell damage that lead to cancers, including mesothelioma, an incurable cancer of the lining that covers organs such as the lungs. For decades, however, the risk from swallowing asbestos has been thought of as small as most fibres were assumed to pass through the gut and be expelled in faeces.
Huh? The headline says “eases” not “erased”.
You can buy BYD cars outside of China. For example:
The company says it plans to launch three new models in Europe within the coming year in addition to the five models it is already selling that include sedans, hatchbacks and SUVs. BYD has 230 outlets in 19 European countries, it says.
https://apnews.com/article/china-byd-hungary-autos-evs-72587976c85d3f9b56d990a6296c73b4
No BYD cars in the US (yet), except trucks and buses:
BYD has been making electric buses in the United States for years and supplies cities such as Los Angeles and Long Beach from a factory in Lancaster, California, built a decade ago.
https://www.reuters.com/technology/chinas-byd-takes-cautious-approach-us-global-ev-push-2023-01-18/
Thanks for the recognition, @flooppoolf@lemmy.world 😊
My comment is more to you talking about trains in general, as there are already regular trains in place. This is more about where high-speed rail fits in. AP News also has an article on it:
“I’m so happy and very excited that finally we can ride a bullet train in Indonesia,” said Christianto Nusatya, a Jakarta resident who joined a public test ride last week. “But still, I would prefer to choose a regular train or car, because Jakarta-Bandung is too short and not worth it to be reached by high-speed train.”
Deddy Herlambang, executive director of the Jakarta-based NGO Institute for Transportation Studies, said the public does not really need a high-speed train on the Jakarta-Bandung route because there were already many other ways of traveling between the two cities.
He said the bullet train would have a significant economic impact if it connected Jakarta and Surabaya. However, he was pessimistic that the railway project would make a profit in less than 30 years of operation.
“The high-speed train cannot replace the old transportation that previously existed,” Herlambang said, “People, of course, will prefer to use far cheaper modes of transportation for short distance trips.”
The article literally tells you why:
While ticket prices for the train have not been finalised, the company behind the train estimates that a one-way ticket could cost between 250,000 Indonesian rupiah and 350,000 Indonesian rupiah ($16 to $22.60).
In comparison, a shuttle bus fare can cost as low as $5, which is approximately 77,685 Indonesian rupiah. And that difference can mean a lot for the average citizen.
Aninda Dewayanti, who lives in Bandung, is sceptical about how practical the train would be for ordinary Indonesians.
“It’s so expensive,” she told the BBC. “There are other transport options with comparable prices. I’d rather take a normal train or a bus.”
Thanks. I’ve updated the title.
Thanks for spotting this. Looks like the article changed its title and updated the text after I posted it the first time.
Right. From the article:
Lisa Kelly, who teaches criminal law at Queen’s University in Ontario, said there is no requirement in Canada’s legal system for a victim to participate, if there is other compelling evidence.
“In this case, there is another doctor and nurse, and possibly others, who could provide credible and reliable evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that the patient had not consented to the sterilization,” Kelly said.
While police and prosecutors have discretion, Kelly said, they "do not have the discretion to simply turn a blind eye to what appears to be evidence of a serious aggravated assault.”
China did make some change by broadening its territorial claims (both in India and South China Sea) with the release of a new map.
With the nine-dash line, you asked a great (and extremely contested) question. The short answer is that China isn’t the only country with historical evidence to support its claim to the area. Both Vietnam and the Philippines, for example, can also make a case.
In fact, I would point you to Philippines v. China. In this case, on 12 July 2016, an arbitral tribunal constituted under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), of which China is a member, concluded that: “… while it would not “rule on any question of sovereignty … and would not delimit any maritime boundary”, China’s historic rights claims over maritime areas (as opposed to land masses and territorial waters) within the “nine-dash line” have no lawful effect unless entitled to under UNCLOS.” (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philippines_v._China).
Good eye. China added an extra dash to extend its claim to Taiwan.
And that purple dotted line is called the “nine-dash line.”
I don’t think so. There are other important parts in the article:
…