Khuu,+Minh-Hue

=AFRICA=

---
= =

= = =1.=

Period 4. History October 29th, 2009** = = =Two Passenger Trains Collide in Egypt, Killing 25=
 * Minh Khuu

This article was about a passenger train that collided with the back of a second one just outside of Cairo on Saturday. Destroying several passenger cars, killing at least 25 people, and at least 55 others were injured in Saturday's accident, the official said. The train was heading to the southern city of Assuit from Cairo, and the train that got hit was travelling from Giza province to the oasis town of Fayoum.
 * __Synopsis:__**


 * __Source:__**
 * 1)*New York Times** []
 * 2)*The Age** []

__**Comparison:**__
Both articles had pretty good information about the incident, however article 1 had a much more lengthy article with more description. Both about the countrie's worst recent disaster, when a train heading to southern Egypt caught fire, killing 363 people. Article 1 talked about the Girza district while the other article didn't, Article 1 also told us that the official couldn't speak on a condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to talk to the media, the other article didn't, Article 1 also talked about the most recent incident that had happen which was similar to this one, it was a passenger train barreling toward a station collided with a second train in August 2006, and killing 58 people. Finally, article 1 told us the government plans to develop the rail infrastructure. Article 2 had a picture, which article 1 didn't have which helped visualize the incident.

__Opinion:__
I think this article was believable, however there wasn't any quotes used in both articles. This made me wonder if this article was true or not, however in article 1 it did say that the official couldn't speak because he had no authority, so it did made me tolerate it. I believe that all countries in Africa should start making safer rail to prevent these tragedies from happening ever again. Also they should make their trains better so that they won't catch on fire like on the 2002 incident. Further more, I think the press should have the right to get all the information they need to create a better article, this article didn't have to much description and i think it is because they could interview the official.

1. "Two Passenger Trains Collide in Egypt, Killing 25." (2009): 1. Web. 29 Oct 2009. <[]>.
 * __MLA SOURCE:__**

2. "Two passenger trains collide in Egypt, killing 25." (2009): 1. Web. 29 Oct 2009. <[]>.

//**--**// =2.=

= =

Period 4 History November 5th, 2009 Thursday, 10:16 PM PST**
 * Minh Khuu

=Somalia: Pirates Seek $7 Million for British= Published: October 30, 2009 (Article)

__**Synopsis:**__ This article was about how Somali pirates are demanding a $7 million ransom for a British couple seized from their 38-foot sailboat off the Seychelles a week ago. The boat was hijacked off the coast of Africa. In the taped telephone call to the BBC (British Broadcast Corporation), the man said “We only need a little amount of $7 million,” and that the couple, Paul and Rachel Chandler, 58 and 55, would not be harmed unless the pirates were attacked by the Western naval task force that was shadowing them.


 * __Sources:__**
 * 1) *NY Times** http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/31/world/africa/31briefs-Somalia.html?ref=africa
 * 2) *Botston News** http://www.boston.com/news/world/africa/articles/2009/10/31/pirates_seek_7m_ransom_for_uk_couple/

Article 2 had a lengthier article, the title was also different as well. Article 1's title was Somalia: Pirates Seek $7 Million for British, while article 2's title was Pirates seek $7m ransom for UK couple. Article 2 was more detailed and used a lot more quotes. Both articles used this quote //“We only need a little amount of $7 million.’’// Article 1 had a quote about NATO (//“[|NATO] operations” had “destroyed a lot of equipment”//), article 2 didn't, however article 2 did mention about the NATO. Article 1 didn't use a quote when Rachel Chandler talked. Article 2 did. //They tell us that we’re safe and we shouldn’t worry and that if we want anything they will provide it in terms of food and water and everything like that,’’ she said, according to a transcript. “Physically we’re fine, physically we’re healthy.’’// Both articles had different authors, one named John and the other named Associated Press. Article 2 also told us that the captive couple sent a distress signal on the 23rd of October, Article 1 didn't have any information what so ever about this. Article 2 also told us a more specific location in Somalia in which the captice couple was held.
 * __Comparison:__**

__**Opinion:**__ I think this article was believable, however article 1 seemed liked it was rush due to its lack of quotes and information. Article 2 had more detail and quotes, making me believe that this happen. This is also very similar to an episode of South Park I watched. It was called "Fat Beard" episode 1307 (Season 13 Ep 07) *LINK http://www.southparkstudios.com/episodes/220764. They were similar to one another because both the Somalia pirates they steal a big yacht. Also, they used the kids as ransom like the British people in the articles, however the kids weren't //really// captive. I think people should stop pirate from forming in Somalia, it could be a lot more serious can cause more deaths and financial loss. I don't think the pirates will kill the couple, but might if they are desperate enough and really need the money. Somalia is a poor country, so I think that the British should just give them the money, but give in small amounts.

1) Burns, John F. "Somalia: Pirates Seek $7 Million for British Couple." (2009): 1. Web. 6 Nov 2009. .
 * __MLA SOURCE:__**

2) Associated Press, . "Pirates seek $7m ransom for UK couple." (2009): 1. Web. 6 Nov 2009. .

//**--**// =3.=

= =

Period 4 History November 11th, 2009 3:33 PM PST**
 * Minh Khuu

=Girlfriend 'kills Uganda general / UGANDAN GENERAL MURDERED BY HIS LOVER= Published Novermber 10th, 2009 (Article)

__Synopsis:__
Army commander Maj. Gen. James Kazini is dead. Kazini was allegedly murdered by his girl friend, Lydia Draru, in Namuwongo, a Kampala suburb, during a scuffle at her residence yesterday morning. Draru was arrested and whisked away to the Kampala Central Police Station where she was held together with her cousin, a girl in Senior Six. Kazini, whose army number is RA 0133, had been one of the longest serving army officers. The Police and security sources said Kazini was killed by a blow on his head with a blunt metallic object during a domestic quarrel between 5:00am and 6:00am. The blow left a deep gush on the general’s head, causing him to bleed to death. Wearing a yellow shirt, the general, who had a career of mixed fortunes, died in the doorway of the house he was renting for the girlfriend. Just before 10:00am, the body was removed and transferred to Mulago hospital for a postmortem check. Draru then confessed, she said “I have killed him and I don’t care where you take me.”

__Sources:__

 * 1) *BBC** http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/8352545.stm
 * 2) *Africa News Online** http://africanewsonline.blogspot.com/2009/11/ugandan-general-murdered-by-his-lover.html

__Comparison:__
Both articles had pretty lengthy descriptions about the murder, but article 2 provided a lot more description about the murder. Article 2 used more names and quotes. Article 1 didn't use any quotes at all. Both articles had different titles, article 1 title was "Girlfriend 'kills Uganda general," and article 2 was "UGANDAN GENERAL MURDERED BY HIS LOVER." Both article's titles covered what they were going to say, however I think article 1's title was more specific, because it has "girlfriend" instead of "lover." Article 1 didn't talk about how the murder happened, instead it talked a lot more about the background history of the commander. Both articles mentioned that an iron bar was the tool used to kill the commander. Article 2 seems a lot more reliable than article 1, due to the fact that article 2 had a lot more description about how the murder happened. It said the times when the killing happened, the name of the "girlfriend", description about how the iron bar looked like, and used quotes from the suspect and investigators. Article 1 had more background information about the commander and it helped see the significance of his death.

__Opinion:__
I believe that the investigators should find the DNA of the fingerprints on the iron bar as fast as they possibly can, so they may have 100% proof that Draru did it or not. Draru could be lying to cover up what someone else did. If Draru did do it, than I believe she should be tormented at least, rather than just being sent to jail. The commander was a very strong leader and his death could really impact Uganda. If Draru didn't do it than Uganda polices should search for the true suspect, interrogate her/him and Draru. I don't like killing so I believe that the person who commuted this crime shouldn't be killed, instead they should be tormented.

1)** "Girlfriend 'kills Uganda general' ." (2009): 1. Web. 11 Nov 2009. .
 * __MLA SOURCE:__
 * 2)** Candia, Steven. "UGANDAN GENERAL MURDERED BY HIS LOVER." (2009): 1. Web. 11 Nov 2009. .

//**--**// =4.=

= =

Period 4 History November 18th, 2009 6:00 PM PST**
 * Minh Khuu

= Kenya: New Law Shuts Door to Gay Weddings / Kenya to Exclude Gay Rights from New Constitution= Published November 18th 2009 (Article)

__Synopsis:__
This article is about how a new law is preventing gay marriage from being legal in Kenya. This also includes lesbian marriage as well, meaning you can not marry a person of the same the same gender as they are. The Committee of Experts on Constitutional Review said at the weekend they had shrugged off pressure from some British MPs who wanted gay rights to be included in the draft Constitution they are preparing. According to the document, every adult will have the right to marry a person of the opposite sex, but this will be based on the "free consent of the parties". It reads: "The parties to the marriage are entitled to equal rights at the time of marriage, during and at the dissolution of their union." The proposal by the committee of experts comes exactly a month after two Kenyan men became the first gay couple to openly wed in London, sparking a huge debate on morality issues in the country. Some people are agreeing with this new law, but most is disagreeing. Most coming from other countries like UK.

__Sources:__

 * 1) * All Africa** http://allafrica.com/stories/200911180992.html
 * 2) * Purple Union** http://www.purpleunions.com/blog/2009/10/kenya-to-exclude-gay-rights-from-new.html

__Comparison:__
Both articles talked about the new law, and how it bans gay marriage in Kenya. Both articles tell that it is a controversial law that should or shouldn't be a law. Both articles says that most people don't agree with the law. However, they both had differences as well. Article 1 was a lot longer and had more detail. Article 2 had a very short article, however it contained a decent portion of it. Both articles used this quote //"We told them that such a thing cannot happen because if we did so, a majority of Kenyans would reject the draft during the forthcoming referendum," he told journalists last month.// Article 1 contained more quotes and had additional information about the document that declared the new law. Both articles had different titles and both generally meant the same. I think article 2 had a much more descriptive title (Kenya to Exclude Gay Rights from New Constitution) compared to article 1 ( Kenya: New Law Shuts Door to Gay Weddings).

__Opinion:__
I think they shouldn't ban gay marriage at Kenya. If you think about it, if you ban gay marriage than less people will decide to have sexual intercourse with the same gender, instead they will be force to have sexual intercourse with the opposite gender. This will cause more pregnancy and increase the world population. If you increase the world population there will be more carbon emissions, therefore adding more greenhouse gas in the atmosphere. If there is more greenhouse gas in the atmosphere than Earth will absorb the light and heat energy of the Sun, and more of the heat energy will be retained in Earth, therefore increasing the temperature, that will cause the ice caps to melt, causing floods. I don't think gay marriage is bad, I think its bad to give people less rights to do what they want, and not be arrested.


 * __MLA SOURCE:__**
 * 1)** Opiyo, Dave. "Kenya: New Law Shuts Door to Gay Weddings ." (2009): 1. Web. 19 Nov 2009. .


 * 2)** Scott, J. "Kenya to Exclude Gay Rights from New Constitution ." (2009): 1. Web. 19 Nov 2009. .

//**--**// =5.=

= =

Period 4 History November 27th, 2009 12:34 PM PST**
 * Minh Khuu

=Benin: One Killed in Attack by Pirates/ Benin: Suspected Pirates Attack Tanker Off Benin= Published November 24th, 2009 (Article)

Synopsis:
This article is about how an oil tanker was killed by pirates. A Ukrainian crew member and stealing the contents of the ship’s safe, the Benin Navy said Tuesday. The ship was carrying crude oil from Nigeria when pirates raided it, the navy said. The pirates attacked the vessel some 18 nautical miles (33km) off the coast of Benin, in what correspondents say is the country's first such attack. Benin-based journalist Esther Tola told the BBC that the pirates were thought to be from Nigeria. The IMB has previously warned of heightened piracy risks along shipping routes in Nigeria and Ghana, to the east and west of Benin.It said attacks usually took place while ships were at anchor or close to coastal areas, unlike in eastern Africa, where Somali pirates strike ships hundreds of miles out to sea. More than 10 ships and 200 hostages are currently being held by pirates operating in waters off Somalia.

**Sources:**

 * 1) *NY Times** http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/25/world/africa/25briefs-Benin.html?ref=africa
 * 2) *allAfrica** http://allafrica.com/stories/200911250231.html

Comparison:
Both articles described about the attack by the pirates however, article 1 was very short and did not give a lot of detail on the attack. It was very ambiguous and i didn't understand what truly happen, until I read article 2. Article 2 was a lot lengthier and had a lot more detail about the attack by the pirates at Benin. None of the articles used any quotes, however they did use summaries of quotes instead. The both used //"Pirates suspected to come from Nigeria have attacked an oil tanker off the coast of west Africa, killing a Ukrainian seaman, the commander of Benin's naval forces says"// Article 1 used "said" instead of "says" and that was the only similarity they shared, beside talking about the same subject. Article 2 had more facts about the pirates and what they had done for the past couple of months (and years possibly). Article 2 also described the situation, when the Benin tanker was attacked. Both had different titles and authors.

Opinion:
I think that the government of Benin should try to arrest the pirates convicting all of these terrible crimes, I think its horrible that all these people are suffering, because of the pirates. The pirates have kidnapped, stolen, and killed many innocent people. I think that all the countries of Africa should contribute to stop the acts of the pirates so that less crime will be convicted.


 * __MLA SOURCE:__**
 * 1)** "Benin: One Killed in Attack by Pirates ." (2009): 1. Web. 27 Nov 2009. .


 * 2)** "Benin: Suspected Pirates Attack Tanker Off Benin ." (2009): 1. Web. 27 Nov 2009. .

//**--**// =6.= = =

Period 4 History December 2nd, 2009 5:30 PM PST**
 * Minh Khuu

=Sudanese Christian, Silva Kashif, 16, lashed 50 times for wearing 'short' skirt against Islamic law / Sudan: Girl Lashed 50 Times Over a Skirt= Published November 27, 2009 (Article)

__**Synopsis:**__
This article is about a 16-year-old Christian girl from southern that said on Friday she was lashed 50 times for wearing a skirt deemed indecent by authorities in the north who enforce a strict version of Islamic law. Silva Kashif said she was arrested by a plain-clothed policeman in a market last week for wearing a skirt beneath the knee. She was convicted of offending public morality and received 50 lashes in the courtroom. Kashif said "I was treated like a criminal," in a telephone interview. "I am confused what to wear. The trousers were an issue. My skirt was beneath the knee. What more can I do? I am Christian. My tribe and my customs permit me to dress like this." Human rights lawyer said a legal team plans to sue the authorities for procedural mistakes and to exonerate Kashif.

__**Sources:**__

 * 1) *NYDailyNews** http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/2009/11/27/2009-11-27_sudanese_christian_silva_kashif_16_lashed_50_times_for_wearing_skirt_breaking_is.html
 * 2) *NYTimes** http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/28/world/africa/28briefs-Sudan.html?_r=1&ref=africa

__**Comparison:**__
Both articles talked about Silva Kashif getting lashed 50 times, and why she was being lashed. However article 1 provided a tremendously longer coverage about this issue. Article 1 used quotes, unlike article 2 who didn't use any quotes what so ever. Article 1 talked about an interview with Silva Kashif, and provided quotes during the interview, article 2 didn't. They also have different titles, Sudanese Christian, Silva Kashif, 16, lashed 50 times for wearing 'short' skirt against Islamic law (Article 1), and Sudan: Girl Lashed 50 Times Over a Skirt (Article 2). Article 1 had a much more descriptive title, but both article's title have the same subject. Article 1 provided background information about Silva Kashif and provided information about the law that made Silva convicted of this crime. Article 1 also talked about Silva's lawyer, and how he thinks this is not fair at all. Both were published by "The Associated Press," but had different lengths in coverage

__**Opinion:**__
I think its unfair that Silva is being convicted for such a ludicrous law. I believe any one can wear anything they want, they can even be naked for all I care they have the right to do it, its their choice. They would have to face other consequences (which I'm not going to provide). I also wonder why the cop would just drag Silva into the police station at the middle of the day, with out even saying why he did it. I think Silva had the right to atleast be informed before she was sent to the police station. I also question the government of Sudan, why would they make such a law (women can't wear clothing in which reveal themselves to much)? I know its a practice (like how monks practice to eat vegetarian) but why does the government have to be involved in this?

**__MLA SOURCE:__**

 * 1)** Associated Press, . "Sudanese Christian, Silva Kashif, 16, lashed 50 times for wearing 'short' skirt against Islamic law." (2009): 1. Web. 2 Dec 2009. .


 * 2)** Associated Press, . "Sudan: Girl Lashed 50 Times Over a Skirt." (2009): 1. Web. 2 Dec 2009. .

//**--**// =7.= = =

Period 4 History December 9nd, 2009 4:30 PM PST**
 * Minh Khuu

= =

=Guinea: Aide Wounds Junta Leader / Soldiers 'shoot at Guinea leader'= Published December 3rd 2009, December 5th 2009. (Article)

__Synopsis:__
This article is about a shooting that broke out in Guinea’s restive capital, Conakry, on Thursday, and the country’s military ruler was wounded, according to an opposition figure, a diplomat there and press reports. Press reports citing a government spokesman said Toumba Diakite, an officer close to Captain Camara who has been widely cited as being responsible for the massacre, fired on the captain. The extent of Captain Camara’s injuries was not immediately known. He was shot at by one of his aides as well as by other soldiers in the capital Conakry, a government spokesman said.

__ Sources: __

 * 1) *NYTimes** http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/04/world/africa/04briefs-guineabrf.html?_r=1&ref=africa
 * 2) *Al Jazeera** http://english.aljazeera.net/news/africa/2009/12/2009123202550699975.html

__Comparison:__
Both articles talked about how Captain Camara was attacked and injured. Article 1 was shorter, but still got to the point. It didn't have as much information though. Article 2 was lengthier and described the situation a lot more. Article 2 also explained the massacre at Guinea on September 28, 2009. It gave a decent description about the massacre and gave me a lot more back ground information which was nice. Both had different titles, article 1's title " Guinea: Aide Wounds Junta Leader" wasn't as descriptive as article 2's title "Soldiers 'shoot at Guinea leader'" Article 2's title told me that the soliders shot the Guinea leader and not just wounded him. It was a little more descriptive but gave me a better understanding. Article 1 used no quotes whatsoever, but article 2 did. Both presented the information differently (article 2 didn't give the location of the shooting immediately)

__Opinion:__
I think that its wrong that the soldiers of Captain Camara back stabbed their leader. Why did they attack him? However I also think that Captain Camara had it coming for allowing the massacre a Guinea to happen and not try to stop it. Both articles didn't tell me where his wounds were, but they did tell me it was severe, so I wonder who treated his wounds? What will happen to Guinea with out a millitary leader, will it prosper or go into chaos? I think it will go into chaos, because the soldier might fight against the soldiers that did the attempted assassination on Captain Camara.

**MLA Source**

 * 1)** Nossiter, Adam. "Guinea: Aide Wounds Junta Leader ." (2009): n. pag. Web. 9 Dec 2009. .

/news/africa/2009/12/2009123202550699975.html>.
 * 2)** "Soldiers 'shoot at Guinea leader' ." (2009): n. pag. Web. 9 Dec 2009. <http://english.aljazeera.net

//**--**// =8.=

Period 4 History December 14th, 2009 4:30 PM PST**
 * Minh Khuu

=5 Peacekeepers in Darfur Die in Rebel Attacks / Two Rwandan peacekeepers killed in new Darfur attack= Published on December 5th, 2009 (Article)

Synopsis:
This article is about Gunmens that killed five Rwandan soldiers in two attacks on the international peacekeeping force in the Darfur region of Sudan, a spokesman for the mission said Saturday. The attacks, on Friday and Saturday, struck peacekeepers from the [|United Nations]-[|African Union] force, which deployed nearly two years ago to protect civilians and improve security in Darfur, where rebels are fighting government forces and their allies. HOWEVER on the article from BBC it said two Rwandan were killed it didn't mention about 5 peacekeepers it only mentioned 2, more specifically Rwandan peacekeepers.

Sources:

 * 1) *NY Times** http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/06/world/africa/06darfur.html?ref=africa
 * 2) *BBC News** http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8397199.stm

Comparison:
There are many differences in both articles. The titles were also different, which meant that the focus was different for both articles. Article 1 talked more about the 5 peacekeepers that died, and article 2 talked more about the 2 Rwandan peacekeepers. Both used the same statistics "//Fighting between rebels and Sudanese government forces began in Darfur in 2003, killing up to 300,000 people and driving 2.7 million from their homes. The government says those figures are exaggerated.//" (article 1) //"Rights groups estimate 300,000 people have been killed since the conflict began in 2003"// (article 2). They were written differently however both had the same meaning. Both articles were about the same in length. Both described where the camp site was //"In Saturday’s attack, the gunmen approached the gate of a camp for people displaced by the conflict and shot at peacekeepers who were distributing water, said a spokesman for the force, Kemal Saiki. The camp is about 40 miles south of El Fasher, the capital of northern Darfur."// (article 1) //"Saturday's attack took place at a camp in Shangil Tobaa, 65km (40 miles) south of the regional capital El Fasher, officials said."// (article 2). Article 1 had more description and made it easier to visualize the event, article 2 was short but still provided the required information.

Opinion:
I think its horrible that the peacekeepers were killed, but I also feel mad that the rebels attack the Darfur region of Sudan. After learning about the rebels I think of them as filthy savages. They are the epitome of the devil, and I have no sympathy towards them if they were to die. I also couldn't find any other articles that were related to article 1, so the one in article 2 was the closest I could find. I wonder why article 2 focuses more on the 2 Rwandan peacekeepers than all of the peacekeepers.

__MLA Source:__

 * 1)** "5 Peacekeepers in Darfur Die in Rebel Attacks ." (2009): 1. Web. 14 Dec 2009. .


 * 2)** "Two Rwandan peacekeepers killed in new Darfur attack ." (2009): 1. Web. 14 Dec 2009. .

//**--**//-
=ASIA=

**---**
=9.=

Period 4 History Janurary 13th. 2010 4:40 PM PST** = = =Mr. Gay pageant shut down in China / Chinese Gay Pageant Is Shut Down=
 * Minh Khuu

Synopsis:
Both articles are about how a gay pageant in Beiging, China was closed. The pagaent was named "Mr. Gay pageant." An hour before the show was set to begin on Friday night, eight police officers walked into the Lan Club and shut down the event, saying organizers lacked necessary permits. This was the first Mr Gay Chine pageant, but it was shut down due to the police. The cancellation of the pageant, billed as a first for China’s fledgling gay community, underscored the many challenges faced by those who push boundaries in a country ruled by a conservative authoritarian government. Although gay life in China has blossomed in recent years, many obstacles remain. Many gay-oriented Web sites are blocked, and even if lesbians and gay men can gather without fear of arrest, they rarely come out to their families and co-workers.

Sources:

 * 1) *NY Times** http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/16/world/asia/16beijing.html?ref=asia
 * 2) *CNN News** http://edition.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/asiapcf/01/18/china.gay.pageant/index.html

Comparison:
Both articles talk about the gay pageant being closed. Article 2 had a longer and lengthier report about the pageant being closed. Article 2 had more quotes and used a lot more interviews with the participants of the "Mr. Gay pageant." Article 2 also talked more about the planning of the pageant and how the pageant was set up, which would give the readers more insight and more knowledge about the gay pageant. Article 1 was shorter but described most of the important aspects. Article 1 was concise and described the events quickly. Both articles had different titles, article 1 (//Chinese Gay Pageant Is Shut Down)// didn't tell the readers the name of the pageant but still gave a decent summary of what was in the article. Article 2 (//Mr. Gay pageant shut down in China)// had the named of the pageant which gave a better description of what was happening. Both articles didn't have any similar writing besides the fact that they both talked about the gay pageant being shut down, however this quote //“I wouldn’t say it’s a huge step backwards for the gay community,” he said, “but I guess it’s not a step forward, either.”// in article 1 was used differently in article 2. Article 2 wrote //"I wouldn't say it's a step back, but it's definitely not a step forward," Dutcher said. He also announced the weekly gay night at LAN club has been cancelled until further notice.// Both quotes meant the same but was written differently.

Opinion:
I think its horrible that gay people are getting mistreated in society. Mistreating people by their sexual orientation is just as bad as being racist. I think that society should put an end to all of these double standard in society so that all humans have equal rights. If people can have straight pageants, why cant the gay have their own pageant? Gays should be treated equally, they are humans just like straights.

__MLA Source:__

 * 1)** Jacobs, Andrew. "Chinese Gay Pageant Is Shut Down ." (2010): 1. Web. 18 Jan 2010. .


 * 2)** "Mr. Gay pageant shut down in China ." (2010): 1. Web. 18 Jan 2010. .

//**--**// =10.=

Period 4 History Janurary 28th. 2010 10:40 PM PST**
 * Minh Khuu

=Vietnam jails democracy activists for subversion / Vietnam, Quelling Dissent, Gives 4 Democracy Advocates Jail Terms=

**Synopsis:**
A court in Vietnam has convicted four activists, including prominent human rights lawyer Le Cong Dinh, of trying to overthrow the Communist government. The four men received sentences of up to 16 years on charges of subversion. Dinh was sentenced to five years, while internet entrepreneur Tran Huynh Duy Thuc received the longest term. All but Mr. Thuc had been charged with subversion, an unusually severe charge that can carry the death penalty. Foreign analysts said the charge was intended as a warning and an assertion of the limits of political discourse before the nation’s Communist Party congress next year.

Sources:

 * 1)*The New York Times** []
 * 2)*BBC** []

Comparison:
Some similarities that I noticed between the two articles is that they had similar titles, "Vietnam jails democracy activists for subversion," and "Vietnam, Quelling Dissent, Gives 4 Democracy Advocates Jail Terms." They both talked about how many of jail service each person would get. Some differences that I noticed that the NY times article had quotes from the 4 men and others while BBC didn't. Also the NY times went into a little history about each of the men and how they got there in court. The NY Times had a picture of all 4 men in court while BBC just had 1 picture of just one man. Also both articles used this quote //"activities aimed at subverting the people's administration."// The NY Times article had the name of the author while the BBC article did not have the name of the author, both were pretty similar so it could have been written by the same author.

**Opinion:**
I personally don't like the government of Vietnam. My family actual hates the government of Vietnam. My mom and dad lived in a time before the north took over in 1975 and back then it was a lot better. I think the government of Vietnam is just horrible. They abuse their powers to much. I think communism is a great system of government, because it keeps things equal, however leaders are abusing their powers and making communism a horrible system of governing a country. This is a great example of how Vietnam abuses their power, they arrest innocent protesters. I was born in Vietnam and I really hate my country's government, its corrupted.

__MLA Source:__

 * 1)** Mydans, Seth. "Vietnam, Quelling Dissent, Gives 4 Democracy Advocates Jail Terms ." (2010): 1. Web. 29 Jan 2010. <http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/21/world/asia/21vietnam.html>.


 * 2)** "Vietnam jails democracy activists for subversion ." (2010): 1. Web. 29 Jan 2010. <http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/8470110.stm>.

//**--**// =11.=

Period 4 History Janurary 31th. 2010 10:40 PM PST**
 * Minh Khuu

=N Korea detains second US man / N. Korea Arrests Second American Man=

**Synopsis:**
Both articles talk about how an American man was arrested in North Korea. He was arrested, because the North Korean government said that the man was trespassing from China. The North's official news agency said in a brief statement on Thursday that the man is now under investigation. The report did not name the man or provide any other details. He is believed to be Robert Park, an American missionary who South Korean activists say crossed the frozen river border on Christmas Day carrying a letter urging the North Korean leader, Kim Jong-il, to shut down prison camps. Washington has no diplomatic ties with North Korea and is working through the Swedish Embassy there to seek consular access to Mr. Park, 28. Since his disappearance into the North, South Korean activists supporting Mr. Park have sent leaflets by balloon to the North in an attempt to let North Koreans know about his trip and urge Mr. Kim to improve human rights in the North.

Sources:

 * 1) *NYTimes** http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/29/world/asia/29detain.html?ref=asia
 * 2) *AL Jazeera** http://english.aljazeera.net/news/asia-pacific/2010/01/201012854031726751.html

Comparison:
Both articles had very similar titles however article 1 used the word "Arrests" instead of "detains" from article 2. Article 1's title was "N. Korea Arrests Second Man," while article 2's title was "N Korea detains second US man." Both article had almost an identical title, however article 2 implies a more severe consequence for the US man. Al Jazeera, like always provide more coverage, while NY Times gave a must shorter synopsis of the events. Article 2 provided 2 pictures which gave a great visualization of where it was happening, while article 1 didn't provide any pictures what so ever. Article 2 added a section about artillery fire in North Korea against South Korea which was totally irelevant to the main title. It had some connections but other than that it should have been on a different article, not combined with the article about North Korea detaining an American man. Both articles didn't use any quotes, which was reasonable because both article said that little information was given about the detaining.

**Opinion:**
I don't really like North Korea, they always seem to be a very aggressive country through out my life time. I can see why they would arrest a man that "trespassed" into their country, but they should at least disclose reasons why they did it so it doesn't seem like their tormenting him. I also think it was kind of weird how not a single quote was used in both articles. Additionally Al Jazeera had a hybrid with 2 articles combined as one, which was awkward but they did have some connections. Overall, I think the man should be arrested but more information should be disclosed to the public and not kept as a secret. Who knows this could start a war.

__MLA Source:__

 * 1)** Sang-Hun, Choe. "N. Korea Arrests Second American Man ." (2010): 1. Web. 31 Jan 2010. <http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/29/world/asia/29detain.html?ref=asia>.


 * 2)** "N Korea detains second US man ." (2010): 1. Web. 31 Jan 2010. <http://english.aljazeera.net/news/asia-pacific/2010/01/201012854031726751.html>.

//**--**// =12.=

Period 4 History February 20th, 2010 9:47PM PST**
 * Minh Khuu

=__Obama meets Dalai Lama, angering China__ (Yahoo News) / __Obama Meets Dalai Lama, and China Is Quick to Protest__ (NY Times)=

**Synopsis:**
Both articles are about how President Barack Obama hosted exiled Tibetan spiritual leader the Dalai Lama at the White House Thursday, drawing an angry reaction from China and risking further damage to strained Sino-U.S. ties. Raising issues that quickly stoked China's ire, Obama used his first presidential meeting with the Dalai Lama to press Beijing, under international criticism for its Tibet policies, to preserve Tibetan identity and respect human rights there. Obama sat down with the Dalai Lama who is reviled by the Chinese government as a dangerous separatist but admired by many around the world as a man of peace in the face of wider tensions over U.S. weapons sales to Taiwan, China's currency practices and Internet censorship.

Sources:

 * 1) *NYTimes** http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/19/world/asia/19prexy.html?ref=asia
 * 2) *Yahoo News** http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20100218/ts_nm/us_china_usa

Comparison:
Both articles talk about how Obama allowed the Dalai Lama in the White House, and spoke to him. Both articles had very similar titles however they use different words to describe the reaction of China. The New York Times used //"Obama Meets Dalai Lama, and China Is Quick to Protest"// while Yahoo News used //"Obama meets Dalai Lama, angering China"// as their title. Yahoo New's title about this event did not describe what China's rebuttal against Obama meeting with the Dalai Lama. The New York Times used a more detail title to explain what China did in response to this meeting. Yahoo News had a longer coverage of the event and had more descriptions about what Obama and the Dalai Lama was talking about. Yahoo news also provided more information on what China was protesting on. However both articles had very similar coverage on the event. The New York times used only one quote while Yahoo news used multiple quotes. Both articles did not use any similar or identical quotes. The one quote that the New York Times used was //“The Dalai Lama is a Nobel Peace Prize laureate, internationally revered religious and cultural leader,” said Mark Toner, a State Department spokesman.//

**Opinion:**
I think China needs to worry about their country and not ease drop on events other countries are dealing with. Also I think China need to stop hating on the Dalai Lama, I know that the Dalai Lama and China had a very bad relationship with one another but they should stop repeating the past and move forward and just forget about the Dalai Lama. China should stop this protest, because its a waste of time, money, resources, and effort. They should do something more productive like inspect their manufacturing facilities. Hatred blinds the truth.

__MLA Source:__

 * 1)** Cooper, Helene. "Obama Meets Dalai Lama, and China Is Quick to Protest." (2010): 1. Web. 21 Feb 2010. <http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/19/world/asia/19prexy.html?ref=asia>.


 * 2)** Spetalnick, Matt. "Obama meets Dalai Lama, angering China." (2010): 1. Web. 21 Feb 2010. <http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20100218/ts_nm/us_china_usa>.

//**--**// =13.=

Period 4 History March 2nd, 2010 5:56 PM PST**
 * Minh Khuu

=Village Attack Leaves 11 Dead in Philippines (NY Times) / Philippines: Suspected militant attack kills 11 (Yahoo News!)=

**Synopsis:**
Both articles are about how Manila, Philippines was attacked. Suspected al-Qaida-linked militants raided a village in the southern Philippines early Saturday, killing 11 people in the country's worst militant attack on civilians in nine years. Gunmen from the extremist Abu Sayyaf group backed by renegade Muslim separatist rebels fired grenade launchers and automatic rifles on houses while residents were asleep, killing one government-armed militiaman and 10 civilians in the village of Tubigan on Basilan Island, said deputy regional police commander Sonny David. The 11 dead included a year-old child, and 17 others, including four children, were seriously wounded. The attackers also burned down several houses. The attack was among the worst against civilians in nearly a decade, officials said.


 * 1) *NY Times** http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/01/world/asia/01manila.html?ref=asia
 * 2)** ***Yahoo News!** http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100227/ap_on_re_as/as_philippines_abu_sayyaf

Comparison:
Both articles had almost the exact same length and gave great coverage on the attack. Yahoo news has a slightly lengthier article on the attack in the Philippines but NY Times covered as much as Yahoo News did with a shorter article. Yahoo News used a lot more quotes that NY Times. For example: Yahoo news used the following quotes; //"The villagers were sleeping when the <span class="yshortcuts" style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% transparent; border-bottom: 1px dashed #0066cc; cursor: pointer;">Abu Sayyaf came with their guns blazing. They spared no one, not even the children," David said.// //| "It's a normal thing for them to retaliate," David said. "We're not lowering our guards, particularly at soft targets like markets, schools, churches, piers and public utility terminals."// and "//They really attacked the villagers," he said.// These quotes that Yahoo News used made the article easier to connect with and the readers could easily visualize the events that happened. Both articles have different names but are very similar. Yahoo News gave more description on who attack in their title than NY Time's title which only said 11 dead in Philippines. Yahoo news gave a much better description than NY Times by giving more facts about who were killed and who they were.

**Opinion:**
As always the news never give any "happy news" Every time I read an article it always about hate, death, and killing. This article is no exeption I think its horrible that people died, its wrong to think that some one else is deciding the fate of another human being. No one should be able to steal the life of another. I feel especially sorry for the one year old baby who was killed in this assault. He barely seen the world and died before actually living his life. The world is cruel, I wish it could change. A world with harmony, joy, and forgiveness.

__MLA Source:__
1) Conde, Carlos H. "Village Attack Leaves 11 Dead in Philippines." (2010): 1. Web. 2 Mar 2010. <http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/01/world/asia/01manila.html?ref=asia>.

2) Teves, Oliver. "Philippines: Suspected militant attack kills 11." (2010): 1. Web. 2 Mar 2010. <http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100227/ap_on_re_as/as_philippines_abu_sayyaf>.

=-= GUESS WHOS BACK!!!!! ^_^

=THE MIDDLE EAST=

Play Your Cards Right And I Might Give You A COOL BREEZE =**-**= = =

=**14.**=

Period 4 History April 7th, 2010 9:56 PM PST**
 * Minh Khuu

=**Palestinian, 14, Emerges Unharmed (NY Times) / Israeli troops kill Palestinian boy (AL Jazeera)**=

**Synopsis:**
Both articles are about a 15-year-old Palestinian boy named Mohamed al-Farmawi has been killed and several others injured near Gaza's border with Israel after Israeli troops opened fire at Israeli Arabs and Palestinians protesters marking the "Land day". Witnesses said Mohamed al-Farmawi was shot dead on Tuesday after he approached the fence along the border with Israel. The youth’s father, Zidan al-Farmawi, 42, spent four days at a hospital emergency entrance, looking inside every arriving ambulance for his son. He was amazed at the boy’s return on Friday, when it was revealed that Muhammad, along with 16 other teenagers, had sneaked into smuggler tunnels to try to get into Egypt and was then picked up by Egyptian security forces. In 2002, Muhammad was seriously wounded by a gunshot to the head during clashes between Palestinians and residents of Rafah at a time when Israel was still in control of the Gaza-Egypt borders. His father said the injury affected his mental abilities.

**Sources:**

 * 1)** ***NY Times** http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/04/world/middleeast/04gaza.html?ref=middleeast
 * 2)** ***Al Jazeera** http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2010/03/2010330193013794153.html

Comparison:
The Al Jazeera was obviously lengthier and was more descriptive than the New York Times article. It explained more about the investigation and background information of the Palestinian boy named Mohamed al-Farmawi. Such as his 2002 incident that gave him injuries in his mental abilities. A stange difference I found was that the New York times refered to the Palistinian boy as Muhammad al-Farmawi and not Mohamed al-Farmawi. More over the boy is said to be 14 in the New York Times article, while the AL Jazeera article said that the boy is 15 years old. Also both articles only had one quote, but they were different. //" An Israeli army spokesperson said: "Following an examination of the Gaza division, we are not familiar with any incident of a Palestinian being hit by IDF (Israeli military) fire." *AL Jazzera // and //“It was a very big shock for us,” Mr. Farmawi said. “We were told that he had been killed by Israeli fire and that his body had been left near the fence at Rafah,” in southern Gaza.// *NY Times The New York Times article also talked more about the worries of his father more than the Al Jazeera did. Both articles had different titles

**Opinion:**
Its great that the teenager was reunited with his family. His family must have been worried sick and was praying for his arrival home. I still wonder why he was trying to go to Egypt. Why go to Egypt when you can go to Europe. I found it fishy that both articles didn't have the exact information for example the age of the boy and the name of the boy.

__MLA Source:__

 * 1)** Akram, Fares. "Palestinian, 14, Emerges Unharmed." (2010): 1. Web. 8 Apr 2010. <http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/04/world/middleeast/04gaza.html?ref=middleeast>.


 * 2)** "Israeli troops kill Palestinian boy ." (2010): 1. Web. 8 Apr 2010. <http://english.aljazeera.net/category/person/mohamed-al-farmawi>.

= =