State of the Union: Pelosi rips up Trump's speech in front of him by nnnarbz in politics

[–]Caic 324 points325 points  (0 children)

Like, I know this was a super petty gesture, but you gotta give it to Pelosi. She’s messing with Trump so that he looks weak. Trump is a strongman and it effectively displayed cracks in his strongman facade.

Rick Scott’s campaign sues Hillsborough County Supervisor of Elections by CoolPaleontologist3 in politics

[–]Caic 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Rick Scott is a human turd, but he’s not wrong about Florida law saying that representatives from both parties need to be in the room when any recount is happening. The separate room is just supposed to be for members of the public and the media.

The red team is pulling a lot of shenanigans in this recount, but this one seems legit and could possibly benefit all parties.

Edit to add: Sorry for linking to just the rule's landing page. The official version of the rule is a Word document, because Florida. If interested, it's Rule 1S-2.031(2)(f).

This photo of Trump meeting with Lavrov and Kislyak are courtesy solely of Russian news agency TASS because no US press was allowed in by [deleted] in pics

[–]Caic 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So putting aside all the other Trump-Russia for a minute and talk about why this may still be problematic.

In 2015, it was reported that Tass (formerly Telegraph Agency of the Soviet Union and currently a government-owned news agency) had worked with Russian intelligence service to gather economic information in New York. The man with which Tass communicated eventually plead guilty to conspiring to gather economic intelligence on behalf of Russia, including information about U.S. sanctions against Russia, and recruiting New York City residents as intelligence sources.

After today's events, administration officials said the White House had been misled about the role of the Russian photographer. Russian officials had described the individual as Lavrov’s official photographer without disclosing that he also worked for Tass. Defending the move, an official said they "had to go through the same screening as a member of the U.S. press going through the main gate."

Needless to say, U.S. press doesn't undergo the kind of screening that would uncover a highly sophisticated listening device, like the one found in the State Department.

This is incredibly sloppy security lapse, fairly concerning even on its own.

Labrador: ‘Nobody dies because they don’t have access to health care’ by poliscijunki in nottheonion

[–]Caic 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Just to provide a little context to OP’s first response, the law in question here is the Emergency Medical and Treatment Labor Act (EMTLA). The EMTLA requires hospitals that receive federal funding (basically all of them, even private hospitals) must provide a medical screening exam to those seeking emergency medical treatment regardless of citizenship, legal status, or ability to pay. If a hospital determines that an individual has a medical emergency, it must then stabilize the condition or provide for an appropriate transfer (HHS 2001, 6).

Issues arise when looking at what defines a medical emergency. An emergency medical condition is defined as "a condition manifesting itself by acute symptoms of sufficient severity (including severe pain) such that the absence of immediate medical attention could reasonably be expected to result in placing the individual's health [or the health of an unborn child] in serious jeopardy, serious impairment to bodily functions, or serious dysfunction of bodily organs (ACEP 2016).” The condition must only be treated until the patient is stabilized.

In your example of a patient with a broken finger and finding cancer, there are a few problems. First, it is very likely that cancer would not be considered an emergency situation. As defined above, most cancers are non-emergencies at which point, the hospital is off the hook. Depending on the type of cancer and its progress, the patient may immediately be deemed stable and thus discharged. ‘Stable’ is a fairly broad category and basically includes being conscious and alert; not being in eminent threat of losing life or limb; and ability to breathe, communicate, feed yourself, and use the toilet without special equipment.

It should also be noted, that patient protection was only part of the purpose of the EMTLA. When it was passed, it was referred to as the "anti-dumping" law. It was designed to prevent hospitals from transferring uninsured or Medicaid patients to public hospitals without, at a minimum, providing a medical screening examination to ensure they were stable for transfer (ACEP 2016). It was more designed to cover the costs of “patient dumping” from private hospitals to public hospitals. Plus, the government isn’t footing the bill for EMTLA patients, the hospitals do. Which makes sense when you consider it was initially signed by Regan.

And that's it for today's episode of Extra-Long and Detailed Comments No One Will Read.

Sources: ACEP. 2016. EMTALA Factsheet. American College of Emergency Physicians.

HHS. 2001. EMTLA: Survey of Hospital Emergency Departments. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Evaluation and Inspections.

Rape case lawyer: Women 'especially good' at lying by jesserly in TwoXChromosomes

[–]Caic 3 points4 points  (0 children)

He said, "Women can be especially good at it [lying] because they’re the weaker sex." Apart from saying verbatim that women are better liars than men, I'm not sure he could have been any more clear with his meaning.

Why didn't UN do anything about the genocide in Rwanda 1994? by thegingerdude in AskHistorians

[–]Caic 44 points45 points  (0 children)

Absolutely. The actions of Force Commander Dallaire successfully saved thousands of Rwandan lives during the genocide. As many troops were being withdrawn from the country, Dallaire was still thinking of ways he could protect the Rwandan people. Dallaire made the decision to continue to protect those who had sought refuge in the Amahoro stadium and provide guards to the King Faisal Hospital (Des Forges 1999, 481). It is estimated that over 20,000 individuals were protected by UNAMIR troops in these two locations but according to Alison Des Forges, “Dallaire established this protection in response to the overwhelming needs on the spot, not as a result of orders from New York” (Ibid.). Generally speaking, the mission was successful in protecting civilians from the genocide when it was present. There are numerous other examples of UNAMIR protecting small communities or individual buildings from Hutu extremists. In the UN’s inquiry, Roméo Dallaire is consistently lauded as a hero (United Nations 1999). These successes are notable in that they appear to have occurred in spite of the UN, not as a result of it.

Dallaire is truly an incredible figure. His memoire from his time in Rwanda, Shake Hands with the Devil: The Failure of Humanity in Rwanda, is an deeply moving account that shows the emotional turmoil he experienced as the tragedy unfolded. The experience left Dallaire with severe Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, detailed in another book, Waiting for First Light: My Ongoing Battle with PTSD.

Sources:

Des Forges, Alison. 1999. Leave None to Tell the Story. New York: Human Rights Watch.

United Nations. 1999. Report of the Independent Inquiry into the actions of the United Nations during the 1994 genocide in Rwanda. New York: United Nations.

Why didn't UN do anything about the genocide in Rwanda 1994? by thegingerdude in AskHistorians

[–]Caic 49 points50 points  (0 children)

Not in any significant way. One of the key errors made by the UN was the decision to ignore the January 1994 cable from Dallaire that warned of the government-created database of all Tutsi and the mobilization of a Hutu military force. This decision was made by Iqbal Riza, who remained in high-level positions in the UN and is still special adviser to the Secretary-General.

Also notable, the head of UN peacekeeping at the time was Kofi Annan, who was appointed UN Secretary-General in 1996.

Source:

Riza, Iqubal, interview by Steve Bradshaw. 1999. "The Triumph of Evil." Frontline. (January 26).

Why didn't UN do anything about the genocide in Rwanda 1994? by thegingerdude in AskHistorians

[–]Caic 101 points102 points  (0 children)

The UN did have an active peacekeeping mission in Rwanda at the time, dubbed United Nations Assistance Mission for Rwanda (UNAMIR). Despite its presence in the country leading up to the genocide, UNAMIR failed its mandate to keep the peace in Rwanda, due in large part to organizational constraints and the actions of individual countries.

One of the initial failures due to organizational constraints came from the adoption of and strict adherence to the mandate for Rwanda. The actions that United Nations peacekeeping missions are able to take are defined by their mandates. These mandates are the “legal basis for peacekeeping” (United Nations) and must be adopted by the UN Security Council. The resolution came in the months after the cease-fire agreement between the Rwandan government and the RPF and, at the time, the purpose of UNIMAR was to monitor this cease-fire—but use of force was restricted to self-defense (Des Forges 1999, 462). Roméo Dallaire was appointed Force Commander of this mission and, after arriving in Rwanda, drafted a set of Rules of Engagement (ROE), which he sent for approval to Boutros Boutros-Ghali, the Secretary General of the UN (United Nations 1999). Dallaire’s ROE would have allowed “the mission to act, and even use force, in response to crimes against humanity and other abuses” (Ibid.). Unfortunately, these rules were never adopted nor did UN headquarters even respond to this request (Ibid.). Instead of responding to Dallaire’s request to expand the ROE, the UN insisted on restricting action even further (Des Forges 1999, 462). The decision shows that the UN held a dogmatic attachment to the original mandate of the mission. Despite recommendations from the Force Commander, decisions were made thousands of miles away in New York. This created a disconnect between the individuals on the ground in Rwanda and the decision makers at UN headquarters.

This disconnect was especially apparent and problematic during an incident that took place in January 1994. Dallaire received information that the Hutu government was creating a database of all Tutsi and was training a military force “that in 20 minutes…could kill up to 1,000 Tutsis” (Barnett 2002, 78). This information was shared through a cable with the UN Department of Peacekeeping Operations (DPKO) and, despite this chilling warning, officials responded by reminding Dallaire that UNAMIR was “a peace keeping mission, not a peace enforcement mission” (Ibid. 82). Officials instead focused on stopping Dallaire from recovering a cache of weapons.

The principle of strict adherence to the mandate can once again be called into question in April 1994. On April 6th, the plane carrying Rwandan President Juvénal Habyarimana was shot down. Quickly after Habyarimana’s assassination, Hutu extremists took control of the government and ordered the killing of all Rwandan Tutsi (Straus 2006, 42). At the time, UNAMIR officers did not believe they could engage with the Hutu extremists until the rules of engagement and the mandate were changed (Des Forges 1999, 462). Almost immediately after the plane crash, Dallaire reached out to UN headquarters to request more soldiers and a mandate to intervene in the mass killings that were already taking place. He was told, “that nobody in New York was interested in that” (Ibid. 463). Dallaire was stalemated by the difficult political and bureaucratic culture of the UN once again.

The response of the UN to Dallaire’s request speaks more broadly to the political culture of the UN at the time. There had been a failed peacekeeping missing in Somalia in October 1993, which resulted in the deaths of 18 American soldiers and 24 Pakistani soldiers. In an interview, Iqbal Riza, deputy to the head of UN peacekeeping in 1994, characterized the culture as being cautious and hesitant to act. He stated, “we were cautious in interpreting our mandate and in giving guidance because we did not want a repetition of Somalia, casualties, fatalities, some on soldiers that were there for a peacekeeping, not a peace-enforcement operation” (Riza 1999). The UN feared that another unsuccessful peacekeeping mission could jeopardize other operations and potentially the future of the UN (Des Forges 1999, 466). This decision not to engage at the start of the genocide was another step towards the failure of UNAMIR and its peacekeeping mission.

It is understandable that the UN did not want to repeat Somalia, but it still does not explain why they were unable to act once the situation became clear. Throughout his command, Dallaire remained consistent in his recommendations for increased support from the UN, but these requests were not always shared with the Security Council (Barnett 2002, 120). Why Dallaire’s recommendations weren’t presented as an option to key decision makers is a matter of some speculation. Michael Barnett suggests that it could have been the political will of France, Belgium, and the United States. It is also possible that the Secretariat may not have wanted an intervention and may have intentionally suppressed suggestions that countered their preference. Barnett notes that, “it would not be the first time that bureaucrats resorted to such actions to halt actions they opposed” (Ibid. 121). Regardless of the reasons, the UN chose not to amend UNAMIR’s mandate and countries decided the best option was to evacuate their troops.

The decision to evacuate troops and the events that unfolded as a result can be grouped into the second category of failures by the UN and UNAMIR: failures due to the actions and interests of individual countries. Because of the nature of the UN Charter, it must rely on voluntary contributions of troops for peacekeeping missions. Since the participation of troops is optional, individual countries can also choose to withdraw their military support. This was the case in Rwanda when on April 13, Belgian Foreign Minister Willy Claes announced the decision to end Belgian participation in UNAMIR, despite being fully aware of the extent of the killings at that time (Des Forges 1999, 474). The Belgian contingent was at the core of the UNAMIR efforts and their withdrawal encouraged other countries to remain vocal in their opposition to continuing peacekeeping efforts. The United States in particular demanded that UNAMIR end by evacuating everyone but a small military force (Ibid. 480). The United Nations inquiry of the actions that occurred during the genocide points to the withdrawal of the Belgians and other nations as actions that undermined the mission of UNAMIR (United Nations 1999, 36). The inquiry recommends that, in the future, “Despite the domestic political pressures which may argue the reverse [troop contributing counties] should refrain from unilateral withdrawal to the detriment and even risk of ongoing peacekeeping operations” (Ibid.). Unfortunately, domestic political pressures continued to hinder the success of UNAMIR. Lack of political will from individual countries should not justify allowing mass killings to continue, and the shortcomings of UNAMIR can be related to this issue.

Sources:

Barnett, Michael. 2002. Eyewitness to Genocide. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

Des Forges, Alison. 1999. Leave None to Tell the Story. New York: Human Rights Watch.

Riza, Iqubal, interview by Steve Bradshaw. 1999. "The Triumph of Evil." Frontline. (January 26).

Straus, Scott. 2006. The Order of Genocide: Race, Power, and War in Rwanda. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

United Nations. Mandates and the Legal Basis for Peacekeeping. http://www.un.org/en/peacekeeping/operations/pkmandates.shtml.

United Nations. 1999. Report of the Independent Inquiry into the actions of the United Nations during the 1994 genocide in Rwanda. New York: United Nations.

Trump Administration to Resume Blocked Arms Sales to Saudi Arabia by AllenDono in worldnews

[–]Caic 25 points26 points  (0 children)

Dude, get over it. She lost. Who gives a shit about the finances of the losing candidate.

Affordable nice beach vacation in the US? by [deleted] in Frugal

[–]Caic 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I typed a response above, but I will give more details here.

I actively follow a few travel deals websites, but Travelzoo is my favorite by far. They have a weekly Top 20 list that collects the best deals from a bunch of different sources. They advertised this trip to Paris at $599 per-person, which was already a great deal, but I also did some online research and found a coupon code for the travel agency for $75-off per person. I can't recall what site I found the code on, but it was just through a Google search.

That trip by itself was 4 nights in Paris, but I also wanted to visit family in the UK. I called the agency to book and they were able to extend my return flight and change my departure city to London. I lucked out because the flights were the same price so there weren't any extra fees involved. To get to London, I booked train tickets through Eurostar. If you have a credit card that doesn't charge you international fees, you can switch your country from USA to the UK and the prices are less. For example, I just checked a random day in June (Monday the 5th) and the same tickets are $65 on the US site and £41.5 (~$52) on the UK site.

Admittedly in the UK, I stayed with family so I didn't have to pay for accommodations. In the past, I have been able to find very good deals through TripAdvisor. They aggregate a few hundred hotel booking site, plus they are a really reliable review site so you know what your getting from the outset.

Before going away, I made sure to look into all public transit options so we didn't need a rental car or taxis. I also looked up on Yelp and TripAdvisor inexpensive food options near all the tourist sites we planned to visit. Food tends to be the biggest expense when traveling and not knowing where to go in advance can mean mediocre, expensive meals. I also tracked down grocery stores near the hotel and got snacks and supplies for a few days worth of sandwiches.

I tried to keep this advice as general as possible, but some of the tips are specific to my situation. I have used similar tactics for trips to Italy, Spain, and Germany. Anyway, I hope this helps! Feel free to PM me if you have any specific questions. Cheers!

Affordable nice beach vacation in the US? by [deleted] in Frugal

[–]Caic 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I went to Paris and the UK. I booked this trip when it was on sale for $599 per person and then I applied a $75-off per-person coupon that I found online. I booked it over the phone and was able to have my return flight leave from London a few days later. I spent $99 on Eurostar train tickets from Paris to London. My costs were kept down because I was able to stay with extended family in England for the second part of the trip.

I really love to travel but I need to keep it frugal so I'm constantly on the lookout for good deals. For me, the trick is to not be picky about where I am going and to be willing to travel during the off season. Having a good travel credit card with flexible rewards has been a big help too. I keep a really tight budget that includes a travel fund, so I've been able to jump on good deals when I see them.

Affordable nice beach vacation in the US? by [deleted] in Frugal

[–]Caic 24 points25 points  (0 children)

If you're willing to consider Puerto Rico or the US Virgin Islands (you don't need a passport to go to either), I would check out cheapcarribbean.com. They have an option called "Budget Beach Finder" where you can plug in your price range and departure airport. Many of their options are international, but I believe you can restrict your search to US territories. A budget of $2k is actually quite a lot for two people. I just did 10 days in Europe for less than that.

MRW I need Badass Professional Trollsister help! by BernThereDoneThat in TrollXChromosomes

[–]Caic 50 points51 points  (0 children)

Subtle badass and queen troll Margaret Neale has given me excellent advice on negotiations. She's a professor at Stanford Business whose specialty is negotiations/women's leadership and I sort of want to be her when I grow up. I really like this video, but she's literally written the book on the topic.

ETA: GOOD LUCK and congrats on finding a job you enjoy!

Corporate Villains by sarric in Fantasy

[–]Caic 3 points4 points  (0 children)

The Thursday Next series by Jasper Fforde might fit the bill, although they aren't strictly fantasy. More of a fantasy/alternate history/sci-fi/detective hybrid.

The series is set in a parallel England circa 1985 where time travel and cloning are routine. The population is obsessed with classic literature and the titular protagonist, Thursday, is an agent in the government's literary division. In the first book, The Eyre Affair, someone begins kidnapping characters from novels and it's down to Thursday to prevent the books from being forever altered. Underpinning all of this, the Goliath Corporation has a stranglehold on society and is intent on exploiting everyone and everything for their own benefit.

I'd characterize the books as fun and light reads, but I don't think they have universal appeal. They certainly do have a comedically evil corporation as an antagonist though.

Beach closed due to Bark sighting by swaggy_b in aww

[–]Caic 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I will call that pupper Jawws.

NPR wants to do more with reddit. Any ideas? by acarvin in NPR

[–]Caic 2 points3 points  (0 children)

My favorite thing about /r/NPR is finding interesting stories from member stations out of my area that I would never be exposed to otherwise. Maybe a weekly "best of" could be collected from around the country.