I recently had the chance to speak with my colleague, a highly accomplished leader, and we briefly discussed the code of conduct. We all concurred that the code of conduct embodies the fundamental principles of a family, a team, or a business.

What rules of conduct apply to you?

Do you operate under a code of conduct?

My colleague, who works in criminal science, brought up the FBI’s way with the expectations of their FBI agents. He said that previous counterintelligence director Frank Figliuzzi developed a book with a code that required absolute internal perfection from everyone at all times. He refers to it as the Seven Cs and the FBI’s Way (Code, Conservancy, Consequences, Clarity, Compassion, Credibility, Consistency).

A code of behaviour has been developed by the FBI, and it’s upheld by teams and all workers.

Everyone in your team or firm follows to the same basic values, which are reflected in this code.

Basic rules of conduct must be established in any group or organisation. A clear and exact code is necessary to prevent actions that can jeopardise the principles you uphold.

Conservancy is a communal effort to conserve and maintain the true worth of a place or thing, much like stewardship. By joining a conservancy, members formally commit to acting as stewards for something bigger than themselves. It is a conservancy, the FBI.

Here, accountability is crucial. Additionally, everyone in the FBI has a line of authority, and the higher up you are, the more authority you have.

A code devoid of compassion is short-lived. Consequences and compassion go hand in one. Sometimes showing compassion entails taking a hard look in the mirror to examine how you or a broken system contributed to the bad decision or improper behaviour.

What may otherwise be an unkind and frigid process is balanced by compassion. People need to have faith in their leaders to treat them with respect as well as assurance that they have established clear guidelines for behaviour. Because of this, effective leaders analyse penalties holistically by considering an employee’s overall performance, the circumstances around their mistake, and their ability to right their wrongs.

When it comes to the results, there shouldn’t be any shocks. A code must contain penalties for violations or it is merely “text on paper.”

A code that is not upheld soon turns into a falsehood that compromises your entire team. People need to understand that there are consequences for endangering the team since you can’t just will them into abiding by the rules.

The foundation of a values-based organisation is credibility. And it holds true for the entire squad. People must trust us and the principles we uphold. Values’ ability to endure past the personalities of specific leaders depends on their believability.

When the procedure is standardised, impartial, and thorough, the principles are preserved in a credible manner. When a process is codified, it must not only be documented in writing but also be simple to access, clear to understand, and taken seriously.

Being trustworthy is what makes someone credible, not being perfect.

Intentionality is key to consistency. It aids in protecting what is truly important.

The process of creating a rhythm had a beauty and simplicity that went beyond simple habit. In your life, at business, or in your studies, create a system that you can stick with. If it works or adjust if it doesn’t. Follow a reliable system.

Sometimes being consistent means changing your entire strategy to be true to your values.

People should not experience change as something that occurs “to” them; rather, it should occur “with” them. Everyone concerned must realise that adjusting does not imply giving up on ideals or a mission. Instead, the suggested adjustments must demonstrate how they are both compatible with and essential to upholding your beliefs.

We all inevitably need to adjust, adapt, and transition to new ways of conserving and promoting what we hold dear to maintain our essential beliefs.

And the FBI’s biggest errors primarily result from its leaders breaking their own rules.

As in life.

 

 

 

They are stealing! They also have no intention of stopping: “They want to surpass us in technology and industry.”

Chinese economic espionage in the West is becoming more prevalent, according to FBI and British intelligence officials.

The Chinese aircraft that will compete with the 737 MAX and A320neo from Boeing and Airbus has finished its first test flight. Beijing proudly displayed its Comac C919 airplane and hailed it as a success of homegrown creativity. However, according to the US Department of Justice, “an aircraft created with stolen secrets from Western airlines” would be a better way to describe China’s first narrow-body passenger jet.

The Chinese manufacturer Comac, which created the C919, was allegedly the recipient of data stolen from Western airlines by a group of cyber-spies known as “Turbine Panda” from China. Due to their extensive infiltration and release of the Chinese Communist Party’s tentacles, British intelligence officials now assert that Chinese spies constitute a threat not only to the US but also to Great Britain (CCP).

During a joint conference in London, Ken McCallum, the director of the British intelligence service MI5, and Christopher Wray, the director of the FBI, issued a warning over the rise of Chinese economic espionage in the West.

McCallum and Wray claimed that there is a Chinese spy network in Britain that has no intention of stopping with theft as long as it enables it to surpass its competitors in technology, industry, politics, and power. They were speaking to businessmen at Thames House, MI5’s headquarters. The FBI, according to Wray, initiates a new China-related probe every 12 hours, while Britain’s MI5 intelligence arm now conducts seven times as many inquiries into China as it did four years ago. According to McCallum, hostile actions are occurring on British land, and the Chinese threat is hazardous not only for the USA and the UK, but also for other Western allies.

 

LinkedIn is a top source

McCallum disclosed that MI5 stepped in after a British aviation expert was twice persuaded to travel to China by a tempting employment offer, he found online. The British expert was given money in exchange for comprehensive technical information regarding military aircraft after much courting and paid dinners. Beyond that, McCallum didn’t offer any more detail, merely mentioning that

LinkedIn has grown to be a popular hunting area for Chinese intelligence agents. Beijing denied all of the allegations, calling them “baseless.”

Chinese embassy in Britain spokesman: “They are spreading all kinds of lies about China to tarnish the Chinese political system, increase anti-Chinese sentiment and exclusion, as well as to divert public attention and cover up own shameful action. The alleged affairs they talked about are merely smokescreens.”

British intelligence often stays out of the spotlight, so their willingness to speak up and openly urge caution is a reflection of the threat’s magnitude as well as some annoyance that they are not being taken seriously enough. Chinese cyber-spies were originally seen as inept due to the large amount of digital evidence they left behind. However, recent years have seen a substantial improvement in their techniques. Research on a vaccine for COVID-19 was the primary target of spies last year, according to the British National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC), which documented a record number of occurrences.

The Chinese government has been accused by the British government of breaking into corporate email systems using loopholes in Microsoft’s Exchange server in order to access emails, contacts, and other data from targeted businesses. An operation known as Operation Cloud Hopper that targeted IT service providers and used them as a launching pad to expose the secrets of carefully chosen targets was discovered by British investigators.

 

Major losses

For instance, Chinese hackers infected a Chinese restaurant’s online menu in order to introduce malware into the system of an American oil business. Ian Williams, a journalist for the Sunday Times and the author of “Every Breath You Take: China’s New Tyranny,” explains how when the company’s engineers clicked to get their takeaway, hackers would have access to a sizable quantity of private information. The Chinese are “the most prolific and persistent offenders of economic espionage in the world,” according to the US National Counterintelligence Service.

The FBI says that China is fostering a new generation of “patriotic hackers” who target cutting-edge technology in which China wants to lead and that China has roughly 30,000 military cyber-spies and 150,000 unofficial hackers that it can activate at any time. Former US National Security Agency director Keith Alexander calls US loses from cyberespionage “the greatest transfer of money in history.” Information collecting by China extends outside of the internet. Today, the Chinese maintain several scientific collaborations with Western universities in addition to corporate connections.

At least 50 Chinese students had to leave British colleges, according to McCallum, who disclosed that their investigations had turned up linkages to the military and other institutions. The UK is rapaciously utilising its relationship with China, which is the largest foreign market for British colleges, while turning a blind eye to any potential risks.

Chinese partners with Beijing-related ties are well-established in British campuses, and Chinese students pay tuition fees that exceed £30,000 annually. While the West has been alarmed by our dependence on Russian gas, analysts say the consequences of severing ties with China would be considerably bigger.

Many important supply chains, including those for fundamental minerals like lithium and rare metals, which are essential to rechargeable batteries and other green technology, transit through China. investments made by China At the same time, Britain accepts 200 enterprises and a £134 billion investment from China.

Chinese investments have been made in a variety of businesses, including nuclear power reactors, electric battery producers, Heathrow Airport, Pizza Express, travel agency Thomas Cook, football clubs Wolverhampton Wanderers and Southampton, and black cab manufacturer LEVCU. Despite being barred from 5G telecommunications networks, Britain continues to rely heavily on Huawei for its 4G infrastructure. The Oxford Sciences Innovation firm, which commercialises research from Oxford University, also gave Huawei permission to purchase a tiny stake. This gave the Chinese corporation access to some of the most exciting early-stage technology created by British academics.

Although the corporation is well rooted in the British economy and academic community, the government’s decision to bar Huawei from Britain’s 5G telecoms networks is frequently interpreted as a sign of its intention to fight Chinese influence. Without a clear definition of what “strategic” means, investment regulations for “strategic” areas have been tightened. The monitoring of academic relationships has been strengthened, but the regulations are murky, making colleges motivated to discover loopholes to shield funding from Chinese students and research collaborations. The British government has also disregarded pleas to restrict Chinese-supplied “smart city” technology, such as cameras and sensors, which intelligence officials have warned may be used for spying, disruption, or the theft of private information.

The non-profit group Big Brother Watch claims that 73% of UK councils, 57% of secondary schools in England, 61% of NHS trusts, UK universities, and the police utilise equipment made by Chinese corporations that are allegedly complicit in human rights violations.

There is simply no such thing as a private Chinese corporation in any sense, McCallum and Wray said, and all Chinese businesses and research institutions must answer to the Chinese Communist Party.

Collaboration to protect “National security” is a requirement under the law. Be aware that you are interacting with the Chinese government as well.

Like almost quiet partners, said Wray. The massive “Chinese machine” is the focus of British intelligence agencies, who have made it clear that they are adamant that the next prime minister placed the Chinese threat at the top of the political agenda.

 

 

 

The Evolution of Labor Organising and the Struggle for Workers’ Rights

The employees organised themselves, but why and how?

Trades dissolved and guild associations now replaced by trade unions because of the increase in industrial production towards the end of the 18th and beginning of the 19th centuries. In the USA, the first union regarded as the Shoemaker’s Union in Philadelphia, founded in 1794. The early unions, like guilds, are based on the association of trained employees in a particular profession.

At the same time (1799), a legislation passed in England, the home of the industrial revolution, prohibiting union formation and collective bargaining. The establishment of trade union organisations in the United Kingdom significantly slowed by the law, which, despite the amended, persisted until 1871. As a result, the General Union of Trades, which founded in Manchester in 1818 under the less contentious name of the Philanthropic Society, regarded as the first British trade union. The longest-running trade union federation in the world, the Trade Union Congress founded 50 years later, in 1868. At the time, it was known as the Trade Union Congress, and it now combines about 50 British organisations with about 5.5 million people. Only three years later, in 1871, was labor union association authorised in Britain.

The Knights of Labor, the first trade union federation in America, established in 1869. The national trade union organisation that will last today established in 1881; it has been known as the American Federation of Labor Federation of Labour since 1886, the year of the demonstration at Haymarket Square.

The General Confederation of Labor established in France in 1895, though labor unions not permitted until 1884.

In contrast to the other Western countries mentioned earlier, unionisation in Germany initiated by an already established labor party rather than the other way around. It concerns the Social Democratic Party, which established in 1869 and has endured to the present. It was the Social Democratic Party that spearheaded the establishment of the German National Trade Union Association in 1892.

In the latter half of the 1820s, non-convict laborers known as free workers in Sydney and Hobart established the first unions in Australia. Since the late 1830s, unions have grown throughout the nation. In Australia, four hundred unions founded between 1850 and 1869. Stonemasons and carpenters, as well as informal unions of craftsmen and other workers like shop assistants, laborers, and miners, represented by these early unions. These unions created in large part to support their members amid illness, loss, and unemployment. Other unions incorporated social welfare support into their advocacy activities for better pay and working conditions.

However, these early unions failed quickly. In the 1850s, union activity increased as workers fought for an eight-hour workday. Road transport employees and miners, two groups of workers outside the craft industry, also started organising.

From the 1870s on, women actively participated in the union movement, frequently founding their own unions.

A daring demand made for an eight-hour workday.

Most the 19th century’s anti-union laws logically drove labor groups’ efforts to legalise collective bargaining and trade union work to advance material rights and working conditions. It is also the time of the English Chartist movement, which fought for universal suffrage, but the eight-hour workday demand prevailed as an offensive demand in the sense of being extremely radical given the circumstances of the time.

Robert Owen, a socialist from Wales, coined the phrase “8 hours of work, 8 hours of recreation, and 8 hours of rest” in 1817, which became known as the “three eights.”

The great classical liberal philosopher John Locke made the observation that it is best to begin work as early as three years old, and this insight is still used as guidance today in Britain.

A summary of the growth of labor law in England in the first half of the 19th century is provided by Karl Marx in his seminal work Capital, which analyses the social system of capitalism.

According to Karl Marx, the prohibition on children under the age of nine years old not working within this timeframe 1833. Children aged 9 to 13 years were only allowed to labor for 8 hours, but those aged 13 to 18 years could work for 12 hours. Children under the age of thirteen years were only permitted to work for 6.5 hours starting in 1844, and it was not until 1848 that adults were allowed to work a maximum of 10 hours per day.

As an organisation of ideologically diverse labor movement groups, the International Workers’ Association, also known as the First International, established in London in 1864. This group of groups included the socialist adherents of Owen and Blanqui, Proudhon’s anarchists, German socialists, Irish and Polish nationalists, Italian republicans, communist Marx, and anarchist Bakunin.

Due to divergent opinions on the state’s role in the coming classless society, the First International suspended operations in 1876. It did not resume operations again until 1889, this time without anarchists. May 1st now suggested as the International Labor Day as a day of memory of the Chicago events during that conference in 1889, which was held in Paris.

However, what specifically occurred in Chicago in 1886?

The American Federation of Labor began a significant effort on May 1, 1886, to exert political pressure on the legislature to enact the eight-hour workday rule in those federal states where it did not yet exist. The government tried to put an end to the first round of strikes and protests. When police attempted to allow strikers to report for work at an agricultural machinery factory in Chicago, violence broke out. The following day, the anarchist unions organised a peaceful demonstration in Haymarket Square, which descended into a horrific carnage that left approximately fifteen people dead and about one hundred more injured when the unidentified assailant, dropped a bomb.

Eight famous Anarcho-syndicalists detained by the police; four of them hanged, one committed suicide while incarcerated, and three others freed following a second trial.

A full one hundred years after Owen set the precedent and approximately 30 years after the events in Haymarket Square, the demand for an eight-hour workday would not be achieved.

Differences and similarities between trade union action today and a century ago

Contrary to what one might think given the passing of time, trade union action at the time the decision to reduce the working day to 8 hours and now share more parallels. Let us list examples: pervasive precariousness, or employment insecurity in the form of fixed-term contracts and hidden self-employment, bad working conditions, unpaid overtime, inadequate legal protection, and company omnipotence.

In this regard, the history of trade union organising in the USA offers an intriguing illustration.

At the start of the 20th century, the historically powerful professional organisation began to falter in favour of industrial unions that organised workers regardless of their profession and qualifications.

In the past, trade unions established with the purpose of organising qualified workers, as their name suggests in English.

Early 20th-century unions saw unskilled workers as unfit for union protection, just as temporary workers seen as being challenging to organise.

Most unskilled workers were women and people of colour.

Due to the acrimonious nature of the battle, the American Federation of Labor split, barring unions that employed low-skilled employees from membership. The unions established the Congress of Industrial Organisations as their new administrative centre.

To address the challenges posed by the various forms of precarious employment that have become prevalent in the service industry and the private sector, we have reached a point at the start of the 21st century where there needs to be a meaningful change in the strategy of trade union work.

This leads us to the distinctions between the circumstances in the past and the present, which must unquestionably be considered if a suitable response is to be developed; today, there is neither a significant labor movement nor labor parties.

The social and economic environment has changed in a way that formalises the role of unions and places it within a framework where any form of politicisation is either undesirable or simply not present.

The nature of work has changed significantly; whereas once employees were employed by large corporations and shared a common workspace, today a large percentage do not share a workspace and do not know each other; instead, they frequently work from home, online, or through one of the platforms, which greatly reduces the likelihood that they will connect and engage in conflict.

Equally as much as they did in the 19th century, workers still require a union.

Now the trade union was founded, it was obvious that no one would give away political and economic rights; rather, they would have to be fought for, and the success of the fight would depend on the size and power of the workers’ organisations.

This has been amply demonstrated by the 100-year war for eight-hour workdays and the even longer struggle for universal suffrage.

But as time went on, the chosen rights started to be associated less and less with pressure and struggle and increasingly with knowledge, advancement, and reason.

This, in this interpretation, led to the development of ideas about the necessity of extending the rights to a larger population. A large part of this understanding made possible by the welfare state in Europe during the so-called “30 golden years” that followed World War II.

We will only briefly touch on the significance of the Western welfare state, i.e., the rights enjoyed workers in the West meant the existence of the Soviet Union and the socialist bloc to which we belonged until the end of the 1980s, without delving into the larger issue of dismantling the Western welfare state, which especially intensified after Margaret Thatcher came to power in Britain in 1979 and Ronald Reagan in the USA in 1981.

As Eastern challenges fade away, social services were privatised, labor rights are becoming more flexible, and the economy’s structure shifts in favour of low-paying positions in the service industry.

The worst are young people, women, and persons with little education, especially if they work in the private sector. The percentage of fixed-term contracts is rising, the unemployment rate is rising, and there are fewer high-paying positions available. Due to the union’s diminished strength because of all these developments, which leave it ill-equipped to adapt to the new conditions, it all but vanishes from the private sector.

Most people have come to the view that the trade union is an excessively strong type of worker organisation that, while it might have been able to protect workers’ rights 50 or 100 years ago, is now helpless in the current environment. Such logic is flawed because it fails to distinguish between the trade union as a labor organisation and the tactics it employs to build its membership and pursue its objectives.

In other words, it was the ideological content that needed to be changed rather than the trade union as a form that was the problem.

The best evidence for this comes from recent victories in organising platform workers across Europe, which show that the issues can be fixed and that there is a chance for a successful campaign to improve working conditions and increase workplace safety. For instance, allowing those who are unemployed or just temporarily working to join a union would make it much easier for precarious workers to organise as they would be able to do so regardless of their ambiguous current employment situation.

Equalising the rights of temporary and permanent employees and regulating labor relations in specific businesses or industries through collective agreements are two other examples.

There is still room for adaptation, including a stronger physical presence, adaptation of organisational techniques to the specifics of workplaces, increased decentralisation, worker empowerment as the face of union activities, increased transparency and worker communication, adaptation to modern communication formats, and a new strategy for collecting and using membership dues.

The work of trade unions is fraught with difficulties, but it is unlikely that things will improve without the concerted efforts of all the workers. As a result, the theory that trade unions are superior in the twenty-first century is, at best, naive and, at worst, a hoax intended to divert attention from the factual issues at hand.

The union needs a fresh concept to inspire the workers.

The labor movement’s history has shown us that, in addition to sound organisation, it was critical to have a concept that inspired participation, mobilised supporters, and inspired hope for a better future.

A notion that, like the radical demand for eight-hour workdays, seems too radical to be true but still starts a struggle and inspires.

The current fight for the protection of material rights is admirable, but the question is? How far can it go without a fresh, creative idea? What would it look like to fight for the socialisation of the means of production or the shortening of the working day in the present day?

 

 

 

For years, Russian secret services have placed agents in European nations, from where they conduct an unnoticed war against the West. They destroy, spy on, and murder dissidents while infiltrating IT firms. It has lasted much longer than the war in Ukraine and is a struggle for authority, influence, raw commodities, and money. On the first day of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, a significant number of American Viasat customers unexpectedly lost their satellite internet connection, demonstrating how closely the unseen war is tied to the apparent one. The Ukrainian army was the true objective of the strike, and 5,800 wind turbines in Germany lost contact with the grid centre.

According to the weekly Der Spiegel, one of the key objectives of Russia’s “invisible” war is Germany. German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock (Greens) expressed alarm over attacks on the country’s electrical networks in July. The administrations in Berlin, Paris, and Rome preferred to keep a blind eye although Eastern European nations, the United States, and Great Britain had been warning about Russian intelligence services for years, according to Spiegel. Koji thinks that the German governments were equally unaware of the threat posed by Russian espionage as they were of their reliance on Russian energy supplies, particularly gas.

Russian espionage, disinformation efforts, and cyberattacks now pose a greater threat because of Russia’s aggressive assault against Ukraine, according to German Interior Minister Nancy Faeser of the Social Democratic Party (SPD). Given Germany’s federal structure, her ministry issued a warning that the federal level’s authority was insufficient to address the current threat. German foreign intelligence agency BND (Bundesnachrichtendienst) even ceased counterintelligence efforts following the September 11, 2001 terrorist assault on the US on the grounds that Germany needed to focus on a new type of adversary.

Russia is now present in our networks, Wolfgang Wien, deputy director of the BND, has issued a warning. He claimed that the agency has a thorough understanding of the cyber world and that what they have discovered there is troubling.

Like the battlefield in Ukraine, where it has been demonstrated that soldiers still play a crucial role, Russia still relies on cadres and specific personnel for its espionage operations in Germany.

Maria Adele K. is one of the examples that made headlines. Adele K.’s passport bears the serial number of a member of the GRU’s (Russia’s military secret service) elite unit, which was established in 2009 and tasked with eliminating rivals. This unit was also responsible for the murder in Berlin’s park and attempted to kill former spy Sergei Skripal in Velika Britain. According to Western reports, the GRU and SVR (Russia’s foreign intelligence arm) are holding only about 70 “illegals” in the West. More agents are employed by the Russian Federation’s embassies and consulates, which enjoy diplomatic immunity.

Western intelligence agencies estimated that at the start of this year, more than 150 Russian spies with diplomatic immunity were working in Germany alone. Few of their interlocutors assist them out of political commitment; most do it out of avarice or ignorance of what they are doing.

Ralph G. might have complied because he was politically committed. The German military reserve lieutenant colonel has been on trial in Düsseldorf since August for giving information to a GRU agent between October 2014 and March 2020. He met Mikhail Starov, a Russian attaché, during the Bonn Air Force Ball. Starov paid the reserve officer a visit a few months later at his residence in Erkrath, North Rhine-Westphalia. According to Ralph G., he gave him the names of Bundeswehr officials he believed to be pro-Russian. He utilised email addresses that were registered on web.de and Gmail, which made it simple to identify him. Although he allegedly didn’t work for pay, he reportedly took many paid visits to Moscow to attend a security conference.

The case of Ilnur N, a Russian PhD student at the University of Augsburg, serves as an illustration of the operations of Russian spies. He was waiting in line to purchase fish in the summer of 2019 when a “random” consumer struck up a conversation with him in Russian. It was Leonid Strukov, who was formally serving as Munich’s deputy consul general. This is an SVR officer, according to the German authorities. Strukov informed him that he frequently visited Augsburg and invited them to meet up for a beer. Ilnur N. describes how Strukov then revealed to him that he was aiding a former co-worker who was looking for investment opportunities in aviation companies at a Russian bank.

He asked N. if he might assist by sharing his knowledge of emerging areas of aeronautical technology research. N. concurred. He gathered data from open sources, but he also utilised his access to the university’s data archive to get some information that was available for a fee.

Although he didn’t divulge any private information, the deputy consul general nevertheless paid him; initially it was 100, then 200, and then 600 euros. The European Ariane 6 rocket caught the Russian spy’s attention in particular, and N. was a significant source of intelligence there as well. The young scientist eventually started telling Strukov about his own studies into the creation of a cryostat, a chamber where extremely low temperatures are produced to test materials for space travel. Strukov first didn’t seem interested, but during a subsequent encounter, he inquired in detail about the challenging problem.

Additionally, he requested that N. send him some of the research-related documents. He could just use his phone to take a photo of the screen if necessary. The BFV, the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitutional Order, which at the time already had Strukov under surveillance, put a halt to everything. N., like many of the Russians’ informants, was essentially a useful moron.

 

 

Have you ever felt as though someone is watching you? Offline or online? That your every move has been monitored and perpetrators used your information on social media against you?

It should go without saying that victims of cyber stalking can experience tremendous mental suffering and find their mental health deteriorating rapidly. Often, even those in the close circle of the victim don’t notice changes in their behaviour until it is too late.

According to Tech Jury: “Victims of cyberbullying are 1.9 times more likely to commit suicide.”

It is easy to find documentaries about cybercrime and cyber stalking on today’s streaming service platforms, however, it seems no one takes this criminal activity seriously until it happens to them.

Finding out if you are being stalked online is even more challenging than figuring out if someone is monitoring you offline.

Let’s discuss the following:

– Who could be an online stalker

– Why cyber stalkers stalk

– Types of cyberstalking

– Comparing offline and online stalking

– What should you do if you believe you are a target of cyber stalking?

 

Different tactics can be used in cyber stalking.

Cyber stalking is happening across all digital gadgets, and for younger generations cyberstalking is mostly conducted on mobile phone devices.

Cyber stalking is a relatively new identified criminal activity; however, we can certainly draw parallels with stalking.

According to AIC (Australian Institute of Criminology, No166 Cyberstalking) “Cyberstalking is analogous to traditional forms of stalking in that it incorporates persistent behaviours that instil apprehension and fear”.

It’s possible that someone is quietly gathering data or that they’ve made contact. Online harassment, slander, libel and slander are all forms of cyber stalking.

Private messages or emails from people you don’t know could be sent to you. It’s possible that you’ll discover that someone has hacked into and used your online accounts. If you have your phone with you, someone may be using spyware to monitor the GPS tracker, allowing them to always know where you are.

 

Who could be an online stalker?

Anyone could be a stalker and the reasons for stalking someone online can vary.

Some people experience stalking from strangers, while other do so from acquaintances.

A cyber stalker could be an abusive spouse or an ex-partner.

A cyber stalker might be an overbearing parent, it can be a former co-worker or even a stranger.

The majority of cyberstalking victims already know the individual who is pursuing them.

People who are well known and famous are more likely to face stalking from strangers.

The reason why we don’t have a profile for a “cyber stalker” and its modus operandi is simple. Everyone feels safe behind their screens, believing no one will discover them and bring them to justice.

 

Why cyber stalkers stalk?

Online harassment and stalking are the most common types of abuse.

Harassment online can be done under some degree of anonymity. The online harasser does not have to leave the comfort of their home in order to find, pursue, and harass the target because they have no fear of physical retaliation.

Love obsessed stalkers frequently think that the object of their desires truly loves them, which makes it impossible for them to understand the word “NO”. A love fixation might begin with an online engagement that ends because the rejected partner is unable to accept the breakup.

Then, there are the hate-revenge stalkers. In this group, more men are the target. An argument or disagreement that spirals out of control may serve as the catalyst for a hate vendetta. Another reason someone can be the target of a vendetta is because of their beliefs.

The ego trip stalkers typically chose a victim at random, someone they don’t know. The harasser’s goal is to impress themselves and their friends with their talent. They are using the victim to show their dominance within their own group; they don’t hold a personal grudge against the victim.

 

Comparing offline and online stalking.

Stalking occurs more frequently with former intimates. The majority of victims are women and the majority of stalkers are men. Most stalkers are driven by a desire to exert control over the victim.

Online stalkers can be found anywhere, unlike offline stalking which typically requires both the stalker and the victim to be in the same region. With the use of electronic communication technologies, it is considerably simpler for a cyber stalker to persuade others to harass and/or threaten a victim without actually confronting the target.

Types of cyberstalking:

• • Email Stalking – if we compare to stalking before internet, stalkers would use their personal or public phones, and mail to harass the victim. Today, the phone is replaced with email. Instant communication can occur between the stalker and victim and emails can be sent with viruses, subscriptions to pornographic sites, spam etc.A stalker will try to establish a “relationship” with the victim, repair a relationship or perhaps attempt to traumatise the victim to the extent of suicide.
  • Internet Stalking – this modus operandi is where the stalker follows the victim on all social media platforms, monitoring and recording what the victim does. The stalker usually uses public domains to place false information and discredit and defame the victim.
  • • Computer Stalking – the stalker will utilise and exploit vulnerabilities on the operating system of the victim’s computer (hacking). In that way, there is a buffer between victim and stalker, usually physical distance. That said, the stalker will then do their best to control the victim’s computer remotely.

   

 

What should you do if you believe you are a target of cyber stalking?

First of all, do not share personal information in public spaces, public domains and even if you do share information, please, keep that that to a minimum.

No one is saying that your personal information cannot be found but why would you give it up on a silver platter?

The first step in protecting ones’ self from cyber stalking is to take action.

• • Change the passwords on your accounts and confirm that you are using the privacy controls offered. Make sure to block the stalker if you think you know who is following you.

• • Check that all of your linked devices have operational and up to date antivirus and antispyware software.

• • Ensure password protection is in place for your wireless router.

• • • Keep copies of every communication as proof. Don’t change or edit them in any way.

  </ul >

  • • • Additionally, keep a record of any interactions you have with the law, such as Police or internet system administrators.
      • Make contact with your local police station and give them as much information as you can about the circumstance or refer to the relevant government body.

Be careful and know that as soon as you are in a public domain, you must be prepared for the chance that someone will try to stalk you.

 

 

 

Waking up in the morning what is the first thing you do after opening your eyes?

Some people make coffee, pray, start complaining about all the daily chores that await to be actioned. But for most people the first thing is?

Grab that mobile and check what has happened while you were sleeping within the world of Instagram, Facebook, Tinder, Twitter just to name a few.

Social networks are an essential part of life today, I think that very few of us who don’t check the news, the screen, and any new posts to see whether we “missed” anything when we have awoken in the morning.

Influencers are crucial when discussing social networks.

Who has the most impact in your life or on your life right now?

You follow him or her on social media for what reason?

 

Now I have another question for you.

Are leaders’ influencers?

Leader/Influencer.

 

Are all leaders’ influencers, or are all influencers’ leaders?

It depends on whoever you ask.

Although they are related, influence and leadership are distinct concepts.

We must consider their objectives and obligations if we are to truly differentiate between influencers and leaders.

The main objective of a typical influencer is to market a lifestyle, item, or brand to their enthusiastic audience.

Influencers are only one aspect of good leaders.

Influencing others to work towards a shared vision is the process of leadership.

While leadership cannot be value-neutral, influence can.

Influence of marketers, influence of authors more is required for leadership then giving people the power to work on building a future that is in line with their own values.

A system can transform deeply and urgently with the aid of leadership. With influence there is a lot more needed.

Influencers drive ideas, whereas leaders drive people. To transform ideas into reality, leaders must learn how to formalise concepts and activate teams.

Great leaders bring about change among known individuals, environments, and occupations. A leader’s charisma or a persuasive speech can produce a group of followers.

However, influencers need more than just leadership to change strangers’ ideas or ideals and have them follow them into uncharted territory.

Leadership has more to do with who you are than what you can impact.

Without leadership, influence is possible but will only last briefly.

As you improve being a leader, make space within your life or business for others to grow and impact others positively. As a result, leaders develop organic influence and serve as change agents.

When influencing someone, a person has a certain aim in mind which determines whether the influence was successfully based on whether the target was reached.

Influence is a common component of leadership and is typically including the idea that the person being influenced has evolved into a better version of themselves; someone who is capable, competent, and confident.

We all have an impact on others. Which can be good or bad (positive or negative).

Leaders are conscious of their power. To have the influence they seek; individuals adjust their thinking and actions.

They are conscious of themselves and their surroundings.

Leadership requires more than just the capacity for influence.

This indicates that they are aware of how their emphasis, behaviours, and beliefs impact other people, also able to read a situation to determine the appropriate language, behaviours, and beliefs.

Although, who do you follow, influencers or leaders?

 

It is the Year 1989.

If you follow the Chinese calendar, it was a year of the Snake.

A year which would change the European and World political landscape forever and 30 years later, the East would clash with the West in Ukraine.

Now imagine a wall. I mean a really big, long, high thick wall, built 13th August 1961.

On top of the wall are barbed razor wires. Every few hundred meters, guard towers, manned by East German military and supported or rather, supervised by the Russian military. (Please bear in mind that the USSR had almost 400,000 of their own troops stationed in East Germany).

In 1962, the Soviets and East Germans added a second barrier, about 50 metres behind the original wall, creating a tightly policed no man’s land between the walls.

You may ask yourself why do I need to understand 1989? Yes, we know the USSR collapsed, the Eastern Bloc and Warsaw Pact dissolved a year later and countries like Hungary, Bulgaria, and Czechoslovakia transitioned from communism to democracy. While one country from the Eastern Bloc, Romania – well they had a little bit of a turbulent uprising which showed signs of what a communist system had on their disposal and why.

Without a doubt, they had security intelligence apparatuses which were able to fight the military, police and citizens like in the case of Nicolaou Ceausescu. We know how that ended.

Shot, after a brief trial in some old village house on the 25th December 1989. Some 2 weeks later Romania abolished the death sentence, conveniently, right?

Maybe you didn’t know but Nicola Ceausescu was signing “The Internationale” just before he was executed.

I do remember we as a kids used to sing that song, “like it or not, it was good for our health”, you know what I mean.

Then we come to 1991 and the civil war in Yugoslavia, well more like the Yugoslavia People’s Army, decided that there will be no democracy within Yugoslavia and that 6 republics and 2 territories will be crushed if they dare opposed.

Croatia did dare and we went to war to free ourselves from communist enslavement, hence me spending almost 1800 consecutive combat days in war.

But that is a story for some other time.

Now let’s sum up what actually did happen to communism when the communist states crumbled and were crushed by the weight of their own people, workers etc.

Citizens wanted revenge on those who spied on them, put them into prisons, and killed their loved ones. So voila, Hungary, Poland and others opened their secret archives to the public.

I mean they really opened secret archives, after of course some files had been removed, just in case.

Most of the security intelligence apparatuses stayed intact, at least at the top but the rest of them, well they needed to find new employers.

Just to give you perspective, here’s what I am talking about:

• Romania “Securitate” 11,000
• Hungary “State Protection Authority” – 33,000
• Bulgaria” Committee for State Security” – Sector 7 ( Smersh type hit squad around the world) – 1981 attempt to assassinate John Paul II – approx 10,000
• East Germany “STASI 91,015” regular employees and you know who was one of their supervisors? Yes, that guy Vladimir Putin.

 

This number is just a fraction of a few countries, whose agents are now in their late 40s or mid 50s with a sour taste in their mouth looking to cash in on their knowledge, allegiance to communism and the list goes on.

But, in reality, the West didn’t want to see two things:

Hundreds of thousands of ex-intelligence officers working under the umbrella of communism, supervised by the KGB, and secondly is the book.

Which book?

Potemkin villages from Grigory Potemkin.

This book is important for one reason, disinformation, or how to utilise disinformation as a part of psychological warfare and deceiving enemies.

A part of the origins of disinformation and one of the most famous examples of disinformation is Grigory Potemkin (1739-1791), who orchestrated the building of fake villages to impress his former lover, Empress Catherine the Great, when she visited newly conquered territories in 1787.

It is a beautiful story, but a fake one. The idea of the Potemkin villages was designed to disinform the Ottoman Empire into believing that the Russian Empire was weak and that they just built wooden facades. It encouraged the Ottoman Empire to go to war with Russia over Crimea. They lost, resulting in the Treaty of Jassy that confirmed Crimea as a part of the Russian Empire.

Modern age disinformation was widely adopted by the USSR under the term, dezinformatsiya. According to Ion Mihai Pacepa, a high-ranking official in Romania’s secret police, who defected in 1978, there were many examples of how the USSR utilised disinformation against the West.

Definitions of disinformation and misinformation are easy to find. The important distinction between the two is the intent that sits behind them.

Misinformation is the sharing or publishing of information that is more or less accurate. It can be spread by anyone, by any means and without the intent to deceive. We see this daily on our social media platforms, through the continuous arguments and counter arguments, which may even include some facts.

Disinformation, on the other hand, is created deliberately with the intent to deceive. Its deceptive nature is designed to cause problems within countries, organisations and the general public.

It is often directed against prominent members of society. It is a common tactic employed by foreign countries and their intelligence agencies, who use friendly, reliable supporters to help distribute disinformation on a large scale.

Disinformation is usually based on true events, so it will include facts around which a false story will be built. These typically use sources, like social media platforms, where misinformation is flowing.

Disinformation is a part of daily life, alongside misinformation. It is important for corporations to understand the modus operandi of both, in order to protect their brands and reputations by maximising trust and confidence within their consumer and supplier communities.

Now imagine the year 1989. Hundreds of thousands of sacked ex-communist secret intelligence agents are looking for a highest bidder for their services, and perhaps a utopia of communism coming back.

 

 

Lets’ talk Inflation.

And recession.

Regardless of whether we want to admit it or not, things have been a little different in the past 6 months.

That being said, I am not an economist nor working in finance, however, I will talk about something related to inflation, recession and how you can respond to it in the way you THINK and ACT.

Before we dig deep into this awesome topic, I know there may be some people who would rather sing Kumbaya all day, holding hands and chanting mantras. How will the world change for the better just by holding hands and singing happy songs?

They tried in the 60s and that ended with Watergate.

It will not.

Period.

 

What is inflation?

According to the mighty internet (more precisely Investopedia.com), inflation is a decrease in the purchasing power of money, reflected in a general increase in the prices of goods and services in an economy.

 

What is recession?

A period of temporary economic decline during which trade and industrial activity are reduced, generally identified by a fall in GDP in two successive quarters – basically declining economic activity.

Let’s go deeper into history and list 5 of the World’s Most Devastating Financial Crises:

•   The British Credit Crisis of 1772

•   The Great Depression of 1929–39

•   The OPEC Oil Price Shock of 1973 (Jackal, Carlos Ramirez Sanchez – 1975, kidnapping)

•   The Asian Financial Crisis of 1997

•   The Global Financial Crisis of 2007–08

 

I do remember inflation in the 1980s – allegedly because of the Iran revolution but I didn’t know better, I was just a teenager with big dreams, like owning a pair of Nike sneakers.

But what I do remember was that petrol was sold to car owners like, if your rego ends with an odd number on an odd date, you can put petrol in your car, as well as many winter nights where the electricity was shut down around 4pm. I was doing homework under candlelight as if I was Galileo and Copernicus. I would finish my homework, no excuses.

I also remember clearly now how I used to stand in line in front of the local store from 8 am till 3 pm, then my father from 3 pm till 3 am, then my mother could follow in the morning buying one litre of cooking oil, 200 grams of coffee beans, 1 kilo of sugar and, if I was lucky, a mandarin or two.

I needed to share with my younger brother which I didn’t like, not one bit.

Inflation was a topic for adults, and in communism people didn’t talk publicly but with a chosen few. You never knew who was an informant.

The most important thing is that in communism there were no financial planners or mortgage specialists.

But what we did have was TV (the truth is, there was only 2 channels, in black and white, no colour).

And on TV was declarations of how communism is great, and our leadership is doing everything to manage the inflation as fast as possible so the working class can go back to the factories happy. This was the news.

News like the US president Ronald Reagan and his speech about “Star Wars”. Funny, Ronald Reagan never watched Star Wars according to his memoirs.

I apologise I can hear it, the Imperial March.

The news was that the US developed Star Wars which suddenly created money. Money for who?

The Military. No need to talk about that in this episode.

What we have seen in the past 2 years are statements such as, “it is cheap money, buy more properties”; and “money was printed, galore, I mean galore, like there is no tomorrow”.

We have seen the phenomena “WFH”. Now we can see the results from those advisors, those financial planners.

So, let’s dig into what you can do and what you should not do. This advice is about your thinking.

There is famous quote:

The Latin cogito, ergo sum, usually translated into English as “I think, therefore I am”, is the “first principle” of René Descartes’s philosophy.

In a nutshell:

We humans operate on a daily basis and future wishful thinking.

Daily basis we can describe as “tactical” and future thinking as “strategic”.

For individuals looking to utilise tactical, operational, or strategic thinking, I would like you to visualise this as a 3-dimensional operation between:

1.  Time

2.  Space

3.  Force: that is Money or Resources

 

In the simplest terms, inflation and recession create uncertainty, obstacles, fear, and anxiety. No questions asked.

So, when someone tells you to think strategically, usually they want you to think about the future.

Stop there right now.

You need to think about now, today, not what will be in 12 months’ time.

You should apply a tactical approach, which means you will need to utilise less time, space, and resources to overcome elements of inflation or recession.

 

What does that mean?

For starters, source cheaper food over the next 7 days. Think how you can reduce cost for your household for the next 30 days. That is tactical thinking.

If you chose strategic thinking, looking beyond the horizon. You will need to spend more time, space, and resources to fight the uncertainty of inflation or recession and plan for the next 12 months’ time. It is impossible due to the everyday changing situation.

Many situations have no answers or crystal ball, so act now for tomorrow not on wishful thinking.

And at the end, I must say, I am always surprised about how the last people who learn that inflation is happening, are the taxpayers.

Take the tactical approach, not strategic.

Strategies can be played well after a crisis is gone and brighter financial days come.

 

 

It is the year 1945 and the month of May.

On the 8th of May 1945, Germany signed an unconditional surrender to the 4 powers (Russia, UK, USA, and France) and World War II in Europe officially ended.

Needless to say, it took a few more months of bloody battles in the Pacific and the Japanese island of Okinawa, and 2 atomic bombs dropped on Nagasaki and Hiroshima to see the end of World War II globally.

A few months before, in February 1945, the leaders of Russia, UK and the USA met in Yalta, Crimea to discuss how the future of Europe would look. Of course, the sphere of influence of Russia had been sealed.

All ex-allies of Germany (Hungary, Poland, Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, Romania) somehow became buffer zones between the West and East. There is one communist country which didn’t like that idea.

That country was called Yugoslavia, once upon a time.

Stalin, on behalf of Russia, told brotherly Yugoslavia and its leader Marshal Tito to hop on the train and ride together toward the red dawn of communism.

Stalin expressed his concerns that the Communist Party of Yugoslavia didn’t follow the principles of Marxism, that they were thieves, looters and literally embarrassing Communism.

In 1948, Stalin withdrew military consultants from Yugoslavia because Tito didn’t like the idea that the USSR were interfering with the internal affairs of Yugoslavia and geopolitical relationships.

However, the crumbling relationship between Yugoslavia and the USSR culminated because Yugoslavia started helping Greek communists in Greece (1944 – 1949). Stalin didn’t like that one bit because he didn’t give his blessing.

Stalin had stipulated that Yugoslavia was having too great a bilateral relationship with the West and that they would become bourgeois and stop being communist.

Stalin started flexing his muscles in the countries surrounding Yugoslavia and threatening a full scale invasion.

Stalin asked true communists of Yugoslavia to remove Tito and his government. No doubt, there were a number of communists in Yugoslavia who were not so happy with Tito and they sided with Stalin.

In a nutshell, the USSR conjured a civil war in Yugoslavia.

Tito responded with his famous “NO” to Stalin in 1948, and Tito not only started a new era in Yugoslavia’s relations with the Soviet Union, but also one of the country’s bloodiest chapters following the Second World War.

Execution and imprisonment was the fate given to those who went rouge against the Yugoslavia Communist Party and its leader Marsal Tito.

Economically, Yugoslavia sided temporarily with the West which made Stalin angrier and even more revengeful. Why? because no one says “NO” to Mr Stalin.

 

Tito’s Response

At the end of 1948 Tito and the Communist Party authorised investigations (torture and interrogations, applying all the forbidden methods in order to obtain confessions) for citizens who supported Stalin and the USSR, and even people who listened to Russian songs.

Imagine, imprisonment of those who saw Stalin and Russia as a raw model, those who believed in communism and that all communists across the globe are equal.

We all heard or saw in movies about the infamous prison called Alcatraz, popularly called The Rock.

Alcatraz is situated in San Francisco Bay and prisoners could see San Francisco, land in the distance. It was considered to be a maximum security prison.

What you never heard about was the most brutal political prison. A prison that even Russia’s Gulags are considered kindergartens by comparison.

Now imagine an island 4.5 km2 in size, uninhabited, only rock and more rock.

The sun above, sea around. No fresh water.

Tito and his close associates belonging to a security-intelligence apparatus decided to turn this rock into a political prisoner camp.

That camp was called Naked Island, Goli Otok.

The most well-known political prisoner camp in socialist Yugoslavia, Naked Island is one of the historical phenomena that has not yet been thoroughly studied.

The camps were a top-secret state operation at the time they existed.

Prisoners of Naked Island said that in the German concentration camps, Germans would kill the body, but the Yugoslavian prison, Naked Island, was designed to kill humanity and the human within the body.

The welcome party for new groups of prisoners was organised by prison guards. They made 2 columns of one or two thousand prisoners beat the passing new inmates.

Daily work consisted of extreme hard labour, smashing the rock and building a camp from that rock.

 

This prison was organised to re-educate political prisoners in the following way:

1. Confess

2. Repel

3. Prove yourself a worthy member of the Yugoslavian Communist Party

 

Interestingly enough, the prison stopped taking political inmates in 1956 after Yugoslavian- Russian relationships improved.

The Prison didn’t close its doors; on the contrary, it was used until 1989 when it was officially closed.

 

Aftermath

Books and newspaper articles addressing that delicate subject didn’t start to appear until the middle of the 20th century.

There is still not enough information available on the network of pro-Soviet opposition camps and prisons in Yugoslavia.

The majority of the materials were unavailable for many years due to the politically sensitive nature of the topic.

Is there any chance that significant sources have been saved at all?

The documentation was destroyed; therefore, the precise number of prisoners is still unknown.

The reasoning behind this practice is likely to do with the fact that the documentation about the camps also included evidence of the breadth and depth of repression, which may subsequently be utilised against UDB officials or specific politicians in the event of any unforeseen developments.

“Dissidents” started to be transported to Goli Otok in July 1949, a little over a year after the then Soviet Union published the Informbiro Resolution to appoint a new political leadership for Yugoslavia. This was following the breakup between Josip Broz Tito and Joseph Stalin.

Due to its isolation, lack of drinking water, and inaccessibility, the same named island in the Adriatic Sea has a reputation as a notorious camp.

Before that, the Soviet Union and its leader were portrayed as Yugoslavia’s closest friends, and Soviet models in the economy, culture, sports, and other fields were imitated and put into practice.

Naked Island is a place where people were “re-educated” to change their opinions because they could not accept that this was no longer the case or were thought to be on Stalin’s side.

Dissidents were typically sentenced to “re-education” by administrative decision without being tried, while military members were tried in simulated trials. They were given sentences of at least three and as much as twenty years in solitary confinement.

According to Wikipedia, 16,101 persons who passed through Naked Island and other information bureau camps between 1949 and 1956 have names listed in the 1963 Census prepared by the UDBA.

In these detention facilities for information bureau officers, 413 prisoners died in various ways (murder, suicide, natural death).

The precise number of detainees was never determined, as I previously stated, therefore the documents contain a variety of information, some of which read:

In Yugoslavia, 55,663 individuals have received sentences, “according to the IB line”, since 1948.

The number of victims ranges from 17,000 to 60,000, and it is still unknown how many convicted or unconvicted individuals (of whom there were the majority) remained on Naked Island.

Additionally, although some estimates put the number of victims at several thousand, it is believed that about 500 captives were killed or died in the camp (i.e., the intention was not to kill people but to kill the spirit).

To end, I would like to highlight one thing.

Communism was notorious for executing their own pupils, those who were leaders, intelligentsia and true revolutionists because they represented a threat to those who came to power, thanks to those who were true believers in communism and revolution.

A great example we can see is where Che Guevara was executed by his second in charge, Fidel Castro and Fidel executed all his associates.

Naked Island was not only hell on earth but a place where security intelligence apparatuses trained themselves in the ways of torture and interrogation.

 

 

 

Modern society is facing something called “climate change or global warming”.

There’s no doubt that the climate is changing and no doubt that global warming is real.

What is unrealistic is that we still continue to drum the same thing over and over again and that is?

Let’s reduce our carbon footprint. So, governments embraced solar, wind, and ocean power and humanity realised well, we can build cars powered via electric battery.

That is a great initiative, except, all the tools we need to harvest that natural energy trough must be built from something, right?

I am not a scientist but certainly, we will still need to dig iron ore, minerals and then we need to melt them, shape them, and put them into operation.

Long story short, I was wondering after an interview with Professor Clive Smallman about why we humans cannot save the planet in any other way than through renewable energy?

Then Professor Smallman explained in simple terms, if we want to save the planet, we need to plant more trees.

Plant trees?

Did I hear that correct?

Like more trees, no wind turbines, solar panels, electric cars? Trees.

Interestingly enough, I do remember as a kid that we were taught in school how trees are the lungs of the planet.

Fact:

In addition to the carbon dioxide trees capture, they also help the soil capture and store carbon. Despite not doing as such an incredible job as the ocean – absorbing around 90% of all carbon emissions and then suffering the impacts of acidification – trees are extremely important to help stop climate change.

So, on my recent trip I visited Singapore.

It should go without saying that I love Singapore. I fell in love with this city in 2012 when I first visited.

Yes, I was told by many “be careful in Singapore, this city has all sort of bans, like don’t throw chewing gum on the road.” Wow, this is something you learn on the first day in school, do not throw garbage, do not litter.

Singapore is a truly amazing city.

An aesthetically shaped and maintained city, incorporating all features necessary for citizens to be happy and proud of their city, state, and country.

So much green is planted in Singapore which is 180,000 acres and yet the government incorporated in architecture, what?

Planting trees and plants?

All around trees and greens.

So, I asked a few of my contacts there, why so many trees, plants, and greens?

They told me that apart from the beautiful look and offering cleaner air to citizens, they are doing their bit for the planet by absorbing more carbon monoxide and making amends for their land destroyed by the previous generation where most of the rainforest is gone.

End of chat.

Let me clarify something.

Singapore is 180,000 acres according to the almighty internet and daily, humans cut almost 10,000 acres of rainforest (according to The Guardian). So, we basically burn one city the size of Singapore in 18 days.

Singapore has gone so far with adjusting citizens, work, and life around climate change; adding more greens, more trees and keeping their carbon footprint so low. The rest of the world is still chasing the magical formula in forms like, “let’s build electric cars and wind turbines”, which require more and more digging, melting, shaping, and welding, while the solution for a cleaner planet was always here.

Trees. Those beautiful, silent natural wonders all around us.

Trees and greens.

You want to save the planet, then plant more trees. It requires less effort, less pollution, and less manufacturing.

Save the planet and plant a tree, that is something we all can do.