Sudan's Foreign Ministry said Tuesday that it was ready to respond to some parts of a platform reached by war-torn Darfur's splintered rebel factions during recent talks aimed at ending four years of widespread violence. Rebel groups who attended the four-day talks in Arusha, Tanzania agreed to hold peace talks with Sudan's government. The UN and African Union said Monday that nearly all the rebel groups reached a "common platform" for talks on issues such as power- and wealth-sharing, security, land and humanitarian issues.
Posted by: Fred ||
08/08/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Sudan
Riyadh, 8 August (AKI/DAWN) - Saudi Arabia is sending a delegation to Iraq next week to explore the possibility of reopening the kingdom's embassy in Baghdad, Saudi foreign minister Prince Saud Faisal announced at a press conference in Jeddah on Tuesday.
A Saudi delegation will head to Iraq next week to look into when it would be possible to open an embassy in Iraq, Prince Saud told reporters in Jeddah. The Saudi Embassy will take care of the interests of both countries.
During the visit of US secretary of state Condoleezza Rice and defence secretary Robert Gates to Saudi Arabia last week, Saudi Arabia had consented to explore the possibility of opening an embassy in Baghdad.
During the press conference, the Saudi foreign minister once again underlined the responsibility of the Iraqi government to achieve comprehensive national reconciliation for all Iraqis, adopt economic reform, provide security and services to all Iraqis and ensure equality among citizens whatever their beliefs, ethnicity and political affiliation.
Saudi Arabia closed its embassy in Baghdad after Saddam Hussein's 1990 invasion of Kuwait. Saudi Arabia in recent months has kept a distance from the Iraqi government and Riyadh has been under increasing US pressure to support the incumbent, US-sponsored Maliki government in Baghdad. Interesting. It probably would have happened sooner without the Reid/Pelosi/Murtha "bug-out" contretemps.
The Government called on America yesterday to release five foreign nationals from Guantanamo Bay detention centre who were formerly British residents. Profiles of the five Guantanamo detainees
The request by David Miliband, the Foreign Secretary, to Condoleezza Rice, the Secretary of State, represented a U-turn by the Government, which had previously resisted moves to force it to take responsibility for the men.
The move also raised concerns over security.
The Government had won cases in the High Court and Court of Appeal after claiming that it had no responsibility to negotiate for the men's release and any attempt to force it to do so would be counter-productive because the US would not negotiate with third countries.
But yesterday the Foreign and Commonwealth Office said that it had "requested the release" of five men who were not nationals but were "legally resident" in Britain prior to their detention.
Jacqui Smith, the Home Secretary, had been given until Aug 9 by the High Court to decide whether one of the men, Jamil el-Banna, 45, would be allowed to return to live in Britain following his release but the Foreign Office insisted it had not been forced into the move.
Sources said the Government was keen to encourage President George W Bush to close the controversial prison camp in Cuba. Officials said they wanted to "embolden" the US in its approach.
Another consideration was the campaign by the families of the men, who say they should not be separated from their loved ones when the men cannot be brought to trial.
Following a decision by the US Supreme Court last year which halted the military -tribunals at Guantanamo, President Bush said he wanted to see the camp closed. In June Robert Gates, the US Defence Secretary, said his government was working on getting past the "legal obstacle" to try to find a solution for those it still wished to detain.
Robert Tuttle, the US ambassador to London, said the request would be considered very seriously. "We will get back with all due, deliberate speed," he told the BBC.
The US had insisted that if the former residents were returned to Britain they should be kept under 24-hour surveillance, a move resisted by the Government.
The Foreign Office statement said: "Discussions with the US government about the release and return of these five men may take some time. The Government will of course continue to take all necessary measures to maintain national security."
But the Tories demanded assurances that the public would not be put at risk.
Damian Green, the shadow immigration minister, said: "I want to hear from the Home Secretary that there will be no extra danger for the British people if these five men choose to come back to Britain."
The men - Shaker Aamer from Saudi Arabia, Jamil el-Banna from Jordan, Omar Deghayes from Libya, Binyam Mohamed from Ethiopia, and Abdennour Sameur from Algeria - had all been granted refugee status, indefinite leave or exceptional leave to remain in Britain before they were detained.
Last night Mr Aamer's wife Zinnira was away on a pilgrimage in Saudi Arabia but her father, Saeed Ahmed Siddique, said: "Today is a day of celebration."
Abubaker Deghayes, Omar's brother, said: "Justice is a -pillar of British values and I'm grateful to whoever made the decision in the British Government to take this step. I am delighted the British public sincerely stood by us."
#3
So what's stopping us from shipping these guys off to their home countries? I'll bet we could ensure most of them get a nice warm welcome from their respective security agencies.
#6
The US had insisted that if the former residents were returned to Britain they should be kept under 24-hour surveillance, a move resisted by the Government.
Then they can go piss up a rope. Why in hell does Britain have its panties in a wad over people who are not even British citizens? This appears to be nothing more than an attempt to appease domestic Muslims with a show of defiance against American policy.
The British government has signed contracts for the construction of two large aircraft carriers -- the largest warships ever built for the Royal Navy. Given the designation CVF (for aircraft carrier-future) during their development, the new carriers will displace some 65,000 (metric) tons full load compared to approximately 100,000 (long) tons for the Nimitz class nuclear powered carriers. . . .
The two British ships, to be named Queen Elizabeth and Prince of Wales, are scheduled for completion in 2014 and 2016, respectively. The ships will operate conventional aircraft, which will make arrested landings and will launch with a ski-ramp (rather than catapults, as in U.S. carriers).
The carriers will replace three small, Harrier carriers of the Invincible class, ships displacing 19,500 tons full load that were completed in the early 1980s. . . . The British carriers are expected to operate the U.S.-developed F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) as well as helicopters. The CVF design is unusual in having a split starboard-side island structure with two starboard, deck-edge elevators connecting the hangar and flight decks. The design provides for supporting 500 aircraft sorties over five days, consuming perhaps 800 metric tons of ordnance.
The ships will have gas turbine engines with electric motors providing a maximum speed of 25 knots (compared to 30+ knots for U.S. nuclear carriers). The manning goal for the carriers is some 600 plus up to 800 in embarked squadrons and command staff, i.e., a total of about 1,400 men and women.
Posted by: Mike ||
08/08/2007 08:43 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
These ain't nuthin' but a future sub captain's office trophy unless they build the escort group to go with them.
Posted by: Laurence of the Rats ||
08/08/2007 9:22 Comments ||
Top||
#2
They probably weren't even designed to be used in anything like a war. They were prolly sold to the pols by pointing out that they could only perform humanitarian missions, and even those not very well.
But, since they will also probably just be taken away for use by the European navy, it doesn't matter at all.
#3
QE is fine, but I could find a better name than PoW. Warspite would be good, or Ark Royal (if they get rid of the half-carrier when these are built).
Posted by: Gary and the Samoyeds ||
08/08/2007 9:28 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Im surprised by this as we have the most pacifist/PC government in British history!!!!!
Brown is no Churchill/Thatcher!!!
Posted by: Paul ||
08/08/2007 9:29 Comments ||
Top||
#5
I don't consider ski ramp carriers to be full-size carriers. But I guess it's an improvement on the Harrier carriers.
#6
Hopefully the Brits will put them to good use. But I see them rusting on some god-forsaken coast in 50 years due to a screw up on some EU/UN mission.
#7
By the time they get built, they'll be named for imams from the London suburbs slums...
Posted by: M. Murcek ||
08/08/2007 9:54 Comments ||
Top||
#8
Bet they will never be launched or commissioned.
Speaking of which, a thought crossed my mind the other day. What is the status of a naval vessel (US) that is sunk in combat. Or just sunk a la Threaher. Is it formally striken from the rolls or what?
Just curious.
Posted by: kelly ||
08/08/2007 9:57 Comments ||
Top||
#9
Names to be changed to Imam Chuck and Imam Wills.
The need for catapaults is required for heavy aircraft carrying heavy loads. RN is going to be using lighter aircraft benefitting from more advanced materials and engines. Also, catapault's take up room and energy from other departments. This way they can build what is ostensibly a more capable carrier without forcing compromises in other parts of the ship.
Posted by: Almost Anonymous5839 ||
08/08/2007 12:53 Comments ||
Top||
#12
The real question is what are the odds that there will even BE a Brit navy by the time these are done? (always assuming the GET done)
My guesstimate is that all things military will be susumed into the EUssr within 3 years.
#13
The catapults matter to the degree that the Brits still haven't figured out an effective carrier-based airborne early warning system (AEW) for the Queen Elizabeth class carriers. Without such a system, the HMS Prince of Wales , c. 2014 has about as low a chance of survival against air/missile attack as the HMS Prince of Wales , 1941 edition.
#15
Catapults are steam-powered, though IIRC they're working on a magnetic linear induction design.
The Queen Elizabeths will be gas turbine powered, so unless they install an auxilliary boiler with its own separate fuel supply, there's no steam to power the cats. Hence, the ski ramp.
Posted by: Mike ||
08/08/2007 14:15 Comments ||
Top||
#16
kelly: US naval vessels sunk by enemy forces in line of duty remain as US property. And I might add, you don't want to be caught by the US Navy attempting to salvage one of their ships.
Just watching a boneyard thing on the History Channel. They talked about decommissioning ships when sold for scrap and I just got to wondering what the status of a ship lost in action would be.
Posted by: kelly ||
08/08/2007 15:46 Comments ||
Top||
#18
They class of carriers being laid down now is designed around electromagnetic catapults. Which also opens the door to some very interesting uses for that power then the cats are not needing to be energized.
#19
Ref # 16 kelly: US naval vessels sunk by enemy forces in line of duty remain as US property. And I might add, you don't want to be caught by the US Navy attempting to salvage one of their ships.
Not sure this is accurate. For example, USS Hornet, 7th of that name, was a carrier sunk 27 Oct 1942 by the Japanese in the Battle othe Santa Cruz Islands. They rebuilt another Hornet (tied up today in Alameda CA). So ships sunk by enemy action do not remain on the rolls.
#20
The Gerry Ford will have a new nuclear reactor power plant, which will provide upwards of three times the electrical output of the current power plant. This would open up the opportunity to begin experimenting with the kinds of weapons systems that heretofore were not possible with the kind of electrical power available.
Yes. That was the thing that was bothering me. I also know that when the US first started building post-Dreadnaught battleships they renamed at least one ship so that the newer one could be named after a state.
Anonymoose may be generally right in what he said, though. Property of the US Navy does not mean on the rolls.
Guess I will keep researching the question.
Posted by: kelly ||
08/08/2007 18:52 Comments ||
Top||
#23
The new QE and PoW are much larger ships than before, and from what I've read they were 'sold' to the pols as warships, not humanitarian ships. Appears the Admiralty has been a tad embarrassed over their inability to project power.
The AEW aircraft issue is supposed to have been solved with a V/STOL type AEW plane, but I haven't read any details. I know they used a Harrier variant for that, but supposedly it really sucks at AEW.
As to escorts, if the RN keeps retiring ships the QE will be lucky to have a destroyer and a sub as escort. Not enough in a real shooting war. Wonder if they plan to second their carriers to us in joint ops? We provide one carrier and sufficient escort for us and their carrier; they provide one carrier and political cover.
Posted by: Steve White ||
08/08/2007 19:30 Comments ||
Top||
#24
The AEW aircraft issue is supposed to have been solved with a V/STOL type AEW plane, but I haven't read any details.
The last I've read on the subject (about 3 weeks ago), there was some mention about a AEW-variant of the V-22 Osprey. The problem being that a AEW Osprey does not exist, nor is there any V-22 AEW variant on the drawing boards.
#25
IOW, the Euros are still mindsetted on limited "police actions" or limited conventional wars. WAFF.com/OTHERS > mindset due to on-going weaknesses in pan-Euro economies + wafflings over the working mechanisms of the "future" EU. Proposed CV's may have double-islands. Iff back in the Vietnam era and under USN, these would prob be labeled as CVS's [Support Carriers].
As for the OSPREY, TMK Amer companies are still working on vastly improved post-OSPREY designs for the USDOD - the V-22 series is gener nothing more than a REAL-TIME TESTBED FOR FOLLOW-ON FUTURE VTOL's/VSTOL's.
The Chinese government has begun a concerted campaign of economic threats against the United States, hinting that it may liquidate its vast holding of US treasuries if Washington imposes trade sanctions to force a yuan revaluation.
Two officials at leading Communist Party bodies have given interviews in recent days warning - for the first time - that Beijing may use its $1.33 trillion (£658bn) of foreign reserves as a political weapon to counter pressure from the US Congress. Shifts in Chinese policy are often announced through key think tanks and academies. Are declarations of war announced through similar channels?
Described as China's "nuclear option" in the state media, such action could trigger a dollar crash at a time when the US currency is already breaking down through historic support levels. Forgive me for being observant, but wouldn't this make chinese imports even more expensive than revaluation of the yuan?
It would also cause a spike in US bond yields, hammering the US housing market and perhaps tipping the economy into recession. It is estimated that China holds over $900bn in a mix of US bonds. Little commie bastards. There's more at the link, you'll want to put your fist through the computer screen.
The Chinese, government and people, view the Olympics as an opportunity to show off the country's economic success and to further establish its reputation as player on the world stage. The government will do anything to keep the economy growing through August of 2008. Addressing issues relating to pollution, corruption, SARS, tainted food, etc., will be put off until until 2009 if the fixes will cost jobs or prestige. Nothing would hit the Chinese economy harder than a dollar collapse and a U.S. recession.
#2
One can only hope the geniuses who run this country have an effective set of options ready to deploy to keep the commies from burying us since it was their idea to make us so vulnerable to this kind of economic blackmail. But I'm afraid we're screwed.
#3
Who will the Chicoms sell them to? What will the Reds take in exchange for their securities? A trillion Euros? What EUnuch would give them a trillion or even a half trillion Euros for securities the EUros already passed on? Do they think they can go to CitiBank BNP and sell them in small quantities and not affect the market before they unload everything?
Clever Chicoms are about to find out that when you owe a little, you've got a creditor breathing down your back. When you owe a whole lot, you've got a partner. Oh, and they better have a good story for all those Chinese who are going to be out of work when their plants move to India.
#4
Simple question, why should the Chinese have to revalue if they don't want to?
The U.S. is getting cheap goods which keeps inflation down. To force the Chinese to revalue stinks of protectionism.
#5
If they do, it will hurt the US for a while, but not permanently China, however will be seriously screwed. Too much of their economy depends on selling goods to the US.
So, go ahead China. Do you feel lucky. Well, do you punk?
#7
$900 billion? That's all? If they dumped 900 bill worth of US securities on the open market, like Nemble said, who's going to buy them - and what would they be willing to pay for them? Petroleum is still sold in dollars, for instance.
Some perspective: In the US stock market downturn of 2002, the country's financial system took a major hit
As of September 24, 2002, the Dow Jones Industrial Average had lost 27% of the value it held on January 1, 2001: a total loss of 5 trillion dollars. It should be noted that the Dow Jones had already lost 9% of its peak value at the start of 2001, while the Nasdaq had lost 44%.
Our financial market system is far more resilient than the PRC's. We are capitalists, not communists, and they need us a helluva lot more than we need them.
#8
"Of course, China doesn't want any undesirable phenomenon in the global financial order," he added.
"No, never! We just like to sit around and threaten our biggest trading partner for gits and shiggles."
"China is unlikely to follow suit as long as the yuan's exchange rate is stable against the dollar. The Chinese central bank will be forced to sell dollars once the yuan appreciated dramatically, which might lead to a mass depreciation of the dollar," he told China Daily.
Sounds like a threat to me.
She said foreign control over 44pc of the US national debt had left America acutely vulnerable.
Some highly selective defaulting could sure as hell solve that little problem.
We need to smack down China and smack it down hard. This shit has gone on for far too long. Ruining their Olympics would be a great way to do it, too. Boycott it like the Russian Olympics in 1980. Lack of American participation would totally delegitimize the event outcomes and irreparably harm China's prestige. On top of the boycott, also institute a travel ban to China for the event's duration and let them watch several million dollars worth of tourism revenue go by the boards as well. Beijing's Mandarins are begging for a gobsmack and we desperately need to be the one who delivers it. Too bad all of our politicians are bought and sold in denominations of yuan.
One can only hope the geniuses who run this country have an effective set of options ready to deploy to keep the commies from burying us since it was their idea to make us so vulnerable to this kind of economic blackmail. But I'm afraid we're screwed.
#9
But what does a dollar crash mean? Does it mean that China will increase the value of its currency vis-a-vis the dollar? No. It means that the dollar will fall relative to the other major currencies. Another way of saying this is that American exports will suddenly become much cheaper in euros, yen or any of the other hard currencies. I can't help but think that those countries will end up having their central banks soak up the Chinese dollar sales to avoid having their price competitiveness go in the tank. Bottom line is that the Chinese threats are empty ones that will cost them a lot of money if they go through with it, while having little or no impact on the dollar exchange rate.
#10
You should have seen the TV news today...live broadcasts to commemorate that it's only 1 year until the Olympics. The Beijing Olympics are a big big big deal in China, and China anticipates winning the Olympics. After that, they'll consider themselves a Great Power and start throwing their weight around. But until then, they're vulnerable.
#11
I agree, ZF, and add that the very execution of a "nuclear option" would inform the markets that the PRC was in a catastrophic financial meltdown (to follow the metaphor), at which point the matter shifts quickly into the military/diplomatic realm.
#12
they're communists , and thats their downfall, pure and simple. As nimble Semple put it, they're our partner, like it or not...
they're an evil corrupt partner, but a partner none the less, so go ahead you wining babys, do your worst.It'll just rearrange the world powers and we will still be on top because we are so far up there that we can hardley be affected adversly by anyone, Adverse being a relative term, Think chinese losing civil infrastructure vs US losing a good deal at WalMart.
#14
China's not really talking about collapsing the dollar. They don't have to dump everything they have. But they do possess enough treasury bills to manipulate our economy, and that gives them a certain amount of political leverage with our politicians, as economic downturns cost political clout at election time.
#17
as a country we need to decide the 10 dollar toaster is not worth it...our economy is the only one in the world that can produce and sustain a multi trillion dollar economy with domestically production --- the cavaet is a 20% or greater reduction in our economy; i can live with that but the chicoms ecomony (and the rest of asia) would crash...they depend on exports for too high a percentage of their respective economies -- the euros are not going to pick up the slack (maybe zimbawe..hehehe)
I suggest a 1 month halt to all chinese imports to our country -- let them sit in the water and wait -- in one month their factories productivity will be cut or they loose money keeping the lines open (then after the squable there is a huge surplas that would need to be sold heap cheap)
Let them have a real taste of the 'Nuclear option'...our only pain would be higher costs (if it supports an amercian working or shafts the chinese give me the higer cost)
bottom line is we need to tell to call their bluff and essentially tell them to fuck off...they are commies but they also want to make money...
Posted by: Dan ||
08/08/2007 13:41 Comments ||
Top||
#18
Dan: the cavaet is a 20% or greater reduction in our economy
Chinese imports are 2% of the US economy. And 10% of the Chinese economy. Given the tyranny of fixed costs, China's economy would go into depression if we embargoed them. We'd probably have a recession.
#19
my apologies -- I was alluding to the us economy being roughly 20% dependant on the world market...we could weather this storm but the chicoms would wither...they need our market more than we need their cheap (and dangerous) products...yes we would have a recession..but i am sure we will have another one either way...we must stop pandering the chinese..recession be damned
Posted by: Dan ||
08/08/2007 13:56 Comments ||
Top||
#20
I just want to point out that were are dealing with Communists. Communists think nothing of killing off 70 million of their own people ala Mao. They do not deal with problems the way we rational people do in all cases. We are "white devils" to the Chinese their interests and ours are not at all the same. They are not even playing the same game as we are.
Instead of screwing around with protectionism Congress should be dealing with making sure US Citizens have access to safe, plentiful, cheap and, reliable food and energy of domestic origin.
Anyone that thinks politicians can't run us off a cliff needs to go back and study what a disaster the Hawley-Smoot Tariff Act was.
#21
I suggest a 1 month halt to all chinese imports to our country -- let them sit in the water and wait -- in one month their factories productivity will be cut or they loose money keeping the lines open (then after the squable there is a huge surplas that would need to be sold heap cheap)
What's not to like? Make sure the embargo is totally unexpected and quietly infer that it will remain in place until China revalues the yuan to realistic levels. We need to eat China's lunch while there's still room at the table. Sadly, our thoroughly purchased politicians do not have the spine appetite for such bold measures. China needs to experience some extremely interesting times.
#23
I suggest a 1 month halt to all chinese imports to our country
Sorry, but this is nuts. We get tons of good stuff from the Chinese and they get...paper from us. I think it's a helluva deal. Think of China as our overseas empire. It's a better deal than the Brits ever got off their empire.
If you really want to screw the Chicoms, get a do over on is the Clinton decision to admit China to the WTO. (How does commie China get into the WTO but non-commie Russia doesn't?)But we don't get a do over on that, so we're stuck.
#24
When a gov't fights the market, the market wins.
Posted by: Mark E. ||
08/08/2007 15:26 Comments ||
Top||
#25
You want to see the Chicoms squirm? Look no farther than what we're doing in India. This is giving the Chicoms the gwobblies like nothing we've ever done. Move some production from Chinese factories to Indian factories, and watch the Chicoms come unglued. The Indians already have an indigenous shipbuilding capability greater than China's, and it's expanding. They have an indigenous aircraft industry that builds everything from small crop-dusters to military aircraft to medium-haul (I.E., internal) passenger aircraft. The Indians will launch an indigenous aircraft carrier several years ahead of China. Provide competition to Chinese industries by buying from Indian, Latin American, and African nations, and the Chicoms will go belly up. It'll take about ten years, but they will IMMEDIATELY begin to go into decline.
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
08/08/2007 16:33 Comments ||
Top||
#26
If China were stupid + arrogant enough to really consider this, as President I would offer this reply: If China wishes to engage in economic warfare, we will block their oil shipping lanes and see if they enjoy going back to an oxen-driven economy.
#28
Never happen. Why? Because it would be like WalMart saying that it is tripling prices in all rural stores.
In other words, China would be damaging their own biggest customer. For every ounce of pain felt here, that pain would translate to reduced demand for their own products. Its kinda like a store that shoots their customers BEFORE they get to the cash register. Pretty stupid.
#29
Also, I think the writer of the article is more than just a little extreme and attempting to fan flames of fear. What China is more likely to do is use it's foreign currency reserves to MODULATE the value of the dollar, not crash it. It we set tariffs on their stuff, they have the power to adjust the dollar so that the impact of the tariff is reduced or eliminated.
Dollars are just like any other item on a market. The value of the dollar depends on the supply of them and the demand for them. Iran moving to the euro for oil purchases, for example, reduced demand for dollars to pay for Iranian oil and increased demand for euros. The result was that the euro is now at a record high against the dollar and oil is at a near record high when paid for in dollars.
China can decide to sell some of its dollars thereby increasing the supply and reducing the value of the dollar relative to other currencies. They wouldn't "crash" the dollar because that would hurt them as much as us, but they do have the power to manage the dollar's value on world exchange markets ... as does Saudi Arabian and Russia and a lot of other countries.
#30
Can't they make tainted products in Mexico? Is the Mexican govenrnment and labor force so pathetic they can't compete against communists and prison laborers?
#31
I don't think the point is whether or not they would do it, the alarming aspect of the article to me is that they would want to. Like crosspatch said, it would be like shooting your customers before they even got to the register. Any devaluation of US money would make chinese goods cost more. Unless they intend to lower the value of their currency too, just to spite us. But that would be defeating their own plan, it just doesn't make any sense, any way you look at it. There is no way to hurt us without sabotaging themselves.
#33
c: It we set tariffs on their stuff, they have the power to adjust the dollar so that the impact of the tariff is reduced or eliminated.
By crashing the dollar against other currencies and keeping the yuan-dollar exchange rate the same, they would be - in effect - be crashing the yuan. In other words, it's a competitive devaluation of the yuan vs other world currencies. I doubt other economies would be happy about this.
#34
Plus, once one starts down that road, it becomes ever more difficult to prevent tit-for-tat sell-offs of one's own currency - which might sound good, until one has to buy say oil using dollars. If the Chinese drop the value of the dollar, the yuan will most likely get hit by other local countries dumping out their yuan reserves. At that point, the fixed price that the ChiComs have with oil suppliers like the Sudan effectively goes up since the yuan is now worth less per dollar and the raw materials exporters are being paid in dollars or other hard currency. Hit the dollar by more than a few cents per unit value against say the Pound, the Yen, or the Euro, and suddenly China is paying a LOT more for its raw materials. Such a campaign would make Russia, OPEC, Sudan, and Cuba {huge nickel supplier to the ChiComs}happy due to increased profits but would bite the Chinese exports hard, due to increased transport costs and relative value of currencies. And believe me, if Wal-Mart decides that the ChiComs are bad for business, it will only take them a few months to a year to have all sorts of cheap item production switched over to Pakistan, India, Mexico, Guatemala, Malaysia, etc.
#35
Wel-l-l, in the Battle/Campaign for the Pacific known as the WOT, Radical Islamists and aligned in THAILAND, MALAYA-INDONESIA, and the PHILIPPINES, etal. fight for East Asian spheres and "land bridges/fronts" into Pacific island chains - CHINA and also RUSSIA-SCO handle the economic and geopolitical part. *1960's > Yet another Ollie Stone production of almost a Madonna film, starring a Texas sized asteroid + AEROSMITH[VAL KILMER as GNR's SLASH as MORRISON OF THE DOORS] ETC. No Guam Taotaomonas = Ancestral Ghosts were harmed in the making of this Moud-ian Apocalypse.
#36
To better explain my point, the ChiComs have been engaged in a form of mercantilism with the smaller countries in Asia : to buy from the Chinese, you give dollars or other hard currencies; when you sell to the Chinese, they pay in yuans in the main. At a certain point, the Chinese will take back the yuans, but they hit you with a transaction fee for paying in non-hard currencies. This has been expanded to other countries around the world, mainly 3rd world pest holes that want to buy weapons with no questions asked.
The way the ChiComs can screw themselves up is that by dumping dollars, suddenly all of those yuans become valuable as a way to buy now cheap dollars, so central banks around the world buy dollars using yuan accounts. Very quickly the market becomes saturated and since there is no intrinsic value to the yuan, it gets discounted heavily. Then the Chinese are caught in a cycle : the value of the yuan drops externally to the Chinese mainland, and the Chinese Central Bank has to buy up internal yuans or see a major hard currency flight out of the country. Or worse, do nothing and see their exporters which lack the necessary private dollar reserves get whacked hard on exchange rates, since the yuan is worth so much less externally. That is what would raise transportation costs, docking fees, etc to very uncomfortable levels.
Of course, if all the ChiComs do is drop the value of the dollar in comparison to most currencies including the yuan, they have then effectively raised the prices on everything they export, and that produces a major incentive to switch to suppliers in lower cost and/or economically more rational countries.
#37
SW: If the Chinese drop the value of the dollar, the yuan will most likely get hit by other local countries dumping out their yuan reserves.
As far as I know, the yuan isn't really available overseas, except via small-time forex dealers, who exchange the local currency for yuan, typically as a service to Chinese tourists. You can't really wire yuan outside of China, and no country has yuan currency reserves as such, since trade - both purchases and sales - is conducted in foreign currencies, not yuan. This is why the yuan was unaffected during the 1998 Asian currency crisis - there's no way to attack a currency that isn't traded internationally.
US Democratic Party presidential candidate Barack Obama said on Monday that there had been "misreporting" of his comments and he had never called for an invasion of Pakistan or Afghanistan, reported Bret Hayworth for the Globe Gazette.
"Who? Me? Invade Pakistan? You musta misunderstood!"
"Who you gonna believe, me or that lying videotape!"
Answering a question from the audience concerning his comments about attacking the tribal areas in Pakistan at an event organised in Sioux City's Irving Elementary School, Obama said, "I have never called for an invasion of Pakistan or Afghanistan."
Presumably we should have left Afghanistan alone in 2001...
He said he advocated a "diplomatic surge" rather than a troop surge, adding that US troops should be withdrawn from Iraq within a year, reported the Globe.
Good idea. Increase the number of striped pants addressing the problems. And Iraq's distracting us from the War of Terror.
Posted by: Fred ||
08/08/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Obama probably meant the *other* Pakistan. It is an easy mistake to make. All those places and names; it is really quite confusing!
Posted by: Bobby ||
08/08/2007 6:52 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Toast? Waffles? You're both wrong! I say he's bacon & eggs!
Posted by: Mike ||
08/08/2007 8:02 Comments ||
Top||
#7
Given that he could have split hairs and replied that he had said "take action", not "invade", his answer is bizarre. He could have clarified it to mean that if the Paks are allowing OBL to hide, we would take action. Why mention Afganistan at all? Why change his statement to a "diplomatic surge" (whatever the hell that is)? Why mention bringing troops home from Iraq within a year? The nutroots have been heard from. This just shows how in over his head he is.
#10
Come on bro, you gotta decide how you're going to lie to us. The American public needs to be lied to in a consistent manner. None of this back and forth shit. Pick one angle and go with it, I expected more from a career liar politician.
The United States on Tuesday designated a charitable organization affiliated with Hamas as a terrorist organization nearly seven weeks after the Islamic militant group seized control of security in Gaza.
Presumably it was affiliated with Hamas prior to the coup, as well.
"Hamas has used the Al-Salah Society, as it has many other charitable fronts, to finance its terrorist agenda," said Director of Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) Adam Szubin in a statement. "Today's action alerts the world to the true nature of Al-Salah and cuts it off from the U.S. financial system", he added. The blacklist also targeted the director of Al-Salah Society Ahmad Al-Kurd, who is loyalist of Hamas since a decade, said the Treasury, participating in weapon deals.
The Treasury added that Al-Salah supported Hamas militants during the first intifada on the logistic and recruitment level, and that this organization attracted support from Persian Gulf countries. The statement noted that this organization was suspected to be affiliated with Hamas in August 2003, but after freezing its bank accounts, Palestinian Authority officials "confirmed that the Al-Salah Society was a front for Hamas".
This article starring:
AHMED AL KURD
Al-Salah Society
Director of Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) Adam Szubin
The government has decided not to include "book" as symbol of political parties in the upcoming elections, sources told Daily Times on Tuesday. "Book" was previously allotted to the Mutahidda Majlis-e-Amal (MMA) as an election symbol.
The sources said the government had decided to cancel all those election symbols that reflected extremism or religious emotions. A ruling party parliamentarian told Daily Times that the announcement for cancellation of such symbols would likely be made after finalization of the election schedule so that religio-political controversy was ended. He said the MMA had exploited the symbol of "book" to bag votes in the NWFP because of its resemblance to Holy Quran.
This article starring:
Mutahidda Majlis-e-Amal
Posted by: Fred ||
08/08/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under: Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal
An incomplete Pakistani delegation will leave for Kabul today (Wednesday) on chartered flights from Peshawar and Quetta to attend a three-day peace jirga there with pessimism upstaging optimism about the event's success. Nominated delegates from North and South Waziristan refused to undertake the journey for various reasons, while Opposition leader in the National Assembly Maulana Fazlur Rehman and his Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam excused themselves from visiting Kabul for the jirga.
The Pakistani delegation will leave for Kabul early on Wednesday where President General Pervez Musharraf and the host, Afghan President Hamid Karzai, will jointly inaugurate the jirga being held to address two serious issues concerning the two countries: improving bilateral relations between Pakistan and Afghanistan and a clear policy to "deny sanctuaries, training and financing to terrorist elements" on each other's soil.
Seven working committees will be formed in the first session of Day Two and each committee will have 100 members, 50 from each side, according to the schedule of the jirga seen by Daily Times. "Each committee will deal with a separate issue," the schedule said. There are seven items to be discussed during the three-day event. The delegates will then prepare a joint declaration and announce their suggestions on the third day of the jirga.
Like their Pakistani counterparts, Afghan officials in Kabul are under the impression that the jirga is unlikely to end with significant results as "almost all (Pakistani delegation) members have been chosen by the Inter-Services Intelligence agency". "There is a general impression among the Afghan officials that we should not attach high hopes with the jirga as the Pakistani delegation members are ISI-selected and they will not speak out as openly as one may hope," a local journalist in Kabul said.
He said that most of the Afghan officials were "suffering from ISI phobia" and "both Pakistan and Afghanistan hold a great deal of suspicion about each. How can one expect good results in such an environment?"
Posted by: Fred ||
08/08/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under: ISI
The Interior Ministry and Balochistan police have denied a report in an Indian newspaper that Pakistan has arrested India's most wanted fugitive Dawood Ibrahim in Quetta.
"Dawood? Certainly no...hey, look! Over there! It's William Shatner!"
Citing Indian intelligence sources, the Times of India reported on Tuesday that Pakistan's ISI took the elusive mafia chief and two trusted lieutenants into custody on last Thursday. "Sources in Quetta confirmed the detention," one intelligence officer said in the report. Dawood was being kept in a safe house near Quetta, said the report, which could not be independently confirmed. Interior Ministry spokesman Brig (r) Javed Cheema denied Ibrahim had been arrested by any Pakistani agency. Balochistan IGP Tariq Mehmood Khosa told Daily Times that the report of Ibrahim's arrest was baseless. He said he was surprised by rumours that India's most wanted man had been netted in Quetta.
Posted by: Fred ||
08/08/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under: ISI
#1
He could act in adult films without adopting a pseudonym.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
08/08/2007 22:02 Comments ||
Top||
American officials believe British forces have been defeated in Basra, it was claimed yesterday. A senior US intelligence official unnamed, of course told The Washington Post that British commanders had allowed militias loyal to three Shia Muslim groups take control of the city's streets. "The British have basically been defeated in the south," he said. The report said a contingent of 500 British troops based at Basra Palace were "surrounded like cowboys and Indians".
The rebuke highlights the increasing violence in Basra, one of four provinces handed over to British control after of the US-led invasion of Iraq in 2003. Three of the four provinces have been pacified and handed back to local leaders; Basra, the most populous, is due to be returned by the end of the year.
In a stark reminder of the deteriorating security situation, two British soldiers were killed in the province yesterday. Private Craig Barber, 20, from 2nd Battalion The Royal Welsh died after being hit by small arms fire. The other soldier, from 1 Squadron RAF Regiment, has not yet been named.
Major Mike Shearer, a spokesman for British command in Basra, rejected the suggestion that UK troop levels in the province, which are now down to 5,500, had been cut too fast. "This is not Dorset, but Basra's crime levels are half the level of Washington," he said. "What we are trying to do is get the security situation to a manageable level where Iraqi solutions can be delivered to Iraqi problems."
A second British official in Basra said the American criticism was misplaced. "Yes, there's violence and yes, there's corruption," he said. "But the electricity directorate, the water directorate, the government structures still work. The Iraqis down here can work their way through the violence."
Gordon Brown told George W Bush at their meeting at Camp David last week that British troops planned to hand over responsibility for Basra to local leaders within months, but that the decision was in the hands of British commanders.
Britain's former governor of Basra, Sir Hilary Synnott, said the US criticism was payback for British claims two years ago that Basra was a success while Washington had failed in Baghdad. "It's not so long ago that some members of the British government were boasting that Basra was doing very well, better than Baghdad. That was very unwise."
Brigadier General Anthony Hunter-Choat, a security director for Iraq's reconstruction programme, said America had initially backed the British "softly, softly" approach to security in Basra, by which power was devolved to tribal leaders, rather than ruling from the top down. "The Americans thought the British were highly successful," he said. "Now they've started to think that the people the British used to keep the place going are not the right people to hand Basra over to."
A think-tank report, quoted in the report, said the legacy of British rule in Basra was "the systematic misuse of official institutions, political assassinations, tribal vendettas, neighbourhood vigilantism and enforcement of social mores, together with the rise of criminal mafias". A former British defence official, now working in Baghdad, said London's push to withdraw forces had been criticised at the "highest levels" in Washington. America "has been very concerned for some time now about a) the lawless situation in Basra and b) the political and military impact of the British pull back," he said.
A spokesman for the British embassy in Washington said yesterday that the Washington Post report did not reflect America's official position on British force levels.
Posted by: lotp ||
08/08/2007 10:13 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[10 views]
Top|| File under: Mahdi Army
#1
By contrast, US officials said yesterday that American troop levels had reached a post-war high of 162,000, surpassing the previous peak recorded in January 2000.
Am I missing something here? Did we have troops in Iraq in January 2000? If so, Bush was sworn in and must have moved those troops he had already secretly, gotten moved, ready to invade.
Bam -- swear in, we invade.... I hope this was a typo... but probably one that will never be corrected.
#4
The British have lost to the Islamofascists the world over, thanks to their leadership.
The British did not lose, they quit...gave up! Tossers! I see a big backlash coming soon, in a lot of places. I predict it will be bloody and the Islamo's will be surprised by its ferocity.
Posted by: Natural Law ||
08/08/2007 11:18 Comments ||
Top||
#5
That's okay Mr. Law, come December or next March at the latest there will be no more Britain as a nation state. The EU "treaty" (aka constitution) will remove what sovereignty the Brits have left.
#9
Some of the British High Command are blaming the "Surge" in Baghdad for the trouble in Basra. You know, driving all the Mahdi Army types south. (Flying pigs need somewhere safe to land)
The Chief of British Defence Staff is Air Chief Marshal Jock Stirrup. Isn't a jock stirrup the cod piece on a jock strap? It's like the Brits a remaking an old 1964 movie, Dr Strangelove. We all remember Gen Jack D Ripper and Major Bat Guano.
#10
I am, at this moment, sitting in Heathrow for my flight back to the States. The earlier commenter is right -- England has surrendered to Islam. The streets and shops of Knightsbridge and Kensington are flooded with men in dishdashas and women in abayas, as well as many military age Arabs with fancy shoes, clothes and cars. Two quick anecdotes of surrender. I was taking a Thames cruise with my family when the tour guide noted that London Bridge City was owned by the royal family of Kuwait. The guide, a salty old Brit, then thanked the Kuwaiti royal family for all they've done for England and for allowing the London Bridge Hospital to accept National Health Services cases.
Later that afternoon, we were walking by Hyde Park Corner when we saw a stetch Mercedes Limo pulled up into a restricted zone. The driver spoke on his cel phone while 3 scruffy young Arabs laced up their Rollerblades. My wife and I were hoping a Bobbie would come along and tell them to move on, but it didn't happen.
I haven't been to London for about 10 years, and was stunned by the change in the makeup and character of the city. I got the impression that, because of their money, rich Arabs could do whatever they want.
Unfortunately, Rule Brittania (or even Tony Blair's corny Cool Brittania) appears to have been replaced with Abdul Brittania.
Posted by: Tibor ||
08/08/2007 13:54 Comments ||
Top||
#11
I am, at this moment, sitting in Heathrow for my flight back to the States. The earlier commenter is right -- England has surrendered to Islam. The streets and shops of Knightsbridge and Kensington are flooded with men in dishdashas and women in abayas, as well as many military age Arabs with fancy shoes, clothes and cars. Two quick anecdotes of surrender. I was taking a Thames cruise with my family when the tour guide noted that London Bridge City was owned by the royal family of Kuwait. The guide, a salty old Brit, then thanked the Kuwaiti royal family for all they've done for England and for allowing the London Bridge Hospital to accept National Health Services cases.
Later that afternoon, we were walking by Hyde Park Corner when we saw a stetch Mercedes Limo pulled up into a restricted zone. The driver spoke on his cel phone while 3 scruffy young Arabs laced up their Rollerblades. My wife and I were hoping a Bobbie would come along and tell them to move on, but it didn't happen.
I haven't been to London for about 10 years, and was stunned by the change in the makeup and character of the city. I got the impression that, because of their money, rich Arabs could do whatever they want.
Unfortunately, Rule Brittania (or even Tony Blair's corny Cool Brittania) appears to have been replaced with Abdul Brittania.
Posted by: Tibor ||
08/08/2007 13:55 Comments ||
Top||
#12
Another way of looking at this is that the British aren't, and *shouldn't* intervene in what is essentially a Shia vs. Shia fight.
First of all, it is bigger than the British could handle anyway. And second, that the fight is an unconventional struggle between nationalists and Iranian backed Shiites, with the US SOCOM working on behalf of the nationalists.
So all the Brits could really do is just keep an overall lid on things, but stay out of it, yet have enough forces to move quickly and decisively if needs be.
No matter what happens, the US is going to have to move South once the Brits pull out. But by then, the Sunni areas will be mostly cooled and under the control of IA, so our hands will be free.
#13
British officials in Basra reject the notion that UK troop levels in the southern Iraqi province had been cut too fast
Blah blah blah. The troops may have done fine, but whatever the case, the leadership didn't. If this is the case, then just like the title says, the Brits have lost Basra, however you want to partition the statement.
Then again, it should be a good magnet for bad guys, and we know where to go when it is time to kill a bunch of them. Now if only we can do it on the sly when the time comes!
#14
With the sectarian Shia mobsters in charge, the Brits say " the electricity directorate, the water directorate, the government structures still work."
And I heard that Mussolini got the trains to run on time, too.
#15
Several weeks ago when I read that Mr. Gordon Brown announced that the words "war on terror" and "muslim" officially will no longer appear in the same sentence...well...let's just say I knew then the war on reaver (muzzie) jihad was lost in Europe.
For gawd's sake the House of Saud can sue in London to stop any mention of Saudi financing of terrorism. Cambridge Univ. caved WITHOUT a fight and agreed to pay HUGE atty fees and substantial damages to a f*ckin' terrorist supporting banker AND to "pulp" all unsold books identifying the Saudis perps.
In the USA more than a dozen US colleges have caved into "reaver" (muzzie) demands for tax payer financed footbaths. Footbaths for reveavers so they can clean up before prayer to their "g*d". Think about that. I mean really think about that. The ACLU says ...hey...we are not gettin' into this...it's a health and safety issue for the schools...build the footbaths or face the warth of the ACLU (and reavers)if you don't build them!!!
Are there tax payer funded / built holy water dispensers adjacent to the entry door of any "meditation rooms" on the campus of any public universities? No...I didn't think so...Why not? Anybody can use them (so goes the rationale of the ACLU for the reaver (muzzie) footbaths).Okay, so reavers traditionally clean their feet before prayer therefore footbaths are okay....but put up a holy water dispenser at taxpayer expense (Catholics traditionally use holy water to bless themselves with prior to prayer) and watch the ACLU scream bloody murder. Double standard.
We are losing the war of ideas. Push back. Please. Push back. Now.
Reavers (muzzies) have the upper hand for now. For how long I do not know. I sense, however, that retribution is in the offing. An awful retribution.
Stop all reaver immigration to the USA.
Posted by: Mark Z ||
08/08/2007 18:00 Comments ||
Top||
#16
THE END was at Suez in 1956. Only death rattles have kept the corpse moving since...
ARBIL, Iraq (Reuters) - The Ministry of Tourism has 417 employees and big plans: "We need three or four times as many hotels as we have now," says Nimrud Youkhana, the minister, "and we need to get more airlines to fly here."
Tourism in Iraq? More hotels in a country whose name evokes images of truck bombs and mayhem, kidnappings and beheaded foreigners?
This is what an advertising campaign in the United States called The Other Iraq, the three northern provinces that blossomed into a quasi-independent state in the 16 years since the U.S. placed a protective umbrella -- the 'no-fly zone' -- over the region to stop a genocidal anti-Kurdish campaign waged by Saddam Hussein.
Continued on Page 49
#1
Investment discussions are going on in southeastern Iraq as well:
LONDON (Dow Jones)--Oil giants Total SA (TOT) and Chevron Corp. (CVX) have signed a services agreement that would lead to the two jointly exploring and developing hydrocarbons from one of Iraq's biggest oil fields once the country gets an oil law in place and security on the ground improves {this could take a while!} , people familiar with the deal say.
The two companies signed an agreement last year and are currently assessing above-ground conditions around Majnoon, Iraq's fourth biggest oil field, which sits near the border with Iran, and at least one other field in the south of Iraq, to see what development work is required, the people told Dow Jones Newswires.
Hacks are the same everywhere...
Palestinians stranded in Egypt who are returning to the Gaza Strip via the Nitzana crossing are complaining that staff members of the Palestinian embassy in Cairo who are handling their return are charging each one a fee of $100-$200, and $40 for baggage, saying that the sum is required for coordination with Israel even though there is no such coordination.
Source: Al-Arabiya.net, August 6, 2007 Paying to get into Gaza? And they do it?
These people really are insane...
The offices of Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and President Shimon Peres vigorously denied a report in Tuesday's Ha'aretz newspaper alleging that they crafted a plan to establish a Palestinian state on the equivalent of 100 percent of the land in the West Bank. "We are not aware of any such plan described in the article," Olmert's office said in the most strongly worded denial the office has ever issued. "It is not being considered or discussed. We are amazed by the false report, which was published without asking for a response or checking whether it was true."
According to the plan, Israel would maintain settlement blocs totaling five percent of the West Bank and compensate the Palestinians with land inside pre-1967 Israel from blocs of Arab communities, with the residents' acquiescence. The paper said Peres presented the plan to Olmert after he became president.
Olmert said at a Kadima event two weeks ago that he would welcome Peres's involvement in diplomatic issues, but Peres's associates said the plan published fits more with the ideology of Strategic Affairs Minister Avigdor Lieberman. A similar plan is the diplomatic platform of Lieberman's Israel Beiteinu party. But even he distanced himself from the report in a statement released Tuesday. "I welcome the acceptance of my idea of population exchanges, because there is no other solution," Lieberman said. "The solution must include all of the settlement blocs and leave Jerusalem united under Israeli sovereignty. But there is no sense in talking about a Palestinian state until the PA proves itself.
Posted by: Fred ||
08/08/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under: Palestinian Authority
#3
Maybe we can give them some real firepower, so they can take on Hezbollah. How about a couple of hundred M-48A5s or M-60A2s still on the National Guard books?
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
08/08/2007 16:43 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Armor would be good. So would training, maintenance equipment, etc. What is really needed is close air support. That won't happen.
In a new blow to Iran's nuclear ambitions, Moscow has warned Teheran it will not deliver fuel to a nearly completed Russian-built nuclear reactor unless Teheran lifts the veil of secrecy on suspicious past atomic activities, a European diplomat said Tuesday.
Separately, a US official told The Associated Press that the Russians are not meeting commitments that would allow the Iranians to activate the Bushehr nuclear reactor and suggested the delays were an attempt to pressure Teheran into showing more compliance with UN Security Council demands. Both men demanded anonymity in exchange for speaking to The Associated Press because their information was confidential.
The increased Russian pressure comes at a time when Iran already appears to be ready to compromise on a key international request - that it lift its shroud of secrecy over past activities that heightened suspicions it might be looking to develop a nuclear arms program.
Those fears led to Security Council demands that Iran suspend its uranium enrichment program - and later to UN to sanctions over Teheran's refusal to mothball the program, which can be used both to generate power and to make the fissile core of nuclear warheads.
With a third set of sanctions looming, Iran last month told the IAEA - the UN nuclear watchdog investigating Iran - that it would answer questions outstanding for years about past experiments and activities that could be linked to a weapons program. That - and a decision to lift a ban on IAEA inspections of a reactor that will produce plutonium once it is completed - appeared aimed at deflecting US-led moves to implement new and harsher sanctions.
IAEA inspectors visited the reactor, near the city of Arak, last month. And a second European diplomat told the AP that Iran had recently began providing valuable information on "four of 10 questions" that the agency was seeking answers to.
Agency officials declined comment. But concerns detailed by past IAEA reports have included suspicions that Teheran has secretly developed elements of a more sophisticated enrichment program than the one it has made public; that it might not have accounted for all the plutonium it processed in past experiments and that its military might have been involved in enrichment, a program that Teheran insists is strictly civilian run. And revelations that Teheran possesses diagrams showing how to form uranium metal into the shape of warheads have heightened concerns.
Posted by: Fred ||
08/08/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Iran
#1
DEBKA > article claims Russia army may had already loaded up and delivered fuel rods for Iran's BUSHESHR plant back in early June. However, what Russ really wants is for Iran to pull out or otherwise change its position to Russ advantage on the proposed gas pipeline project wid Turkey.
#6
Moscow has warned Teheran it will not deliver fuel to a nearly completed Russian-built nuclear reactor unless Teheran lifts the veil of secrecy on suspicious past atomic activities...
Does Russia really care what the rest of the world thinks? Maybe they woke up to the danger of a nuclear armed theocratic islamic Iran where it's jihadis are enamoured with a death wish.
#7
Nah, John QC. Ahmadinijad has just been stiffing Vlad over the payments. Once the moolah from the mullah's starts rolling again, all will be well.
Posted by: BA ||
08/08/2007 21:40 Comments ||
Top||
#8
I don't know what is more hilarious: That Iran couldn't understand the inherent risks of dealing with unscrupulous Russians or that ever-obscurant Russia is demanding transparency from one of the few regimes more obsfucative than themselves.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
US Democratic Party presidential candidate Barack Obama said on Monday that there had been "misreporting" of his comments and he had never called for an invasion of Pakistan or Afghanistan, reported Bret Hayworth for the Globe Gazette.
The United States on Tuesday designated a charitable organization affiliated with Hamas as a terrorist organization nearly seven weeks after the Islamic militant group seized control of security in Gaza. 
The government has decided not to include "book" as symbol of political parties in the upcoming elections, sources told Daily Times on Tuesday. "Book" was previously allotted to the 
An incomplete Pakistani delegation will leave for Kabul today (Wednesday) on chartered flights from Peshawar and Quetta to attend a three-day peace jirga there with pessimism upstaging optimism about the event's success. Nominated delegates from North and South Waziristan refused to undertake the journey for various reasons, while Opposition leader in the National Assembly Maulana Fazlur Rehman and his Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam excused themselves from visiting Kabul for the jirga.
The Interior Ministry and Balochistan police have denied a report in an Indian newspaper that Pakistan has arrested India's most wanted fugitive Dawood Ibrahim in Quetta. 
ARBIL, Iraq (Reuters) - The Ministry of Tourism has 417 employees and big plans: "We need three or four times as many hotels as we have now," says Nimrud Youkhana, the minister, "and we need to get more airlines to fly here."
The offices of Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and President Shimon Peres vigorously denied a report in Tuesday's Ha'aretz newspaper alleging that they crafted a plan to establish a Palestinian state on the equivalent of 100 percent of the land in the West Bank. "We are not aware of any such plan described in the article," Olmert's office said in the most strongly worded denial the office has ever issued. "It is not being considered or discussed. We are amazed by the false report, which was published without asking for a response or checking whether it was true." 
In a new blow to Iran's nuclear ambitions, Moscow has warned Teheran it will not deliver fuel to a nearly completed Russian-built nuclear reactor unless Teheran lifts the veil of secrecy on suspicious past atomic activities, a European diplomat said Tuesday. 
