You do that.
Printable View
You do that.
This week marks the 15th anniversary of the 1992 bombing of the Israeli Embassy here in Buenos Aires. 29 people died with about 240 injured. The site is located at the corner of Arroyo & Suipacha, you will easily see the memorial park and the traced outline of the previous building. Two years later, there was a second bombing here that killed approximately 85 people at the AMIA Jewish Center.
An interesting article:
[url]http://www.jamestown.org/publications_details.php?volume_id=391&issue_id=2877&article_id=23407[/url]
For the members who are still reliving the "lovefeast" of the 1990s, I. E. Clinton era. May I respectfully offered this reminder:
1992- Bush"1" - BsAs bombing #1
1993- Clinton - World Trade Center 1st bombing.
1994- Clinton - BsAs bombing #2
1996- Clinton - Khobar towers.
1998- Clinton - Nairobi US Embassy.
1998- Clinton - Dar es Salaam US Embassy.
2000- Clinton - USS Cole attacked.
2001- Bush"2"- Asleep at the switch - WTC 2nd attack.
The point is this; the US has never and will never be liked by many / most in the world - for more reasons than I could list here. If you believe that the recent trials and tribulations are solely caused by the man / dufus we currently call "Mr. President and Commander in Chief", you have a short memory.
President George Bush will return from his Latin American tour this week with an agreement-in-principle to aid several nations by providing them with a steady supply of low-cost, American-made anti-Bush protesters.
"Our experienced, homegrown protesters will augment the budding anti-me industry in these developing nations," Mr. Bush said at a news conference today in Uruguay. "I think Latin Americans will be impressed by our high-volume products."
In an extraordinary goodwill gesture, the president did not ask his Latin American counterparts for anything in return.
"We're more than glad to help," said Mr. Bush. "After all you've shipped to us, it's the least we could do."
I just could not help to see the irony in todays NY Times Webpage as the first article was shown directly over the other.
Bush Vetoes Stem Cell Bill.
By SHERYL GAY STOLBERG 3:39 PM ET.
President Bush said that the bill promoting embryonic stem cell research disregarded the sanctity of human life.
Heavy Fighting as Troops Pursue Iraqi Insurgents.
By ALISSA J. RUBIN 3:32 PM ET.
Officials said that at least 30 insurgents were killed on the first full day of an aggressive push in Diyala Province.
I guess there is no sanctity of human life for at least 30 follks. By the way I met a couple the other day from Florida who were here with their daughter going to some clinic in the province because they do stem cell research down here.
...absolutely hilarious:
[url]http://rawstory.com/news/2007/The_Daily_Show_lambastes_Cheney_secret_0626.html[/url]
[url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cSjaXqGrtyI[/url]
The truth is, with the current line-up, the Democrats don't have a snowflakes chance in hell to win the coming elections. And while I think Giuliani has less of a chance of winning. The Democrats are screwed either way.
Clinton will NEVER win this election, half of the so-called " democrats " hate her, Obama is too scared to really say or do anything that might lose him poll percentage points. Plus he has the youth vote, and the youth never vote. Edwards would seem like the best choice (please refrain from laughing) but I don't think he has the funding or the proper handlers to market him to the masses.
So even though Brzezinski's endorsement of Obama is interesting. I don't think it really matters. Brzezinski, although being extremely intelligent, has historically been quite the war monger. So I take his opinions with a grain of (military coup plotting) salt.
Democrats are screwed, Republicans will win by default.
Bad
LOL Bad. I hope you are wrong, but I fear you may be right. Richardson would be my pick, but barring a miracle that ain't gonna happen. As for Ziggy, a real smart guy and a bit of a non conformist at times. My guess is that he probably believes what he says about Obama, but does also have a habit of saying things that get him some press. As for Edwards, a complete lightweight, but I will not laugh. The best candidate is not running, Chuck Hagel, though he is a republican.
By Christopher Swann.
Bloomberg News Published:
August 23, 2007
[url]http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/08/23/business/imf.php[/url]
WASHINGTON: The U. S. Treasury took two years to persuade the International Monetary Fund to police global currency markets - and just two months to trash the initiative once the IMF adopted it.
Treasury officials recruited the fund to be a currency regulator as China and other countries tried to gain a trade advantage with exchange rates. Instead, the fund took aim at the dollar, calling it overvalued in an Aug. 1 report. The Treasury objected, and on Aug. 2 an aide to Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson Jr. Told Congress that it was impossible to measure a currency's fair value.
By rejecting the IMF's analysis, the Treasury may have jeopardized its own effort to use international leverage to help narrow China's $118 billion trade surplus with the United States. Members of Congress are threatening sanctions if the Treasury does not succeed in getting Beijing to stop suppressing the value of its currency.
Tim Adams, then Treasury under secretary, started the process in September 2005 when he criticized the IMF for a perception that it was "asleep at the wheel on its most fundamental responsibility: exchange-rate surveillance." Involving the IMF also served a political purpose: It helped to disengage Washington from a direct confrontation with Beijing over the value of the yuan, which the United States argues is undervalued as a result of Chinese government policy. Now the Treasury's response to the fund's analysis of the dollar may undermine the lender's ability to referee currency disputes.
Fund economists told U. S. Officials in meetings ended July 27 that their research showed that the dollar was 10 percent to 30 percent overpriced, according to an account included in the Aug. 1 report. The second blow to the IMF's new mission came when Mark Sobel, a Treasury deputy assistant secretary, told Congress the day after the report was released that while exchange-rate modeling offers "valuable insights, there is no reliable or precise method for estimating the proper value of an economy's foreign exchange rate."
Assistant Treasury Secretary Clay Lowery, the department's No. 2 international official, said the U. S. Stance on calculating fair-value rates was not new and did not undercut the IMF. Pinpointing an exchange rate's fair value is "very difficult," Lowery said in an interview. "The IMF explained what they believed, and the United States explained back what it believed on the same issue."
Armed with the Treasury's arguments, Beijing may now emulate Washington by rebuffing IMF attempts to alter its exchange-rate policies. China, along with Iran, voted against the fund's new surveillance program before Rodrigo de Rato, managing director of the fund, introduced it in June. Adam Lerrick, a professor of economics at Carnegie Mellon University, said: "The U. S. Criticism will certainly weaken the authority of the fund to comment on China's currency. The Chinese are likely to argue that the fund is wrong about their currency, too, and point out that even the U. S. Doesn't trust the fund's views."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
You couldn't make this stuff up. Lol. Good bye lame duck IMF, you have literally become useless.
Bad
Yo, Dogg, long time no 8 ball,
In late May Richardson met the nonpariel inquisitor of politicos, Tim Russert, on Meet the Press.
The Gov. Took a beating by critics after the show, one such being in Slate.
For the criticism and the live interview see below if you're so inclined.
[url]http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18818527/[/url]
[url]http://www.slate.com/id/2167195/nav/navoa/[/url]