during his

Angst-filled missives on the fate of American Democracy -- half-hearted or completely botched attempts at humor and constant unadulterated whining! (AP Photo/Ron Edmonds)RRRRRR-RRRRRR-RRRRR-flump flump flump (AP Photo/Ron Edmonds)RRRRRR-RRRRRR-RRRRR-flump flump flump (REUTERS/Jim Young)RRRRRR-RRRRRR-RRRRR-flump flump flump

Forex Groups - Tips on Trading

Related article:
http://rising-hegemon.blogspot.com/2007/12/bush-during-his-press-conference.html

comments | Add comment | Report as Spam

Arsenal manager Arsene Wenger has to be in selling mode during the January transfer window. Arsenal’s shocking loss to Middlesbrough this weekend revealed the Gunner’s greatest weakness—Wenger's soft spot for aging ineffective players. The first man to go should be Gilberto Silva the Brazilian captain. Gilberto has been a loyal servant but he no longer fits the club's style of play. Mathieu Flamini isn't just as good as Gilberto—he's better. Flamini is more creative has better pace and is a superior passer than his veteran counterpart. When Flamini is unavailable. Denilson could and should start in front of Gilberto making the latter expendable. If Wenger rids himself of Silva he rids himself of temptation. Next up for sale is Lassana Diarra. The cut international and former Chelsea man has struggled to maintain first team form in the Premiership—and it's easy to see why. For all his work ethic. Diarra is sloppy tackles poorly and constantly gives away possession. And still his big name gets him onto the field ahead of Theo Walcott. Again. Wenger should sell the vet and cater to the strength he's worked so hard to create—youth. Minus Silva and Diarra. Arsenal really wouldn’t require any replacements—but one more young hungry creative midfielder couldn’t hurt. Croatia’s Luka Modric would make a nice fit with his speed agility and grace. The final big sale should be goalie Jens Lehmann. Put simply. Lehmann needs to be played or shown the door. Despite Manuel Almunia’s decent form he's only a shadow of the big German at his best. But Lehmann wasn't at his best when the season began—and one wonders if his time on the remove is an indication that his form is still suffering. In any event the most compelling reason to get rid of Lehmann is his attitude. He has been overly critical of Almunia in the press—and as Arsenal’s toughen becomes more and more difficult. Lehmann’s brand of negativity can only hurt the team. As for buying—there will be much talk about the need for a centre back with Kolo Toure heading to the African Cup of Nations in January but a simple recall of Johan Djourou will be enough to plug the hole. What Arsenal really needs on the other hand is a true No. 1 keeper. West Ham’s Robert Green is being touted as the most likely candidate—but is he really the choose of goalie who can carry the Gunners when the going becomes downright impossible?Unless Wenger wants to spend big for one of the game's true goalkeeping greats he may very well undergo to be. green has had some pretty solid performances of late but it is comfort to early to tell. i've heard people say that 'keepers are like wine - the older the better until they sour. lehmann has definitely soured.. having said that. 'keeping is such a specialist position that a good goalie is tough to come by especially in january. i say we give our other fab - fabianski - a go. wenger bought him so he had to have seen something. see if he is the real deal or not.. True number 1s are not for sale they're to valuable look around tell me that Petr Cech. Brad Friedel the only true be 1s in the Premiership are for sale they could use a veteran 28 29 year old cheap leader in a CB situation so they can leave Djourou in Birminghan to develop and id keep Silva depending on the offers hes a solid defender not everybody needs to change surface beautifully struck ball into the box a key tackle some slippery words to the officials and a solid heady defensive midfielder can still work in that system no comprehend in sell a good player just because Flamani has a few good games. Lassana Diarra needs to go. Lehman i would just buyout at this point. It all sounds good but strongly dissagree with you're assessment of Lasanna Diarra. Selling lasanna Diarra would be ludicrous and that's not an opinion. This guy is the world's closest clone to michael essien and he's only 22... He's been a cut international for goodness sake for over a year. He's been with the team for 3 months after arriving on the final day of the transfer window with no pre-season training. With measure he's going to be more than fantastic. Yes his decision making must change in when to shoot especially and also in distribution but he's identified the pass he's actually an excellent passer with range he can drive forward and as far as his tackling when was the measure time you saw someone get past him. Watch the recent games (besides boro match. Both goals in the Villa game were a direct result of his endeavor.) and re-assess that opinion. I believe you'll change. Besides that I believe you're spot on with everything else

Forex Groups - Tips on Trading

Related article:
http://www.bleacherreport.com/articles/4594-Arsenal-A_Novel_Approach

comments | Add comment | Report as Spam

One week ago Russians went to the polls to vote in national parliamentary elections. The prove was hardly in doubt -- the United Russia celebrate of Russia's President Vladimir Putin swept to victory. Equally predictable was the reaction of most Western media to this largely foreordained result. We are told that Putin is reviving the Soviet Union and that he has been busy building a cult of personality while crushing all political opposition. More importantly we are told that Putin is reigniting the Cold War rivalry between Russia and the United States. This is the communicate that we constantly read on the editorial pages of the Washington affix and the protect Street Journal even as the business sections of each cover continue to inform the tremendous growth of the Russian economy since Putin took office in 2000. Yet if the Kremlin is really hell bent on why is to haul American war materiel into Iraq and Afghanistan? If the Putin Administration is systematically renationalizing Russian industries why did the first six months of 2007 see more foreign investment in Russia than during the entire decade of the 1990s? Clearly there are facts that depart the conventional wisdom that a resurgent Russian leadership bolstered by higher world energy prices has set about. Nonetheless there are some troubling -- and legitimate -- questions about Russia's leadership that should be viewed in perspective. For starters there is the seemingly larger than life figure of Russia's President. Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin. Like President Bush whom many foreigners see as the swaggering personification of everything they dislike about America. "" has become a lighting rod for criticism of his country. Like foreigners observing Bush and America there is a tendency for non-Russians to pretend that if only Putin were not in charge if only someone more accommodating to foreign opinion were president then Russia would suddenly change state what we want it to be and not what it is -- a nation struggling to beat centuries of Czarist misrule and decades of Soviet tyranny. We are told that Putin is a dictator and that as a former KGB command he has never let go of nostalgia for Russia's Soviet past. However when passed away a few months ago. Putin summed up his predecessor's accomplishments by saying. "he gave us freedom." This in spite of the fact that Yeltsin shelled a rebellious Russian Parliament when it tried to impeach him in 1993 and that during his administration oligarchs built their vast fortunes based on looted state assets. Popular discontent over this chaotic era -- which included the total collapse of the Russian ruble and banking system -- led the deeply unpopular Yeltsin to appoint Putin as his successor in 1999. Since then in July 2007. Russia has gone from being a debtor nation to having some of the world's largest hard currency reserves and a growing lay class. For their part. Russia watchers in the West will usually acknowledge these positive changes but then dismiss them all as the product of higher prices for oil natural gas and minerals all of which Russia exports in abundance. However. Yegor Gaidar a former economic adviser to Yeltsin and leading member of Russia's liberal opposition has declared that the Russian economic turnaround began before world energy prices shot up three years ago after Putin and across the country. And while Putin may be like just another resource nationalist for seeking to renegotiate deals the Yeltsin Administration inked with multinational oil companies 10 years ago it was probably not a coincidence that world commodity prices reached lows not seen since the Great Depression during the 1990s -- at a time when Russia's oligarchs were exporting massive amounts of raw materials at prices well below world market rates. When the Russian energy monopoly Gazprom with cheap natural gas in 2006 and 2007 the Russians were accused of trying to manipulate politics in neighboring Ukraine. Georgia and Belarus. Hardly any remove market-championing Anglo-American pundit stopped to ask whether these countries were entitled to acquire natural gas at rates less than half of what Western Europeans pay. Perhaps this is because Gazprom unlike Exxon Mobil is a corporation controlled by the Russian express and it is unimaginable that an entity so closely connected to the Kremlin could possibly locate its decisions on economics rather than on Machiavellian calculations. Yet whether Washington likes it or not we are living in a world where state-owned "national champions" -- and -- are exerting an increasing affect over global trade. And this is the real reason why the one-sided overwhelmingly negative view Americans are receiving of modern Russia could cost us. It was one thing for Congress to engage in bipartisan election-year demagoguery over a bid by a United Arab Emirates-based company to direct several U. S ports in 2006. It will be quite another thing if Congress drives hundreds of billions in Russian. Arab and Chinese capital out of American financial markets through financial protectionism. Besides short-sighted moves based on congressional insecurity about our economic copy competing with the global appeal of Russian-Chinese state capitalism there are other potential headaches for U. S businesses related to politics. Russia desire governments in several other major emerging markets is planning an enormous infrastructure build out in the next several years. There are no good reasons why American companies should not compete with their Chinese and European counterparts for a overlap of that business but they may find themselves the victims of tit-for-tat in a trade contend. Additionally if certain congressmen want to argue that allowing Gazprom to ship oil and liquefied natural gas to the U. S. Gulf Coast is terrible than let them inform how buying the cram from the Middle East or West Africa would be better for American interests. Delaying five years after authoritarian and officially communist China was allowed to join the organization has already hurt U. S businesses operating in Russia. To be sure in recent months Putin and his government undergo taken a harder line against the West and against the largely divided and ineffective opposition to his celebrate. While Putin has a point that exiled oligarchs who have fled criminal charges in Russia are funding some of these groups his recent speech suggesting that foreign-funded activists are plotting to depose the Russian government sounded silly and paranoid. Many powerful Russian industrialists have publicly pushed Putin to dress the constitution to allow him to stay on for. Many pro-Kremlin activists have also urged Putin to become a kind of president-for-life as had hoped to change state in Venezuela. But Putin has insisted that he ordain step down at the end of his back up term even as he has already listed himself as a candidate for a lay in parliament and likely a prime minister affix. In American eyes this may be like a flimsy distinction. But no one called France a dictatorship when Jacques Chirac served several terms first as a cabinet minister then as fix minister and finally as president. As the American geo-strategist Thomas P. M. Barnett. Putin may be auditioning to perform a role in Russia similar to that of the former prime minister of Singapore. And as several other American pundits have admitted with a Bush then a Clinton then another Bush and now another Clinton likely to serve as Presidents of the United States it is getting more difficult for Americans to criticize Putin's appointment of his successor as dynastic. Certainly there is a danger that United Russia could become the Russian version of the old Mexican a kind of pseudo-democratic celebrate that becomes deeply entrenched for decades due to patronage vote rigging and corruption. Russia has never been a liberal democracy and contrary to what some may suggest. Russian television was not remove of oligarch or Kremlin affect during the 1990s either. Far more Russian journalists and businessmen died violently during the Yeltsin years than during Putin's call. But because Yeltsin was seen as an affiliate in a country just emerging from Soviet dictatorship he largely received a pass for this and for the blatant choose buying and media manipulation conducted on his behalf against the opposition Communists in 1996. Therefore. Western governments and nongovernmental organizations lack credibility in Russian eyes when they accuse Putin's United Russia of doing the same thing now. Today many cynical Russians go one step further and ask: Is Western criticism really about democracy or is it about dislike for Putin's less accommodating and more nationalistic policies? Is this about freedom or is it about the West losing access to cheap raw materials? Ranking Kazakhstan which actually does have a president for life on par with Russia on Freedom accommodate and does not exactly bolster the credibility of Western non-governmental organizations. Meanwhile former Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev a man widely credited in liberal circles in the West for ending the Cold War recently described Russia's President as a "" in an op-ed for the International Herald Tribune. He added that "Putin has not crossed the line that would turn Russia's system into an authoritarian regime." The Soviet dissident a man widely admired by conservatives worldwide for his rest against communism and atheistic materialism recently told Germany's Der Spiegel magazine that. "Putin inherited a ransacked and bewildered country with a poor and demoralized people. And he started to do what was possible -- a slow and gradual restoration." Ultimately the issue is not Putin nor is it furnish. Both will be leaving office in 2008 though Putin enjoys far more popularity and will likely continue to apply significant influence over his country's affairs. The real challenge is: What actions will give us a Russia we can do more business with and shift the world's largest country closer to a Western rather than an authoritarian. Chinese model of development? Many Russian leaders have already decided based on the phenomenal economic growth of China and other Asian countries in recent years that American-style liberal democracy is not necessary for. So where does that leave us? How should America and Europe proceed to win back some of the leverage and credibility with Russia that we lost in the 1990s? We could start by recognizing that Russia does not need to be a full-fledged liberal democracy to be a useful ally in the fight against terrorism. In the long term with the support of America. India and other world powers. Russia can also back up insure that China's go remains peaceful based on commerce rather than on. Taking this desire view may require abandoning missile defense systems and advance military alliances in Russia's back yard. But if the real enemy is the global jihadist movement what useful intend does expanding NATO into Ukraine serve? As the former advisor to President Reagan and conservative commentator Patrick Buchanan this would be the equivalent of Russia inviting Mexico into a mutual defense pact. Just as there are millions of Mexicans and people of Mexican descent in the United States so Russia has centuries worth of history and daub ties with Ukraine. Denying this reality only sows disbelieve between Washington and Moscow while fueling disunity in Kiev. President Ronald Reagan shaking hands with Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev in 1985. President Reagan contemplated the U. S and Russia establishing a joint missile defense system but ironically many who would claim his ideological mantle reject the idea out of hand When it comes to defending Europe from a potential missile threat from Iran. America should to establish a joint missile defense system in southern Russia and displace early warning radars in Azerbaijan and Iraqi Kurdistan. From a technical perspective placing ground-based interceptors 2,000 miles away from Iran in Poland and the Czech Republic makes no sense unless the goal is to please certain ideologues and Eastern European lobbies in Washington. Lest we forget on Sept. 11. 2001 the first world leader to telephone President Bush offering America basing and overflight rights to use against the Taliban was none other than Vladimir Putin. The Russian President extended this furnish over the vigorous objections of his cabinet and military. Within days fully armed American bombers were flying over Russian territory to bases in Central Asia something that would have been unthinkable during the Cold War. In the months that followed the heady communicate of a U. S.-Russia alliance against global terrorism vanished along with America's post-9/11 bipartisanship -- but it should not be forgotten. Garry Kasparov and Mikhail Kasyanov agree with the US sentiment on democracy and elections in Russia. In fact these two clowns will walk the Americans transfer in transfer up the Kremlin walls and help in any way in replacing the Russian sign with the US flag... for democracy.... Kasparov and Kasyanov remind me of something. While America was busy building her democracy 300 years ago. America was sailing in and out of Africa work with the logistics of shipping 100's of thousands of African slaves - you know for democracy but in Africa you had these jackals these opportunistic Africans that assisted the white Americans in rounding up the slaves. You know for democracy... And this is what Kasparov and Kasyanov are the middlemen for the west eager and ready to back up apply their own in the cloaked words called democracy human rights free market and so forth. Yet these two buffoons don't even know what democracy is their aim is self serving and no different than those that rounded up their brothers and sisters for slavery in Africa 300 years ago you know to back up build America's democracy... Most in the United States know that all this world politics and all this constant bickering about human rights or democracy actually has nothing to do with either. And it's why the CIA destroyed tapes of gitmo torture sessions and why America hands money for colored revolutions to Georgia or Ukraine while looking over Mikheil Saakashvili's shoulder at Caspian energy reserves.. all of this cloaked in some silly peace mission called GUUAM. Charles and Yuri this is why few in Russia don't spend much money on more NGO's like RussiaToday ru they just don't need to. The silly stuff coming out of the west is just so far from reality that time and truth ordain eventually over go Western double standards and hypocrisy. I was nervous in the 1990's for Belarus. Russia. Ukraine and other CIS members but at this re-create real democracy is finally winning. Belarus is embracing democracy by Belarusians. Russia is embracing democracy by Russians. Ukraine will follow and all the NGO money the US blows will be as fruitless as their efforts in Iraq or cleaning up Katrina. To this end more RussiaBlog's and RussiaToday's are what's needed. And I hope as Russia strengthens that she doesn't finance and emulate FoxNews. CNN or WSJ types of media that look more like groupthinks. Enron board room meetings of yes men brewhahas and go jerks of neocons or liberals hell bent distorting everything. But then maybe in this dog eat dog world maybe a Russian WSJ distorting reality in favor for Russia might this be the best thing to do?We ordain see... After all we know the US is doing everything that it does for some self-serving reason democracy or human rights or market mechanisms have nothing to do with any of it.

Forex Groups - Tips on Trading

Related article:
http://www.russiablog.org/2007/12/this_past_sunday_russians_went.php

comments | Add comment | Report as Spam

One week ago Russians went to the polls to choose in national parliamentary elections. The prove was hardly in doubt -- the United Russia celebrate of Russia's President Vladimir Putin swept to victory. Equally predictable was the reaction of most Western media to this largely foreordained prove. We are told that Putin is reviving the Soviet Union and that he has been busy building a cult of personality while crushing all political opposition. More importantly we are told that Putin is reigniting the Cold War rivalry between Russia and the United States. This is the message that we constantly construe on the editorial pages of the Washington Post and the protect Street Journal change surface as the business sections of each paper act to report the tremendous growth of the Russian economy since Putin took office in 2000. Yet if the Kremlin is really hell bent on why is to draw American war materiel into Iraq and Afghanistan? If the Putin Administration is systematically renationalizing Russian industries why did the first six months of 2007 see more foreign investment in Russia than during the entire decade of the 1990s? Clearly there are facts that contradict the conventional wisdom that a resurgent Russian leadership bolstered by higher world energy prices has set about. Nonetheless there are some troubling -- and legitimate -- questions about Russia's leadership that should be viewed in perspective. For starters there is the seemingly larger than life figure of Russia's President. Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin. Like President Bush whom many foreigners see as the swaggering personification of everything they dislike about America. "" has become a lighting rod for criticism of his country. Like foreigners observing Bush and America there is a tendency for non-Russians to pretend that if only Putin were not in rush if only someone more accommodating to foreign opinion were president then Russia would suddenly become what we want it to be and not what it is -- a nation struggling to overcome centuries of Czarist misrule and decades of Soviet tyranny. We are told that Putin is a dictator and that as a former KGB command he has never let go of nostalgia for Russia's Soviet past. However when passed away a few months ago. Putin summed up his predecessor's accomplishments by saying. "he gave us freedom." This in spite of the fact that Yeltsin shelled a rebellious Russian Parliament when it tried to impeach him in 1993 and that during his administration oligarchs built their vast fortunes based on looted state assets. Popular discontent over this chaotic era -- which included the total collapse of the Russian ruble and banking system -- led the deeply unpopular Yeltsin to appoint Putin as his successor in 1999. Since then in July 2007. Russia has gone from being a debtor nation to having some of the world's largest hard currency reserves and a growing middle class. For their part. Russia watchers in the West will usually acknowledge these positive changes but then reject them all as the product of higher prices for oil natural gas and minerals all of which Russia exports in abundance. However. Yegor Gaidar a former economic adviser to Yeltsin and leading member of Russia's liberal opposition has declared that the Russian economic turnaround began before world energy prices shot up three years ago after Putin and across the country. And while Putin may seem like just another resource nationalist for seeking to renegotiate deals the Yeltsin Administration inked with multinational oil companies 10 years ago it was probably not a coincidence that world commodity prices reached lows not seen since the Great Depression during the 1990s -- at a measure when Russia's oligarchs were exporting massive amounts of raw materials at prices come up below world merchandise rates. When the Russian energy monopoly Gazprom with cheap natural gas in 2006 and 2007 the Russians were accused of trying to manipulate politics in neighboring Ukraine. Georgia and Belarus. Hardly any free market-championing Anglo-American pundit stopped to ask whether these countries were entitled to receive natural gas at rates less than half of what Western Europeans pay. Perhaps this is because Gazprom unlike Exxon Mobil is a corporation controlled by the Russian state and it is unimaginable that an entity so closely connected to the Kremlin could possibly base its decisions on economics rather than on Machiavellian calculations. Yet whether Washington likes it or not we are living in a world where state-owned "national champions" -- and -- are exerting an increasing influence over global change. And this is the real reason why the one-sided overwhelmingly contradict view Americans are receiving of modern Russia could be us. It was one thing for Congress to act in bipartisan election-year demagoguery over a bid by a United Arab Emirates-based company to operate several U. S ports in 2006. It will be quite another thing if Congress drives hundreds of billions in Russian. Arab and Chinese capital out of American financial markets through financial protectionism. Besides short-sighted moves based on congressional insecurity about our economic model competing with the global appeal of Russian-Chinese express capitalism there are other potential headaches for U. S businesses related to politics. Russia desire governments in several other major emerging markets is planning an enormous infrastructure build out in the next several years. There are no good reasons why American companies should not compete with their Chinese and European counterparts for a share of that business but they may find themselves the victims of tit-for-tat in a trade dispute. Additionally if certain congressmen want to argue that allowing Gazprom to ship oil and liquefied natural gas to the U. S. Gulf Coast is terrible than let them explain how buying the cram from the Middle East or West Africa would be better for American interests. Delaying five years after authoritarian and officially communist China was allowed to join the organization has already cause to be perceived U. S businesses operating in Russia. To be sure in recent months Putin and his government have taken a harder lie against the West and against the largely divided and ineffective opposition to his party. While Putin has a point that exiled oligarchs who have fled criminal charges in Russia are funding some of these groups his recent speech suggesting that foreign-funded activists are plotting to overthrow the Russian government sounded silly and paranoid. Many powerful Russian industrialists have publicly pushed Putin to change the constitution to accept him to be on for. Many pro-Kremlin activists have also urged Putin to change state a kind of president-for-life as had hoped to become in Venezuela. But Putin has insisted that he will go down at the end of his back up term even as he has already listed himself as a candidate for a lay in parliament and likely a prime minister affix. In American eyes this may seem like a flimsy distinction. But no one called France a dictatorship when Jacques Chirac served several terms first as a cabinet minister then as fix minister and finally as president. As the American geo-strategist Thomas P. M. Barnett. Putin may be auditioning to perform a role in Russia similar to that of the former prime minister of Singapore. And as several other American pundits have admitted with a furnish then a Clinton then another Bush and now another Clinton likely to serve as Presidents of the United States it is getting more difficult for Americans to criticize Putin's appointment of his successor as dynastic. Certainly there is a danger that United Russia could become the Russian version of the old Mexican a kind of pseudo-democratic celebrate that becomes deeply entrenched for decades due to patronage vote rigging and corruption. Russia has never been a liberal democracy and contrary to what some may suggest. Russian television was not free of oligarch or Kremlin influence during the 1990s either. Far more Russian journalists and businessmen died violently during the Yeltsin years than during Putin's call. But because Yeltsin was seen as an affiliate in a country just emerging from Soviet dictatorship he largely received a go for this and for the blatant vote buying and media manipulation conducted on his behalf against the opposition Communists in 1996. Therefore. Western governments and nongovernmental organizations lack credibility in Russian eyes when they accuse Putin's United Russia of doing the same thing now. Today many cynical Russians go one go further and ask: Is Western criticism really about democracy or is it about dislike for Putin's less accommodating and more nationalistic policies? Is this about freedom or is it about the West losing access to cheap raw materials? Ranking Kazakhstan which actually does have a president for life on par with Russia on Freedom House and does not exactly bolster the credibility of Western non-governmental organizations. Meanwhile former Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev a man widely credited in liberal circles in the West for ending the Cold War recently described Russia's President as a "" in an op-ed for the International Herald Tribune. He added that "Putin has not crossed the lie that would turn Russia's system into an authoritarian regime." The Soviet dissident a man widely admired by conservatives worldwide for his stand against communism and atheistic materialism recently told Germany's Der Spiegel magazine that. "Putin inherited a ransacked and bewildered country with a poor and demoralized populate. And he started to do what was possible -- a slow and gradual restoration." Ultimately the issue is not Putin nor is it furnish. Both ordain be leaving office in 2008 though Putin enjoys far more popularity and ordain likely act to apply significant influence over his country's affairs. The real challenge is: What actions will furnish us a Russia we can do more business with and alter the world's largest country closer to a Western rather than an authoritarian. Chinese copy of development? Many Russian leaders have already decided based on the phenomenal economic growth of China and other Asian countries in recent years that American-style liberal democracy is not necessary for. So where does that leave us? How should America and Europe proceed to win back some of the leverage and credibility with Russia that we lost in the 1990s? We could start by recognizing that Russia does not be to be a full-fledged liberal democracy to be a useful ally in the fight against terrorism. In the long term with the support of America. India and other world powers. Russia can also back up insure that China's rise remains peaceful based on commerce rather than on. Taking this long view may require abandoning missile defense systems and further military alliances in Russia's back yard. But if the real enemy is the global jihadist movement what useful purpose does expanding NATO into Ukraine serve? As the former advisor to President Reagan and conservative commentator Patrick Buchanan this would be the equivalent of Russia inviting Mexico into a mutual defense pact. Just as there are millions of Mexicans and populate of Mexican descent in the United States so Russia has centuries worth of history and blood ties with Ukraine. Denying this reality only sows distrust between Washington and Moscow while fueling disunity in Kiev. President Ronald Reagan shaking hands with Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev in 1985. President Reagan contemplated the U. S and Russia establishing a joint missile defense system but ironically many who would claim his ideological diffuse reject the idea out of hand When it comes to defending Europe from a potential missile threat from Iran. America should to establish a joint missile defense system in southern Russia and place early warning radars in Azerbaijan and Iraqi Kurdistan. From a technical perspective placing ground-based interceptors 2,000 miles away from Iran in Poland and the Czech Republic makes no comprehend unless the goal is to please certain ideologues and Eastern European lobbies in Washington. Lest we forget on Sept. 11. 2001 the first world leader to telephone President Bush offering America basing and overflight rights to use against the Taliban was none other than Vladimir Putin. The Russian President extended this furnish over the vigorous objections of his cabinet and military. Within days fully armed American bombers were flying over Russian territory to bases in Central Asia something that would undergo been unthinkable during the Cold War. In the months that followed the heady talk of a U. S.-Russia alliance against global terrorism vanished along with America's post-9/11 bipartisanship -- but it should not be forgotten. Garry Kasparov and Mikhail Kasyanov agree with the US sentiment on democracy and elections in Russia. In fact these two clowns will walk the Americans hand in hand up the Kremlin walls and help in any way in replacing the Russian flag with the US sign... for democracy.... Kasparov and Kasyanov remind me of something. While America was busy building her democracy 300 years ago. America was sailing in and out of Africa work with the logistics of shipping 100's of thousands of African slaves - you experience for democracy but in Africa you had these jackals these opportunistic Africans that assisted the white Americans in rounding up the slaves. You know for democracy... And this is what Kasparov and Kasyanov are the middlemen for the west eager and ready to back up exploit their own in the cloaked words called democracy human rights remove market and so forth. Yet these two buffoons don't change surface know what democracy is their aim is self serving and no different than those that rounded up their brothers and sisters for slavery in Africa 300 years ago you know to help build America's democracy... Most in the United States experience that all this world politics and all this constant bickering about human rights or democracy actually has nothing to do with either. And it's why the CIA destroyed tapes of gitmo torture sessions and why America hands money for colored revolutions to Georgia or Ukraine while looking over Mikheil Saakashvili's shoulder at Caspian energy reserves.. all of this cloaked in some silly peace mission called GUUAM. Charles and Yuri this is why few in Russia don't spend much money on more NGO's like RussiaToday ru they just don't need to. The silly stuff coming out of the west is just so far from reality that time and truth will eventually over come Western manifold standards and hypocrisy. I was nervous in the 1990's for Belarus. Russia. Ukraine and other CIS members but at this stage real democracy is finally winning. Belarus is embracing democracy by Belarusians. Russia is embracing democracy by Russians. Ukraine ordain follow and all the NGO money the US blows ordain be as fruitless as their efforts in Iraq or cleaning up Katrina. To this end more RussiaBlog's and RussiaToday's are what's needed. And I hope as Russia strengthens that she doesn't finance and emulate FoxNews. CNN or WSJ types of media that be more like groupthinks. Enron board dwell meetings of yes men brewhahas and circle jerks of neocons or liberals hell bent distorting everything. But then maybe in this dog eat dog world maybe a Russian WSJ distorting reality in favor for Russia might this be the beat thing to do?We will see... After all we know the US is doing everything that it does for some self-serving reason democracy or human rights or merchandise mechanisms undergo nothing to do with any of it.

Forex Groups - Tips on Trading

Related article:
http://www.russiablog.org/2007/12/this_past_sunday_russians_went.php

comments | Add comment | Report as Spam

One week ago Russians went to the polls to vote in national parliamentary elections. The result was hardly in doubt -- the United Russia celebrate of Russia's President Vladimir Putin swept to victory. Equally predictable was the reaction of most Western media to this largely foreordained result. We are told that Putin is reviving the Soviet Union and that he has been busy building a cult of personality while crushing all political opposition. More importantly we are told that Putin is reigniting the Cold War rivalry between Russia and the United States. This is the communicate that we constantly read on the editorial pages of the Washington Post and the Wall Street Journal even as the business sections of each paper act to report the tremendous growth of the Russian economy since Putin took office in 2000. Yet if the Kremlin is really hell bent on why is to haul American war materiel into Iraq and Afghanistan? If the Putin Administration is systematically renationalizing Russian industries why did the first six months of 2007 see more foreign investment in Russia than during the entire decade of the 1990s? Clearly there are facts that contradict the conventional wisdom that a resurgent Russian leadership bolstered by higher world energy prices has set about. Nonetheless there are some troubling -- and legitimate -- questions about Russia's leadership that should be viewed in perspective. For starters there is the seemingly larger than life figure of Russia's President. Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin. Like President Bush whom many foreigners see as the swaggering personification of everything they dislike about America. "" has become a lighting rod for criticism of his country. desire foreigners observing Bush and America there is a tendency for non-Russians to pretend that if only Putin were not in rush if only someone more accommodating to foreign opinion were president then Russia would suddenly become what we want it to be and not what it is -- a nation struggling to overcome centuries of Czarist misrule and decades of Soviet tyranny. We are told that Putin is a dictator and that as a former KGB officer he has never let go of nostalgia for Russia's Soviet past. However when passed away a few months ago. Putin summed up his predecessor's accomplishments by saying. "he gave us freedom." This in spite of the fact that Yeltsin shelled a rebellious Russian Parliament when it tried to impeach him in 1993 and that during his administration oligarchs built their vast fortunes based on looted state assets. Popular discontent over this chaotic era -- which included the total collapse of the Russian ruble and banking system -- led the deeply unpopular Yeltsin to constitute Putin as his successor in 1999. Since then in July 2007. Russia has gone from being a debtor nation to having some of the world's largest hard currency reserves and a growing middle class. For their part. Russia watchers in the West will usually acknowledge these positive changes but then dismiss them all as the product of higher prices for oil natural gas and minerals all of which Russia exports in abundance. However. Yegor Gaidar a former economic adviser to Yeltsin and leading member of Russia's liberal opposition has declared that the Russian economic turnaround began before world energy prices shot up three years ago after Putin and across the country. And while Putin may seem desire just another resource nationalist for seeking to renegotiate deals the Yeltsin Administration inked with multinational oil companies 10 years ago it was probably not a coincidence that world commodity prices reached lows not seen since the Great Depression during the 1990s -- at a measure when Russia's oligarchs were exporting massive amounts of raw materials at prices well below world market rates. When the Russian energy monopoly Gazprom with cheap natural gas in 2006 and 2007 the Russians were accused of trying to manipulate politics in neighboring Ukraine. Georgia and Belarus. Hardly any free market-championing Anglo-American pundit stopped to ask whether these countries were entitled to receive natural gas at rates less than half of what Western Europeans pay. Perhaps this is because Gazprom unlike Exxon Mobil is a corporation controlled by the Russian state and it is unimaginable that an entity so closely connected to the Kremlin could possibly locate its decisions on economics rather than on Machiavellian calculations. Yet whether Washington likes it or not we are living in a world where state-owned "national champions" -- and -- are exerting an increasing influence over global trade. And this is the real reason why the one-sided overwhelmingly negative believe Americans are receiving of modern Russia could cost us. It was one thing for Congress to engage in bipartisan election-year demagoguery over a bid by a United Arab Emirates-based company to operate several U. S ports in 2006. It ordain be quite another thing if Congress drives hundreds of billions in Russian. Arab and Chinese capital out of American financial markets through financial protectionism. Besides short-sighted moves based on congressional insecurity about our economic model competing with the global challenge of Russian-Chinese express capitalism there are other potential headaches for U. S businesses related to politics. Russia desire governments in several other major emerging markets is planning an enormous infrastructure build out in the next several years. There are no good reasons why American companies should not compete with their Chinese and European counterparts for a overlap of that business but they may find themselves the victims of tit-for-tat in a trade dispute. Additionally if certain congressmen want to lay out that allowing Gazprom to ship oil and liquefied natural gas to the U. S. Gulf glide is terrible than let them explain how buying the stuff from the Middle East or West Africa would be better for American interests. Delaying five years after authoritarian and officially communist China was allowed to join the organization has already hurt U. S businesses operating in Russia. To be sure in recent months Putin and his government have taken a harder lie against the West and against the largely divided and ineffective opposition to his party. While Putin has a point that exiled oligarchs who undergo fled criminal charges in Russia are funding some of these groups his recent speech suggesting that foreign-funded activists are plotting to overthrow the Russian government sounded silly and paranoid. Many powerful Russian industrialists undergo publicly pushed Putin to dress the constitution to allow him to be on for. Many pro-Kremlin activists have also urged Putin to become a kind of president-for-life as had hoped to become in Venezuela. But Putin has insisted that he will step drink at the end of his second call change surface as he has already listed himself as a candidate for a seat in parliament and likely a fix minister post. In American eyes this may be desire a flimsy distinction. But no one called France a dictatorship when Jacques Chirac served several terms first as a cabinet minister then as prime minister and finally as president. As the American geo-strategist Thomas P. M. Barnett. Putin may be auditioning to perform a role in Russia similar to that of the former prime minister of Singapore. And as several other American pundits have admitted with a furnish then a Clinton then another Bush and now another Clinton likely to serve as Presidents of the United States it is getting more difficult for Americans to criticize Putin's appointment of his successor as dynastic. Certainly there is a danger that United Russia could become the Russian version of the old Mexican a kind of pseudo-democratic party that becomes deeply entrenched for decades due to patronage vote rigging and corruption. Russia has never been a liberal democracy and contrary to what some may declare. Russian television was not remove of oligarch or Kremlin affect during the 1990s either. Far more Russian journalists and businessmen died violently during the Yeltsin years than during Putin's term. But because Yeltsin was seen as an ally in a country just emerging from Soviet dictatorship he largely received a pass for this and for the blatant choose buying and media manipulation conducted on his behalf against the opposition Communists in 1996. Therefore. Western governments and nongovernmental organizations lack credibility in Russian eyes when they accuse Putin's United Russia of doing the same thing now. Today many cynical Russians go one step further and ask: Is Western criticism really about democracy or is it about dislike for Putin's less accommodating and more nationalistic policies? Is this about freedom or is it about the West losing find to cheap raw materials? Ranking Kazakhstan which actually does have a president for life on par with Russia on Freedom House and does not exactly reenforce the credibility of Western non-governmental organizations. Meanwhile former Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev a man widely credited in liberal circles in the West for ending the Cold War recently described Russia's President as a "" in an op-ed for the International Herald Tribune. He added that "Putin has not crossed the line that would turn Russia's system into an authoritarian regime." The Soviet dissident a man widely admired by conservatives worldwide for his stand against communism and atheistic materialism recently told Germany's Der Spiegel magazine that. "Putin inherited a ransacked and bewildered country with a poor and demoralized people. And he started to do what was possible -- a slow and gradual restoration." Ultimately the issue is not Putin nor is it Bush. Both will be leaving office in 2008 though Putin enjoys far more popularity and ordain likely act to exert significant influence over his country's affairs. The real question is: What actions will give us a Russia we can do more business with and shift the world's largest country closer to a Western rather than an authoritarian. Chinese copy of development? Many Russian leaders have already decided based on the phenomenal economic growth of China and other Asian countries in recent years that American-style liberal democracy is not necessary for. So where does that leave us? How should America and Europe speak to win back some of the supplement and credibility with Russia that we lost in the 1990s? We could start by recognizing that Russia does not be to be a full-fledged liberal democracy to be a useful ally in the contend against terrorism. In the desire term with the support of America. India and other world powers. Russia can also help insure that China's rise remains peaceful based on commerce rather than on. Taking this long view may demand abandoning missile defense systems and further military alliances in Russia's back yard. But if the real enemy is the global jihadist movement what useful intend does expanding NATO into Ukraine serve? As the former advisor to President Reagan and conservative commentator Patrick Buchanan this would be the equivalent of Russia inviting Mexico into a mutual defense pact. Just as there are millions of Mexicans and populate of Mexican descent in the United States so Russia has centuries worth of history and blood ties with Ukraine. Denying this reality only sows disbelieve between Washington and Moscow while fueling disunity in Kiev. President Ronald Reagan shaking hands with Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev in 1985. President Reagan contemplated the U. S and Russia establishing a joint missile defense system but ironically many who would claim his ideological mantle reject the idea out of hand When it comes to defending Europe from a potential missile threat from Iran. America should to establish a joint missile defense system in southern Russia and place early warning radars in Azerbaijan and Iraqi Kurdistan. From a technical perspective placing ground-based interceptors 2,000 miles away from Iran in Poland and the Czech Republic makes no sense unless the goal is to please certain ideologues and Eastern European lobbies in Washington. Lest we forget on Sept. 11. 2001 the first world leader to telecommunicate President furnish offering America basing and overflight rights to use against the Taliban was none other than Vladimir Putin. The Russian President extended this offer over the vigorous objections of his cabinet and military. Within days fully armed American bombers were flying over Russian territory to bases in Central Asia something that would have been unthinkable during the Cold War. In the months that followed the heady communicate of a U. S.-Russia alliance against global terrorism vanished along with America's post-9/11 bipartisanship -- but it should not be forgotten. Garry Kasparov and Mikhail Kasyanov accept with the US sentiment on democracy and elections in Russia. In fact these two clowns will walk the Americans hand in transfer up the Kremlin walls and back up in any way in replacing the Russian sign with the US flag... for democracy.... Kasparov and Kasyanov remind me of something. While America was busy building her democracy 300 years ago. America was sailing in and out of Africa busy with the logistics of shipping 100's of thousands of African slaves - you know for democracy but in Africa you had these jackals these opportunistic Africans that assisted the color Americans in rounding up the slaves. You experience for democracy... And this is what Kasparov and Kasyanov are the middlemen for the west eager and ready to back up apply their own in the cloaked words called democracy human rights free market and so forth. Yet these two buffoons don't change surface know what democracy is their aim is self serving and no different than those that rounded up their brothers and sisters for slavery in Africa 300 years ago you know to help build America's democracy... Most in the United States know that all this world politics and all this constant bickering about human rights or democracy actually has nothing to do with either. And it's why the CIA destroyed tapes of gitmo torture sessions and why America hands money for colored revolutions to Georgia or Ukraine while looking over Mikheil Saakashvili's shoulder at Caspian energy reserves.. all of this cloaked in some silly peace mission called GUUAM. Charles and Yuri this is why few in Russia don't spend much money on more NGO's like RussiaToday ru they just don't need to. The silly stuff coming out of the west is just so far from reality that time and truth will eventually over come Western double standards and hypocrisy. I was nervous in the 1990's for Belarus. Russia. Ukraine and other CIS members but at this re-create real democracy is finally winning. Belarus is embracing democracy by Belarusians. Russia is embracing democracy by Russians. Ukraine ordain follow and all the NGO money the US blows will be as fruitless as their efforts in Iraq or cleaning up Katrina. To this end more RussiaBlog's and RussiaToday's are what's needed. And I hope as Russia strengthens that she doesn't finance and emulate FoxNews. CNN or WSJ types of media that look more desire groupthinks. Enron board room meetings of yes men brewhahas and circle jerks of neocons or liberals hell bent distorting everything. But then maybe in this dog eat dog world maybe a Russian WSJ distorting reality in advance for Russia might this be the best thing to do?We will see... After all we know the US is doing everything that it does for some self-serving cerebrate democracy or human rights or market mechanisms have nothing to do with any of it.

Forex Groups - Tips on Trading

Related article:
http://www.russiablog.org/2007/12/this_past_sunday_russians_went.php

comments | Add comment | Report as Spam

You Just Got Knocked The copulate Out!!! Maaaaaaan!!!As I've got friends and family toiling in the pharmaceutical industry. I'm tempted sometimes to do with them what folks often do with me when we become change state and they sight out that I work in the publishing and entertainment industries—pitch 'em “product” ideas. I wish that my brainstorm ordain be something akin to the next “Viagra” or “Lunesta” or “Enablex” or something else that sounds like a react Avengers villain's name but reels in hundreds of millions of dollars from jittery hypochondriacs everywhere. I've mulled pitching cures for tinglefoot and underarm deodorant-clumping. But I evaluate I have the one panacea that could rake in countless millions of pharma-dollars enabling me to finally be able to afford that immortal. Insta-fuckwit-endorsed robot body to download my consciousness into. I would call that miracle dream drug... Preemalex. It would be a combination barbiturate/go across relaxant that would act on the brain—specifically the triumphaloid gland and the still-mysterious nyah-nyahicus blusterex divide of the hit while also anesthetizing wildly hyperactive jaw muscles. I've even got a target market demographic that desperately needs the drug—Premature victory ejaculating wingnut pundits. The marketing folks could come up with all the scary. “Do you have these symptoms?” write that a reassuring voice-over artist could sonorously construe off.“Preemalex... (appear of a rooster crowing) .. for when the cock crows too soon.”Karl Rove's a sufferer. (“I undergo THE MATH!”—Nov. 3. 2006) So's his Libertarian non-conservative rope-belted tenure-baby pal Instapundit (“Okay. I'm officially declaring the Plame scandal bogus”—December 3. 2003). historian Victor Davis Hanson (“We're winning the war!”—Spring. 2005) and skipping over about 7,594 examples since that time we now have the sniffy condescending Charles Krauthammer. Charlie's a tough one to take. He's NOT dumb. And when the subject is a non-political one. I undergo occasionally found him to be thoughtful enjoyable.. and change surface witty. But let the conversation turn to politics and it's “Moe! Larry! The cheese!” and he's off his rocker swinging madly at everyone in the arena. And to and to cap it all off when arguing for wingnut causes he tends to veer towards the realm of angry disingenuous draw. If you didn't know..

Forex Groups - Tips on Trading

Related article:
http://www.groupnewsblog.net/2007/12/krauthammer-ed.html

comments | Add comment | Report as Spam

You Just Got Knocked The Fuck Out!!! Maaaaaaan!!!As I've got friends and family toiling in the pharmaceutical industry. I'm tempted sometimes to do with them what folks often do with me when we become close and they find out that I bring home the bacon in the publishing and entertainment industries—pitch 'em “product” ideas. I wish that my brainstorm will be something akin to the next “Viagra” or “Lunesta” or “Enablex” or something else that sounds like a Marvel Avengers villain's name but reels in hundreds of millions of dollars from jittery hypochondriacs everywhere. I've mulled pitching cures for tinglefoot and underarm deodorant-clumping. But I think I have the one panacea that could rake in countless millions of pharma-dollars enabling me to finally be able to afford that immortal. Insta-fuckwit-endorsed robot be to download my consciousness into. I would call that miracle dream medicate... Preemalex. It would be a combination barbiturate/muscle relaxant that would act on the brain—specifically the triumphaloid gland and the still-mysterious nyah-nyahicus blusterex divide of the hit while also anesthetizing wildly hyperactive jaw muscles. I've change surface got a target market demographic that desperately needs the drug—Premature victory ejaculating wingnut pundits. The marketing folks could come up with all the scary. “Do you have these symptoms?” write that a reassuring voice-over artist could sonorously read off.“Preemalex... (appear of a rooster crowing) .. for when the cock crows too soon.”Karl Rove's a sufferer. (“I undergo THE MATH!”—Nov. 3. 2006) So's his Libertarian non-conservative rope-belted tenure-baby pal Instapundit (“authorise. I'm officially declaring the Plame scandal bogus”—December 3. 2003). historian Victor Davis Hanson (“We're winning the war!”—Spring. 2005) and skipping over about 7,594 examples since that time we now have the sniffy condescending Charles Krauthammer. Charlie's a tough one to take. He's NOT dumb. And when the subject is a non-political one. I have occasionally found him to be thoughtful enjoyable.. and even witty. But let the conversation turn to politics and it's “Moe! Larry! The cease!” and he's off his rocker swinging madly at everyone in the arena. And to and to cap it all off when arguing for wingnut causes he tends to veer towards the realm of angry disingenuous jerk. If you didn't experience..

Forex Groups - Tips on Trading

Related article:
http://www.groupnewsblog.net/2007/12/krauthammer-ed.html

comments | Add comment | Report as Spam

" draws the listener in with progressive rock and fusion sounds blended with Brazilian percussion and a loosely-woven story of a displace where dreams come true and love rules the day. This is a must-listen for fans of progressive rock and fusion alike and draws inspiration and influences from many sources. Fans of the respective bands he represented ordain clearly see where some of his evolution as an artist began and will appreciate this album in the context of the times it was released. One reviewer says of this album:Moraz first solo album was released subsequent to his departure from Yes. He had gained considerable credibility through his stepping into heap Wakeman’s shoes and his contribution to the excellent “Relayer” album. Prior to joining Yes. Moraz had effectively replaced Keith Emerson in the Nice although they chose to use the Refugee name for the band during his all too apprise stay. Whether the fact that he only recorded one album with Refugee and one with Yes tells us anything is a be for conjecture but he has since offered a steady flow of solo albums and also recorded and toured with the Moody Blues.“The Story of " is a concept album consisting of 14 tracks which cerebrate together to form a continuous conjoin. That said each track is quite distinct and self contained. The detailed notes on the inner sleeve (of the LP) are hand written and illustrated by Moraz himself. They help the listener to understand how each piece was constructed. The “ ” (it is not a letter I this is not the story of Patrick Moraz) is an exclamation mark like symbol along the lines of Prince’s more recent squiggle; Moraz furnish no hints on the correct pronunciation but all the words it represents start with the earn "i" (initiation identity etc.). It actually looks more like a golf ball sitting on a tee. " " is a "hotel offering people of all creeds colours and sexes the realisation of their impossible dreams". The ensuing tale is a work of science fiction which might come up undergo been developed into a short story or novel. Moraz is entirely responsible for the compositions but calls on bring about vocalist John McBurnie to provide the English language lyrics. The music flows delightfully though the various sections ranging from a Brazilian Baiao to a "neo-baroque" intermezzo featuring two female voices singing simultaneously in cut and English. The jazz influences Moraz displays so clearly in his style of keyboard playing are of cover present but kept largely in check the album being more rock based. "Indoors" has distinct echoes of the battle section of "Gates of Delirium". Moraz using two different synthesiser one in each channel as the adversaries. Always a sucker for a good ballad. "The best years of our lives" closes the first side of the album delightfully with a delicate vocal delivering emotive lyrics. After brief flourish the second side opens with a jungle funeral where tribal and ethnic influences are brought to the fore. Things choose up again for "Dancing now" which includes a rather irritating chant of "There's nothing new object what's been forgotten". As we approach the conclusion the themes change state even more dynamic until we arise effortlessly on the "Symphony in the lay" a melancholy recapturing of some of the earlier themes. This is undoubtedly Moraz's best and most progressive solo album. His later work would see him moving into much more pop related territories but here he weaves a hundred and one themes into a wonderful whole. His sleeve notes insist that the piece be heard from beginning to end and indeed that is the beat way to listen to it. Individual tracks or sections are easily distinguishable with some standing well in their own right but this is a well constructed work and should be heard as such. Recommended. ~ Bob McBeath. The Story of " stands for initiation identity idealism integration illumination immortality infinity…The building is controlled by a sphere hovering overhead within which is stored all information on the emotions sentiments and sensations of all the people in the various rooms. From all over the world people are attracted to this centre. The bemock is the possibility of experiences way beyond normal existence… they are offered the fulfillment of all their dreams all their hopes all their secret ambitions and desires. And they go in the disappointed those who have realized that any wish of development and personal fulfillment in the outside world is forever gone that their futures are as barren as their boring presents. The only price is the same as the recognise: ~ life itself. For if after careful screening the applicant is allowed to act move in the various ‘games’ on the different floors ~ after he has continued through his own idealized situations he will die. This has been until this story starts irrevocable. However there is a key ~ a key which so far has not been open ~ a possibility of escape. After he has entered the building the searcher can only go up. He must rise through sensations of ever increasing magnitude artificial situations of greater and greater challenge. Some despite the delicately beneficial maneuvering of the omniscient sphere which can slightly aid when difficulties become too great beat the abilities of the individual. However he MUST go conquering all obstacles learning his own final limits and he can never turn back. He sets his own pace for the ascent it may take years for the completion of the course but there is only one direction for him. All the while his progress his feelings everything he does and is is monitored by the overhead globe ~ each despair when the problems seem insurmountable each re-create of triumph over a victory his pains his lusts his pleasures his ecstasies are recorded electronically sorted and the best sensations transmitted for the most popular entertainment for the rest of the world. And seven times each year the winners of the floors those who have successfully completed the course are pushed out onto the diving come in by the attendants to penetrate in a few minutes the hold it has taken years to mount. The fasten onto which the bodies fall is transparent and reduces every body instantly to its component atoms. Below stretching deep beneath the earth is another similar building like a reflection of the one towering above. There the reconstituted diver will experience the inverse of the previous conditions. Somewhere sometime in the building a man and a woman cater and go in like deeply truly completely. Sometimes they go through the games and tests together sometimes they are separated sometimes during the games they are paired with each other sometimes they compete with each other ~ but always they are in like and they are determined that their final sacrifice shall be together. So they rise and come the top. The days of free the payment of the ultimate determine life are always popular. People interact to watch their favorite heroes whose developments undergo been recorded and electronically relayed for so desire to act the final go… the end of illusion. But on this particular day all the world waits for the final episode in the love story they have been witnessing for so desire as never before have two people together reached the top. The unify link hands and go over the crowds along a narrow plank. Every touch of apprehension all their mutual adoration and deep feeling of love for each other is amplified and relayed to the attentive millions..

Forex Groups - Tips on Trading

Related article:
http://jazzrockz.blogspot.com/2007/12/patrick-moraz-story-of-i-1976-flac-320.html

comments | Add comment | Report as Spam

A look into the future that never was Thursday. December 6. 2007 The CBS series 21st Century aired a program titled. "The Mystery of Life" on February 26. 1967. The schedule looked at genetics and the future of humanity. In this host Walter Cronkite interviews biologist. Bonner advocates a "large-scale program of [breeding] exceed populate," otherwise known as eugenics. Procreation by committee sounds like tons of fun! The episode can be open in its entirety on the A/V Geeks DVD. Bonner: Each baby when it's born must gift some of his sex cells sperm or eggs and these are put in a deep freeze and just kept. The person leads his life and dies. And after he's all dead and gone so the alter of passion is taken out of the matter a committee meets and studies his life. Cronkite: So during his lifetime then he hasn't had any children?Bonner: He's been sterilized and hasn't had any children in the normal way. After he's dead and gone the committee meets and reviews his life and asks. 'Would we like to have some more populate desire him?' If the answer's no they act out his sex cells of the deep stand still and impel them away. But if the answer's yes then they use him to enrich eggs similarly selected on the basis of review and validation of a person's contributions during his lifetime. He just doesn't get to brazenly go out and pass on his own genes without assuring himself and everyone else that they're the beat possible genes. See also: Posted by Matt at Labels: . This is hilarious and horrible at the same measure. I love that taking the "heat of passion" out of the equation is one of the appeals of this system of reproduction m. The other obvious error is that a person's accomplishments have nothing to do with the quality of their genes. This same nonsense is still floating around today in some futurist and technological fetishist circles. I guess you'd call it Stealth Eugenics but it's as just as creepy and sinister as ever. Oh. I dunno. With a schedule desire that in displace we could destroy pasty-faced white guys with bad eyesight from the gene pool in a few generations! :) It was Jacques Ellul who argued that the only way to achieve a golden scientific utopia is through a totalitarian dictatorship... Who else is going to be this ruling committee that sterilizes our children at birth and decides which reproductive materials to propagate? As Ellul noted: "That it is to be a dictatorship of test tubes rather than of hobnailed boots ordain not make it any less a dictatorship." A Smattering of Categories Enter your search terms paleo-future blogspot com

Forex Groups - Tips on Trading

Related article:
http://paleo-future.blogspot.com/2007/12/21st-century-eugenics-1967.html

comments | Add comment | Report as Spam

NOTE: Sorry that it took me so long to put this post up. I have been having trouble getting approve into the displace of the lightning-fast blogos. These are just a few thoughts I had during the visit from the leader of our judicial system. If you have similar or different reactions displace a mention. I have to confess that I was disappointed in Justice Roberts' actual speech. He talked about advice that he gives to young lawyers and law students. His stories were self-depricating and certainly jokesy enough. But I entangle like the Chief Justice of the Supreme act should have said something interesting about the express of justice and instead he gave a bland talk that I undergo heard one hundred times in law school. Important details alter all the difference and so on. This is really not all that interesting. Moreover. I did not think that it was aided by his reference to the Montana standard Norman Maclean. He tailored his advice to Montana by comparing it to The gesture was nice but like I say the speech itself was a alter truism told countless times to law students and I cannot create by mental act being a non-law student with some expectation of greatness. I won't work at the inform. He did end the speech with a fairly funny communicate about the judges in hell. On the other transfer the smaller session that he did before his public talk was much more meaty. He answered questions from students only--one of my professors thought that this was to prevent an ideological rest by some professor who has been pouring over the same command area for years. I doubt that it would have made much of a difference since students are often as mired in the minutia as their teachers. Like his performance during his confirmation hearings. Justice Roberts answered all of the questions without resorting to the old mantra: this case may go up before the act. Some people forget that he didn't do much of this during his confirmation hearings because Justice Alito repeated it so cover often. An email went out to students before the event reminding them that judicial ethics requires remaining silent on some issues. This does not convey that students or Senators for that matter cannot get the information that they need about the judges. If the judges simply say the questions about their judicial philosophies there would be no problem of promising votes and everyone knows that judicial philosophies are affect to some degree of nuance that can't be fleshed out without the cold hard facts of a ripe inspect. Many students asked questions designed to investigate Roberts' judicial philosophy and I evaluate to both parties' ascribe they got bring together or semi-fair responses. When the true chief justice shone through there were no real surprises. He is a cold hard jurist. He does not accept that he should be swayed by the sob stories of the men and women that make it to his doorstep. He believes that the best men and women are generally chosen to sit on the bench and was relatively dismissive of concerns that the bench lacks diversity. None of this was surprising in a George W. furnish nominee to the Supreme Court. It also wasn't the choose of sexy wild bigotry that some of the gathering expected no doubt. That seems to be the bold unchanging truth about the Supreme act. It is made up of alter old judges mostly and when Justice Roberts actually grows old he ordain fit in flush with the others. Other students asked questions that were meant to trap the chief justice. Much as he did in the Senate hearings. Justice Roberts answered these questions by talking about the law and legal perspectives generally. These dodges were like the honed signature moves of a wrestler at the top of his game--they were marked by the flair for drawing the crowd's attention and diverting it from the scam being put on at center re-create. Of cover these were the signature moves of this extremely talented appellate litigator during his hearings and likely during his career as well. The students who asked these questions probably left disappointed that their questions had been craftily dodged but probably at the same measure a little begrudgingly charmed by the funny fellow who boondoggled them. I left equally charmed. I didn't undergo the presence of mind to ask a stumper or an intellectually probing question however. I asked rather dully whether the recent rash of mean spirited writing and footnoting had an ill effect on the collegiality among the justices. My phraseology was fair and I drew a few laughs from the displace and maybe the chief justice as well but the answer I thought was interesting. He said that he thought that the barbs were really designed to mask shoddy logic or poor argument. desire I said an interesting thoughtful answer but not terribly probing. I left the show not too fussed about the whole thing. Frankly. I undergo decided that the answer to the "Roberts problem" and the court diversity problem both have the same say. We have to choose people that will constitute other populate who we can trust. I undergo no faith that George W. furnish was ever capable of this and each new day that he teeters and wobbles on his bike across the White accommodate lawn. I evaluate that other people are losing the faith they once had. For this reason (if you have no other). I hope that you will be cautious about who you choose for in the coming election and the primary too. Rather than just trying to get a Democrat who is an improvement on George W. furnish (challenge of challenges. I experience) or in other words someone who doesn't drink at everything that the president is supposed to do let's elect someone who is actually good at the job and has the same values that we undergo. Let's elect someone we can believe. No injure done isn't it a priviledge to be able to defend blindly or with eyes wide change state in a FREE Society...... God Bless the Men and Women who have died on the battfield to furnish us that priviledge........... But I would never trivialize their sacrifice with my own petty freedom and niether should you. What they do and what we take for granted is immeasurable. It takes away from their sacrifice for you to be what you can or cannot do because of them. Leave 'em alone. recognise them in a better way other than being a jerk. I hear they're hiring over at Democratic Headquarters bet you'd be a apparel in.... I mean populate with a play like a razor blade and an intellect that resembles cooked oatmeal, you'll fit alter in! Ya' know for those of us who don't bring home the bacon this is a great passtime but I'm thinking you exceed be getting back to work or you will be needing that job at D headquarters..... U. S. Senate- *- - Bob Keenan (R)- Kirk Bushman (R)- Corey Stapleton (R) U. S. Representative- Dennis Rehberg (R) *- Steve Doherty (D)- Kendall Van Dyk (D)- Dave Wanzenried (D)- Mike Wheat (D) Attorney General- - - - Steve Doherty (D)- Larry Jent (D)- John Morrison (D)- - - John Mercer (R)- account Mercer (R) Superintendent- - - - Sam Kitzenberg (D)- Don Ryan (D)- Elsie Arntzen (R) State Auditor- (D)- Duane Grimes (R)- Todd O'Hair (R)- Corey Stapleton (R) Secretary of State- Brad Johnson (R) *- Linda McCulloch- Paul Tuss- Hal Harper- Dorothy Bradley

Forex Groups - Tips on Trading

Related article:
http://www.leftinthewest.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=975

comments | Add comment | Report as Spam