HANGZHOU, China, Sept. 10 -- A co-founder and senior executive of Yahoo Inc., the global Internet giant, confirmed Saturday that his company gave Chinese authorities information later used to convict a Chinese journalist now imprisoned for leaking state secrets.
The journalist, Shi Tao, was sentenced last spring to 10 years in prison for sending foreign-based Web sites a copy of a message from Chinese authorities warning domestic journalists about reporting on sensitive issues, according to a translation of the verdict disseminated by the watchdog group Reporters Without Borders.
Speaking at an Internet conference in this eastern Chinese city, Yahoo's co-founder, Jerry Yang, said his company had no choice but to cooperate with the authorities.
The Shi Tao case has become particularly high-profile because it involves the imprisonment of a Chinese journalist at a time when the government is cracking down on domestic media that report on topics seen as challenging the state's authority.
"We already knew that Yahoo collaborates enthusiastically with the Chinese regime in questions of censorship, and now we know it is a Chinese police informant as well," the watchdog group declared. "Yahoo appears to be willing to go to any lengths to gain shares of the Chinese market."
Yang characterized the state's demand for the information and Yahoo's ultimate compliance as "a legal process."
The exchange over Yahoo's role in Shi's conviction was barely a footnote to a conference full of triumphant talk about the transformational power of the Internet. The keynote speech was delivered by former president Bill Clinton, who characterized China's Internet entrepreneurs as a progressive force for change in Chinese society.
Clinton's trip to China was paid for in part by Alibaba.com, one of China's most successful Web commerce businesses. Yahoo recently purchased a 40 percent stake in the firm.
Clinton did not mention the Shi case in his speech. As he was leaving the hall, the former president declined to answer a question about the case before melting into a thicket of Chinese security and Secret Service officers.
#2
If you want to do business in China, you have to follow Chinese laws. It's easy for people who don't have any skin in the game to say that Yahoo should defy the Chinese government. After investing billions of dollars in setting up infrastructure and buying Chinese companies, Yahoo can't just walk away from the Chinese market. It's that simple. The fact is that Yahoo could no more defy a Chinese government request for information than it could defy a Congressional subpoena for information.
#3
Its also easy for us in the West to refuse to use or invest in Chinese crackdowns. Yahoo, then Google, then MS -0 don't ivest - see where th estock prices go...think they rise under bad PR?
Posted by: Frank G ||
09/11/2005 22:34 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Integrity and Honor are not items that show up on the corporate balance sheet.
#5
FG: Its also easy for us in the West to refuse to use or invest in Chinese crackdowns. Yahoo, then Google, then MS -0 don't ivest - see where th estock prices go...think they rise under bad PR?
They rise or fall based on how much money they make, which in turn depends on whether they comply with the laws of the countries in which they do business. Bloomberg kowtowed to Singapore over some issue related to freedom of the press. Bloomberg is still the most important provider of financial terminals, bar none.
#6
I forget which communist leader said that the west would sell them the rope they used to hang us.
The reassurances I'm now hearing that "of course they're now in a situation where they'll have to" doesn't make me feel better in the least.
Of course Yahoo has to do what it has to; and I'm going to NOT do business with them in the future if I can help it. I kinda-sorta feel it's what I have to do now.
Posted by: Phil Fraering ||
09/11/2005 23:52 Comments ||
Top||
EFL
Several foreign nationals must now have documents to enter Mexico, following a spike in migration to the United States. Mexico got catcalls from Brazil on Friday after announcing it will again require visas for Brazilians, many of whom have been using Mexico to enter the United States without documents. Tens of thousands of Brazilians have been apprehended while trying to enter the United States illegally since Brazil and Mexico agreed to waive visa requirements for each others' citizens in February 2004. The Mexican government announced the measures late Thursday. On Friday, it issued a statement denying local press reports that the measure was aimed at preventing the entry of "Muslims or 'presumed terrorists.'" "The Mexican government regrets such negative and ill-intended misinformation, Nope, nope, couldn't be senor!
which has caused so much indignation in Mexico and abroad," the Foreign Relations Secretariat said in a statement. Mexico will also begin requiring visa for travelers from Ecuador and South Africa, whose citizens also frequently travel through Mexico to reach the United States.
#1
Because they are too far from their homelands to be sent right back, tens of thousands have been released with a notice to appear in immigration court.
why not return them to the portal of entry. This is just unbelievable.
Posted by: Jan ||
09/11/2005 0:41 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Air Mexico is grounded? No other airlines operating?
No?
Then no excuse, load them aboard and "Adios"
Posted by: Redneck Jim ||
09/11/2005 1:46 Comments ||
Top||
#3
...following a spike in migration to the United States.
ROSEAU, Dominica -- Eugenia Charles, the former prime minister of Dominica, who gained widespread attention when she stood beside President Ronald Reagan as he announced the invasion of Grenada, died Tuesday on the island of Martinique. She was 86. She died at a hospital where she had been taken for treatment of a broken hip, said Dr. Bernard Yankey, a longtime associate. Dame Eugenia, the first woman to become a prime minister in the Caribbean, was known as the region's "Iron Lady." She survived two coup attempts during her tenure, which stretched from 1980 to 1995. She was made a dame of the British Empire in 1992. She stood with President Reagan at the White House on Oct. 25, 1983, when he announced the invasion of Grenada. She then dismissed critics who scorned her for supporting the United States military action. "The Grenadians wanted it, and that's all that counts," she told The Associated Press in a 1995 interview. "I don't care what the rest of the world thinks."
Bravo.
Mary Eugenia Charles was born May 15, 1919, in the village of Pointe Michel, the youngest of four children of John-Baptiste and Josephine Charles. Her father founded a cooperative bank for peasants and became mayor of Roseau, the capital, and a legislator. She graduated from the University of Toronto and studied at the London School of Economics, returning to become a lawyer in 1949. She became prime minister in 1980, two years after Dominica declared independence from Britain. A firm anti-Communist, she refused to accept scholarships offered by Fidel Castro to Dominican students. "I am not going to allow my students to study in Cuba where they will learn revolution," she said.
Bravo again.
Posted by: Steve White ||
09/11/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi crisscrossed the capital on Saturday on the last day of campaigning for Japan's general election, hewing to a reformist message that has earned him a commanding lead in the polls.
The main opposition Democratic Party struggled to get its message across to voters during a 12-day campaign period that was dominated by Mr. Koizumi's personality and his framing of the election as a referendum on the privatization of the country's multipurpose postal services.
Unless there is a last-minute surge of undecided, mainly urban voters supporting the opposition, Mr. Koizumi's Liberal Democratic Party is poised to extend its nearly continuous 50-year grip on power.
Mr. Koizumi called an early election unexpectedly last month after the upper house of Parliament rejected his bill to privatize Japan Post, the world's largest financial institution, with $3 trillion in savings and life insurance deposits. By making postal privatization - a complex subject little understood by most voters - a litmus test for reform, Mr. Koizumi tapped into a deep-seated popular desire for change and painted his opponents as reactionaries.
"This election is about postal privatization: Are you for it or are you going to oppose it?" Mr. Koizumi asked a swelling crowd outside the Kamata train station here, mentioning no other issues.
Adding that postal reform was a prerequisite for other pressing, if undefined, changes, he said, "If we can't accomplish this reform, what kind of reforms can we accomplish?"
With four years in office, Mr. Koizumi, 63, is the longest-serving prime minister in two decades, and he has been displaying some of the same flair that won him a huge following when he was first elected. Standing atop a campaign bus, Mr. Koizumi wore a pinkish shirt without a tie, and struck a defiant pose with his left hand wrapped around a microphone and his right hand on his hip.
"I came here to see Koizumi," said Yukiko Iwakawa, 36, after listening to his speech with her two young daughters at the Kamata station. "He's cool. Compared to past prime ministers, he's easy to understand. I used to think that nothing would change whoever the prime minister was. With Koizumi, change has been occurring, though not dramatically."
Under Mr. Koizumi's leadership, the government's economic policies, from cuts in public spending to cleaning out the banking sector of bad loans, have drawn mixed reviews. His postal bill - which would privatize only the institution's banking and life insurance assets in 2017 - has also been criticized as too restrained. Japan's economy has revived during his tenure, though that was more a result of China's booming economy.
His transformation of the political landscape, especially inside his own party, has been more striking. In an effort to wean the Liberal Democratic Party of its pork-barrel politics and its reliance on rural support, Mr. Koizumi expelled members who had opposed his postal bill.
In a move to make the party more appealing to women and urban voters, he recruited women candidates to unseat the rebellious members. The strategy - though described as disingenuous by critics who pointed out that the Liberal Democrats have proportionately the fewest female candidates - has greatly rejuvenated the party's image.
The opposition Democratic Party, which had made strong gains in recent elections among urban voters by projecting itself as the party of change, could face a setback in the election.
"Koizumi always says the same thing," Katsuya Okada, 52, the Democratic Party leader, said Friday at a campaign stop in Nishikawaguchi, a Tokyo suburb. "Nearly 90 percent of his speech is about postal privatization issues. This election will decide the next three to four years of Japan's future, and important issues should be thoroughly discussed."
The Democratic Party, which is supported by the postal union, opposes the privatization of Japan Post, arguing instead that individual savings deposits in the institution should be reduced. Postal savings have long helped the Liberal Democrats finance public works projects and reward their backers, especially in rural areas.
Rie Matsumoto, 36, who attended the speech with her 6-year-old daughter, said she was dissatisfied by Mr. Koizumi's single-minded focus on postal reform.
"I think he says stupid things," Ms. Matsumoto said. "I have children and parents, so issues relating to children and pension are very important. But he doesn't mention these topics. He talks only about postal reform."
During the campaign, Mr. Koizumi succeeded in avoiding topics that could hurt him at the ballot box, particularly foreign policy. His repeated visits to the Yasukuni Shrine, the war memorial where Class A war criminals are deified, have damaged Japan's relations with China and South Korea. He has deployed troops to Iraq and decided to join the American-led missile defense shield, moves that have split Japanese public opinion.
The Democratic Party failed to capitalize on Mr. Koizumi's weak backing on foreign policy, even though Japan's troubled relationship with China has dominated the news here this year. The party offered a substantially different approach to foreign policy, saying it would put a priority on improving ties with China and South Korea and being less dependent on the United States, but the position attracted little attention.
Mr. Okada said that the Democrats would withdraw troops from Iraq and that he would never visit the Yasukuni Shrine.
Mr. Koizumi's tough approach toward China worries many Japanese, but also receives strong support, especially among the young.
"I find the Democratic Party's foreign policy unacceptable," said Hiroki Ota, 31, a worker at an Internet equipment company, who came to listen to Mr. Koizumi at a campaign stop. "I think their policy is tantamount to kneeling on the ground and bowing to China. I don't deny that friendly relations with China are important, but China seems to blame Japan for everything, and I don't like that."
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
09/11/2005 00:03 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
BEIJING - China, which bans its Catholics from recognising the Pope, has turned down a Vatican invitation to four Chinese bishops to go to Rome, saying it showed no respect. The four bishops invited to Rome were on a list of prelates from around the world that the Pope had named to be members of next monthâs synod, the Vatican said on Thursday.
I recall the Soviets and the Polish communists had a similar complaint about John Paul II ...
âThe act (invitation) goes against the original good intention of the Pope and shows no respect for Chinaâs 5 million Catholics, bishops, the Chinese Catholic Bishops College and the China Patriotic Catholic Association and for the decision-making power of the two Chinese Catholic groups,â a spokesman for the two groups was quoted by Xinhua news agency as saying in a report late on Saturday.
The China Patriotic Catholic Association is the state-backed Catholic church. Catholics who recognise the Vatican are forced to worship underground.
âIf the Holy See has deep sincerity to improve China-Vatican relations, we hope they take real actions, rather than put up new barriers,â the spokesman said.
The four bishops are Anthony Li Duan of Xian, Aloysius Jin Luxian of Shanghai, Luke Li Jingfeng and Joseph Wei Jingyi. Li Duan and Jin were appointed by the government from the state-backed church and their appointments were later tacitly recognised by the Vatican. Li Jingfeng had been a member of the underground church but was later recognised by the Chinese government. Wei remains a member of the underground church.
The Vatican estimates it has about 8 million followers in China, compared with about 5 million who follow the association.
The Vatican has regularly accused China of violating human rights and criticised the government for what it sees as the repression of religion. After his election in April, Pope Benedict said he hoped to establish diplomatic relations with countries that still had no formal ties with the Vatican, a clear reference to China, the only major power not to recognise the Pope. Beijing congratulated the Pope on his election, raising hopes in some quarters of a possible warming in relations.
Posted by: Steve White ||
09/11/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I think the Chinese are right to be very cautious of the Pope, the Catholic Church has a very long history of Nation-Meddling, while denying it loudly at the exact same time it's doing the meddling.
This kinda generates a "Pox on both your houses" thought from me. Seems that for either or both to fail would be a good thing.
Posted by: Redneck Jim ||
09/11/2005 1:53 Comments ||
Top||
#2
The Chinese government will cause Catholicism to grow like kudzu on a Georgia highway with their ham-handed attempts at repression. What the Romans could not do with lions and bonfires the Chinese will not accomplish with denied visas and sternly worded press releases.
Posted by: Baba Tutu ||
09/11/2005 5:02 Comments ||
Top||
#3
China opresses, while most of the last half century Catholicism was one of the major reasons for the collapse of the eastern bloc. Need I remind you of Reagan, Thatcher and John Paul II?
Redneck Jim, you are a bigot to morally equate the Communist China with the Catholic Church as they both now stand. Yes, the Church was imperfect in its past - it is composed of humans who are imperfect by nature. But only an idiot or a bigot would make the statement that you did. You forget pictuer of you in your KKK hood at the end of your post?
#4
I stated the World would gain if both China and Catholic Meddlers were to lose.
Sorry you can't read. Try taking off your Bigot Blinders.
Posted by: Redneck Jim ||
09/11/2005 21:08 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Oldspook, a question, which of the two have a long, gory past history of centuries of opression, murder, intolerance, racial hatred and repression of it's peoples.
Frankly the two seem equaly matched.
Posted by: Redneck Jim ||
09/11/2005 21:14 Comments ||
Top||
Not a word in that article about how the communists were taking over Chile. We wonder where Hugo Chavez gets his ideas; some of them are from Allende ...
Population shifts caused by the exodus of hurricane victims from the Gulf Coast could have ripple effects for years to come in Louisiana political races and perhaps beyond.
How big depends on how many people stay away, which ones stay away and where they end up putting down roots.
The early thinking is that the evacuees least likely to return to their homes in Louisiana may be the poorest -- and thus, Democrats for the most part. That would hurt the party in a state where Republicans already were making inroads.
If the lion's share of those leaving settle in Texas, that could work to the advantage of Democrats in President Bush's home state.
"I'm believing that the greatest displacement occurs among those who are traditionally Democratic voters," said Elliott Stonecipher, an independent political consultant from Shreveport, Louisiana.
"Based on sheer demographics, those who are Republican voters have the wherewithal and, we believe, the will to go home and rebuild," he said.
Stonecipher sees the New Orleans area losing Democratic voters and a political network that was of great benefit to Sen. Mary Landrieu and other Democrats.
"On Election Day there is a well-oiled machine boy, they admit it openly ... that knows how to turn those votes out from specific neighborhoods and in specific ways," Stonecipher said.
Landrieu was elected in a 2002 runoff by just 42,000 votes (52 percent to 48 percent). New Orleans was the base of her support.
"If that's compromised, that could be a problem for her," said John Maginnis, who publishes a political newsletter in Louisiana.
Landrieu is not up for re-election until 2008. Kathleen Blanco, the Democratic governor, who also won by four percentage points (52-48), faces re-election in 2007.
Ray Nagin, the Democratic mayor of New Orleans, is up for re-election in February. No one knows if the city could even hold an election by then.
Overall, said Maginnis, Republicans have made gains in Louisiana in recent years and "the effects of the storm aftermath probably will help them." President Bush carried the state in 2000 and 2004; Democrat Bill Clinton did so in the previous two presidential elections.
Still, demographic shifts within the state could work to the Democrats' advantage in some cases, Maginnis said.
For example, if the sizable evacuee population now in Baton Rouge, the capital, decides to settle in, that could make the 6th Congressional District, a politically competitive one held by GOP Rep. Richard Baker, more Democratic.
In Texas, which stands to gain the largest number of evacuees, analysts do not expect much impact on statewide races. But local races -- for everything from school boards to legislative seats and perhaps even congressional districts -- could be affected.
The place to watch is Houston, which has taken in the most evacuees, at least temporarily.
Richard Murray, director of the Center for Public Policy at the University of Houston, said Republicans hold every elective office in Harris County, which takes in most of Houston, but did not win by much.
"This could accelerate the tipping of the county, which was expected to happen in the next four to six years," he said.
While politics is taking a back seat for now to the urgent needs of the hurricane victims, "my Democratic friends are smilingsalivating," Murray said.
Bob Stein, professor of political science at Rice University in Houston, said the political impact on Texas depends in large part on how concentrated or widely dispersed the evacuees are.
He noted that sprawling Houston is one of the nation's least segregated big cities because it has no zoning laws, so hurricane victims could well be broadly scattered, diluting their impact in any particular race.
In any event, though, with Texas' Hispanic population surging and its black population growing faster than the white population, demographic shifts already are pushing the state toward the Democrats. Relocation of evacuees could help hasten the trend. Maybe. Depends on whether the Dems can hold the Hispanics. Could trigger a reaction towards Reps by hispanics if blacks are seen to suck up government attention.
"Our politics may be Republican," Stein said, "but that's just a temporary condition."
The thought is echoed by David Bositis, a senior political analyst at the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies, a think tank focused on black issues. He said adding a substantial number of blacks to the state could "potentially make Texas more competitive in the not-too-distant future."
As for Louisiana, Bositis said, "If proportionally more whites come back than blacks, it'll make Louisiana somewhat whiter, which would statewide be to the advantage of the Republicans." But he, like other political analysts, said it will take time to see where evacuees end up settling and how many ultimately return home
Posted by: too true ||
09/11/2005 19:21 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[8 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The poverty-stricken are the least likely to go to the polls, unless someone organizes it for them. That well-oiled Lousiana machine is going to do no good in Houston, and the refugees aren't likely to make time to register and vote in the midst of trying to make a new life in a strange place. I'm not too worried about 2006 -- and by 2008 the refugees (those who think about it at all) will have seen the difference between a well-oiled Democratic Machine and a government that works. My bet, fwiw, is that Katrina will have lost the Democrats more votes than they can afford.
#2
I'm sure that the former residents of New Orleans will remain faithful to the political party of Mayor Nagin and Governor Blanco that served them so well.
#1
She is doing nothing more than any other faithful spouse would do, defending her husband from the loons and moonbats of the world.
Posted by: Captain America ||
09/11/2005 0:50 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Her conciliatory tone was in marked contrast to comments by Mr Bush's mother, Barbara, who implied that some "under-priviliged" evacuees were better off now in Texas than before. White House aides hope that deploying Laura Bush and recalling Mr Brown will halt the political rot after the worst opinion poll figures of Mr Bush's presidency.
Just the facts, m'am. Yeah, right. Disgusting. Telegraph.
Posted by: Bobby ||
09/11/2005 8:54 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Considering that quit a few of these people will probbaly now qualify for low/no interest home loans,Bab's is probbaly right.
#4
Actually, I can't help but think that if I were underpriveliged and looking for work, I'd rather be doing it in Texas than in inner-city New Orleans even pre-Katrina.
Posted by: Phil Fraering ||
09/11/2005 20:39 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Santa Monica and Malibu accepted how many?
Posted by: Frank G ||
09/11/2005 22:37 Comments ||
Top||
TOKYO: Japan plans to demand a cut in its contributions to the United Nations budget from 2007 after the failure of its high-profile campaign to win a permanent seat on the UN Security Council, a leading newspaper said on Sunday.
Tokyo had stepped up a decades-old drive for a permanent seat in recent months, but met with lukewarm support from the United States and hostility from China, which cites what it perceives as Japan's failure to atone for its wartime past.
With little prospect of a seat, the government believes it will no longer be able to ensure public support for shouldering almost 20 percent of the UN budget, the Yomiuri Shimbun said, citing government sources.
Japan is set to demand that permanent Security Council members should make financial contributions to match their status, an argument that is likely to face opposition from China and Russia, whose contributions would rise, the paper said.
Assuming that prime minister Koizumi wins Sunday's election, which polls indicate he is likely to do, his foreign minister, Nobutaka Machimura, would make a speech on the need to review UN contributions at a General Assembly meeting in New York starting on September 19, the Yomiuri said.
Posted by: john ||
09/11/2005 14:14 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Japan has more of a right to a permanent seat than France. This seems a logical course for them. Why fund a kleptocracy which provides them no benefit.
#2
The UN is a dead rat on the kitchen floor. It can't be fixed - because most of the rot has a veto.
Follow Japan's lead - offer 1/191th the cost of whatever the UN does to actually help people, effectively and openly - which might be, what - 5% of its budget? Use the remainder to make the pay of our armed forces more competitive with the commercial market. Put our money where it does us the most good, not the least.
#4
Withdraw Japanese funding and withdraw U.S. funding; the U.N. will collapse and can be replaced with something more useful for promoting peace and freedom.
#5
How much are we going to demand our be cut by? 75%?
I love it when the lefties and Euro weenies go on "you haven't paid the full amount you owe the UN" tangents. Even if we don't it is still multiple times what they pay. Screw this TRANZI crap and get us out of the UN.
Maybe Japan should be the first country we invite to join the League of Democracies, as we kick the Useless Nitwits out of the U.S.
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
09/11/2005 16:58 Comments ||
Top||
#7
The logical thing to do is to set up a parallel organization to the UNSC. That is, a new club that only includes the *real* powers, military and economic.
There should be three tiers to the club:
The first tier would be veto members. Those that have a significant military and would agree to commit permanent resources, men, money, and guns, to a permanent garrison located in a neutral host country or countries around the world. This garrison would conduct peacekeeping and nationbuilding operations around the world, where violence and chaos require armed forces.
Most likely this first tier would include only the US, Russia, China, Japan, India, and perhaps the EU. Though there are several serious contenders who may wish to ante up a decade in advance.
The second tier would be voting members without veto. That is, nations that are powerful but unwilling to commit forces to perform mutual operations involving force. They commit forces and money only in support of humanitarian missions.
The third tier and blocs and NGOs that act in support and advisory roles to the club. These could be organizations such as SEATO, the African Union, the Int'l Red Thingy, and several others. They could assist in the debate, if requested, but would have no vote.
UNITED NATIONS - It was meant to be the centerpiece of UN chief Kofi Annanâs ambitious plan to reform the world body on its 60th anniversary. Enlarging the powerful, 15-member Security Council was supposed to reflect the 21st centuryâs new balance of forces, enshrining the enhanced status of economic powerhouses Germany and Japan - the World War II losers - and the emerging power of India and Brazil.
But the plan, which was to have been endorsed by world leaders at their summit this week, has become a victim of the competing egos and interests of rival nations.
That's never happened before.
Its most promising version came in a draft introduced in the UN General Assembly in July by the so-called G4: Brazil, Germany, India and Japan. It called for boosting council membership to 25, with six new permanent non-veto-wielding seats - the G4 nations plus two from Africa - and four non-permanent seats.
The G4 draft was endorsed by nearly 40 nations, including Britain and France, but it also needed the backing of the 53-member African Union (AU) to secure the required two-third majority in the 191-member assembly. The G4, particularly Japan and Germany, mounted an aggressive drive to woo the Africans, who were pressing to correct what they see as a historical injustice that has left them as the only continent not represented on the Security Council.
But the Africans, led by Algeria and Egypt, pushed their own draft calling for two permanent Security Council seats for Africa - with the right to veto resolutions - as five non-permanent council seats, including two for Africa. That demand for veto power was generally viewed as unrealistic as the five current permanent members - Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States - were unwilling to share their veto right.
Might as well let them have it, it's not like anything important will get done in the UN ever again.
Yet as the United States and China signaled opposition to the G4 blueprint, the Africans decided at a summit in Addis Ababa last month to reject a compromise deal offered by the G4 and backed by Nigeria, the current AU chairman. Analysts said the AU stance stemmed in part from rivalry for Africaâs two council slots. Regional powerhouses Egypt, Nigeria and South Africa were seen as favorites, but Kenya, Angola, Libya and Senegal also made a claim.
I can see why Senegal would want a veto seat next to China and the U.S., they being so important to world peace and all ...
Early on, the United States warned it would reject any major expansion of the council, stating its preference for only two additional permanent seats, including one for Japan. China, which had previously backed council seats for Brazil, Germany and India, is against permanent status for regional rival Japan, due to its perceived refusal to face up to its wartime past.
Demonstrating that either the writer is clueless or doesn't want to write the obvious truth about the millenium-long competition between the two countries ...
To muddy the waters further, a group led by Canada, Pakistan and Italy pushed its own proposal to enlarge the council from 15 to 25 seats with 10 new non-permanent members elected for two-year terms, with the possibility of immediate re-election.
Each of the G4 aspirants had serious regional opposition: India from Pakistan, Brazil from Argentina and several Latin American countries, Japan from China and South Korea, and Germany from Italy, diplomats said. But in the end it was the opposition of the Washington and Beijing which sank the G4 bid, diplomats said.
âDonât count us out yet,â Japanâs UN envoy Kenzo Oshima told AFP. Japanese diplomats, conceding that they had underestimated the depth of US and Chinese opposition, put on a brave face, saying they had succeeded in putting their countryâs case on the world agenda. âWe will continue to pursue Security Council reform this year and our dialogue with the African Union and other regions,â said Shinichi Iida, a Japanese UN delegate.
In an interview with French radio broadcast on Saturday, Annan conceded that a Security Council deal would not be agreed at the summit but expressed hope it could be sealed by the end of the year.
Posted by: Steve White ||
09/11/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The G-4 is someone's wet dream at this juncture. Ain't gonna happen. US and China oppose it, amongst others.
Moreover, the so-called Kofi "ambitious plan to reform the world body" is nothing more than attempt to inoculate himself from his Oil-for-Food scandal. Very transparent, even Clintonisc in approach.
Posted by: Captain America ||
09/11/2005 0:58 Comments ||
Top||
#2
The deal has been done. China and the US made the deal. It's DOA. Pound dirt.
#3
Deck chair rearrangement on the Titanic. Of no matter in the large scheme of things. Nothing to see here, good people. Move along and get along with your lives. Each one of you alone will do something more significant than the UN. And you can take that to the bank, Jack.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
09/11/2005 2:19 Comments ||
Top||
BANGKOK, Thailand -- Straddled atop hulking pachyderms and wielding long mallets, the Chivas Regal Scotland team clinched their second King's Cup Elephant Polo title Sunday after scoring a golden goal in overtime to beat Thailand's Mullis Capital, 6-5.
Some 1,500 spectators came to watch the fifth annual charity game to raise money for Thailand's National Elephant Institute in Lampang, northern Thailand. The tournament was held near Hua Hin, 80 miles southwest of Bangkok.
The game is played on a field 330 feet by 200 feet, roughly one-third the size of a horse polo field. A game has two seven-minute halves -- known as chukkas -- with a 15-minute interval. Three elephants form a team.
Chivas Regal, which won the 2004 tournament, was tied with Mullis Capital after the second chukka and scored the winning goal after two minutes of overtime, said Wanida Khunthipmark, a spokeswoman for the event.
Players from both teams were experienced elephant or horse polo players, Wanida said.
The rules of the game were drafted by the World Elephant Polo Association, which was set up in 1982 to stage annual games in Nepal. Since then, elephant polo tournaments have also been played in Sri Lanka.
Thailand joined the ranks by hosting the inaugural King's Cup tournament in 2001 to raise money for conservation of its 1,500 wild and 2,500 domesticated elephants. "There is no truth to the rumor that some of the elephants received peanuts from bookies for point-shaving."
ZAMBOANGA CITY, 11 September 2005 - Dozens of people were hospitalized for severe diarrhea and difficulty in breathing after feasting on meat stew cooked with cassava starch in the southern island of Mindanao, officials said.
Most of the victims were teachers and parents attending a school meeting in the village of Alimbayong in Magpet town of North Cotabato province on Friday, town mayor Efren Pi?ol said. âAt least 15 of the victims were seriously poisoned, but health experts are still investigating what triggered the mass poisoning,â he said by phone from the hospital yesterday. Investigators said the cassava starch used in the stew have been contaminated.
The cassava root is widely consumed in Southeast Asia and other parts of the world, but it can also be poisonous if not completely peeled or thoroughly cooked.
Last week, at least 33 people were hospitalized near Magpet town after they cooked and ate a rabid dog.
I transcribed this from an article in the latest Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA) magazine. In this age of terrorism, and on this somber day in our nation's history, it is inspiring to read about an individual who made a difference in the lives of tens of thousands of people who were systematically terrorized for centuries.
Robert E. Maguire, Jr., who was dubbed the âIrish Moses by Israeli Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion, died on June 10 at the age of 94. The WW2 veteran was a pilot for Alaska Airlines in 1948 when his company was contracted to fly Jewish refugees from Yemen, where they had been oppressed for centuries, to Tel Aviv in the newborn state of Israel. This became possible when the imam of Yemen agreed to allow the entire Jewish population to leave.
When Alaska Airlines pulled out of the operation, Maguire kept it going by creating Near East Transport using purchased and leased airplanes. He said he was motivated more by adventure than money and never forgot the gratitude of the Yemenite Jews. âThey would sing and offer blessings as they flew into Israel. It was so touching. I was blessed that God had given me the opportunity to be there.â
Maguire was chief pilot of this heroic, dangerous, and secret mission that became known as Operation Magic Carpet. He helped to carry more than 40,000 refugees during more than 400 flights---each round trip was 3,000 miles long---through hostile airspace during Israelâs War of Independence. Although the flights were made at low levels to avoid detection and were frequently fire upon by Arab military forces at war with Israel, no aircraft was lost, and no one was injured. Following Operation Magic Carpet, Maguire transported thousands of Iraqi and Iranian Jews to Israel through Operation Ali Baba.
Maguire was raised in Portland, Oregon as an Episcopalian and was of Irish and British descent. He learned to fly at 17 and enlisted in the Army Air Force on December 8, 1941.
A memorial service for Maguire was held at the Santa Monica Municipal Airport. The eulogy was presented by Rabbi Marvin Hier, founder and dean of the Simon Wiesenthal Center. âIt wasnât his conflict,â Hier said, âyet he risked his life every day.â A Douglas C-54 (DC-4) representing those used by Maguire during Operation Magic Carpet was flown to Santa Monica from New Jersey in Maguireâs honor.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
09/11/2005 14:39 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Baruch ha-ba. Blessed be his coming. I remrmber reading about Operation Magic Carpet as a child. Thank you, Alaska Paul, for sharing the rest of this heroic tale.
Bats found in Hong Kong carry a virus very similar to the severe acute respiratory syndrome or SARS virus and might be able to spread it, Chinese researchers reported on Friday.
They said the horseshoe bats, valued both as food and for their use in Chinese medicine, should be handled with great care. They may have helped spread the virus among different species of animals, the researchers said.
SARS first emerged in China in 2002 and in 2003 spread around the world via jet, killing more than 700 people and infecting around 8,000.
It is caused by a new virus called SARS coronavirus. Coronaviruses are common in people and animals and usually cause nothing more serious than a cold.
But SARS was different.
"The isolation of SARS-coronavirus from caged animals, including Himalayan palm civets and a raccoon dog, from wild live markets in mainland China suggested that these animals are the reservoir for the origin of the SARS epidemic," Kwok-yung Yuen of the University of Hong Kong and colleagues wrote in their report, published in the Proceedings of the national Academy of Sciences.
"However, several lines of evidence suggested that the civet may have served only as an amplification host for SARS virus and provided the environment for major genetic variations permitting efficient animal-to human and human-to-human transmissions," they added.
So they studied wild animals in the Hong Kong countryside that may have come into contact with civets.
They found a coronavirus similar to SARS in nearly 40 percent of wild Chinese horseshoe bats they examined.
Genetic analysis of the bat SARS virus showed it was closely related to the human SARS coronavirus.
The researchers could not determine how the bats were originally infected or whether bats were responsible for transmitting the SARS coronavirus to other mammals including the civets.
But because bat feces are used in Chinese traditional medicine, and bat meat is considered a delicacy in parts of Asia, the researchers suggest caution in handling them
"Interestingly, the nearest wildlife market previously found to have animals with SARS in Shenzhen is only 10 miles (17 km) away from the locations with bats harboring bat-SARS in (Hong Kong)," the researchers wrote.
Posted by: john ||
09/11/2005 10:21 Comments ||
Top||
#2
I was once in central Bormeo talking to some locals BBQing fish beside a lake. When fruitbats started flying overhead and someone produced an ancient shotgun. He spoke a little english and told me how good BBQed bat tasted. Unfortunately, the only one he hit fell too far out in the lake to retrieve, so I can't tell whether bat tastes like chicken or not.
A $2-billion deal with Airbus in the bag and with another $2 billion in his pocket to buy Scorpene submarines, a confident Manmohan Singh leaves for Paris tomorrow to tell the French how much India values their friendship.
India values everybody's friendship these days. And everybody loves India right back. Keep an eye on Singh, he's a playa.
Posted by: john ||
09/11/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
India has what everybody wants. Cheap labor, geographic location, massive market, etc.
Posted by: Captain America ||
09/11/2005 0:45 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Singh is actually a political lightweight. He lost election to the lower house of parliament. He has his job because he has no real power base and is no threat to anyone. Ministers actually ignore him, reporting directly to Sonia Gandhi (the real Indian PM).
Posted by: john ||
09/11/2005 7:04 Comments ||
Top||
#3
It's India that's the playa; not any particular Indian politician.
If they ever completely junk the Fabian socialism of their elites and fully transcend the caste system, they'll eat China's lunch economically.
They may even end up being "our America", so to speak.
DETROIT, Sept. 9 - A week ago, Benjamin Kleber was spending $3.39 a gallon at a gasoline station in Maryland when he noticed an obscure decal on his minivan. "It's this sticker about the size of a business card that's stuck on the side of the gas flap that I never really paid attention to," said Mr. Kleber, a 25-year-old electrical engineer for a government contractor. The decal said he could be using E85, a fuel cocktail that consists mostly of grain alcohol, or corn-based ethanol, with a splash of gasoline.
Production of ethanol fuel, much of it blended in small doses with regular gasoline, has doubled to more than three billion gallons in the last half decade. This year, propelled by rising gasoline prices, E85 is finding new life as an alternative fuel.
It remains hard to find, to say the least, in part because many oil companies have no desire to put a competing product in stations that carry their banner. But the number of stations offering E85 has nearly doubled since January, to more than 460, mostly in corn-growing states like Minnesota. And because of incentives included in recently passed energy legislation, and the fact that E85 is now about 40 to 50 cents cheaper than a gallon of regular gasoline, E85 backers are expecting the surge to accelerate.
Being an engineer, Mr. Kleber had heard of E85. And after spending $58 to fill his 1998 Plymouth Voyager with regular unleaded last Sunday - "staggering," he said - he went home and began to do some research. He discovered that a station nearby sold the fuel for $2.67 a gallon. At current prices that could save him more than $14 a fillup. So he decided he would switch to a fuel from the Midwest instead of the Mideast.
What separates E85 is that more than four million American cars and trucks have the ability to run on it right now, even though the majority of people who own these so-called flex-fuel vehicles are not even aware of the ability. Already, Brazil has turned to ethanol en masse, though the fuel there is derived from the more prevalent local crop, sugarcane.
Gregory J. Cobb recently replaced premium gasoline pumps at two of his five Indiana stations with E85. At one station near South Bend, he said, he was selling 24,000 gallons of E85 a month compared with the 1,700 gallons of premium gas he had been selling.
In Madison, Wis., Rebecca Bell and her husband, Kevin, started using E85 in the last couple of weeks to fuel their Ford Explorer and their Chevy minivan. They have also started carpooling with neighbors. "I feel better that it's coming from the United States," said Ms. Bell, 34, a vice president of a veterinary drug company and a mother of three.
Now, here are some of the catches. For starters, it's hard to find the stuff. There are roughly 180,000 gasoline stations nationwide and fewer than 500 with E85. And ethanol can take us only so far. Huge tracts of farmland would have to be converted to corn production to provide enough fuel for significant portions of the American automobile fleet.
A recent study published in the journal BioScience forecast that for all cars and trucks to run on ethanol by 2048, "virtually the entire country, with the exception of cities, would be covered with corn plantations." Using more farmland to produce ethanol would also drive up food prices. And E85 cannot be transported through gasoline pipelines, because it sucks up grime and water.
E85 is also less energy-dense than gasoline, so a driver goes a bit less far on a gallon. Its current cost advantage is dependent on a 43-cents-a-gallon subsidy, versus a roughly 40-cent tax on a gallon of gasoline. Environmentalists have generally viewed the rise of flex-fuel vehicles as a boondoggle for automakers, because they are afforded fuel economy credits for making them. The credits have had the effect of driving up oil consumption. Many consumers who buy flex-fuel vehicles are not even made aware of the capability.
On the upside, ethanol is a domestic resource and most studies indicate that it reduces emissions of both smog-forming pollutants and global warming gases, the amount depending on how it is produced. An emerging process of creating ethanol from agricultural waste like cereal straw has the potential for far greater emissions reductions and more efficient land use.
This so-called cellulose ethanol has much greater potential than current ethanol, said Michael Wang, a researcher at the Center for Transportation Research at the Argonne National Laboratory, but, he added, "the technology has not arrived."
David Friedman, a senior analyst at the Union of Concerned Scientists, an environmental group, said, "ethanol has great potential to help the U.S. kick our oil habit, but that's 20 or 30 years away."
"Corn ethanol can help in the short term, but it has serious limitations, and none of this is going to work if we don't dramatically improve the efficiency of our cars and trucks."
Posted by: Steve White ||
09/11/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Ethanol requires more fossils fuels to produce than the fuel it delivers and consequently significantly increases fossil fuel imports and increases dependence. Ethanol fuels are just a disguised farm subsidy. This is a much better article.
#2
I am not big on Slate as a credible source. Still, with high fuel prices more innovative alternatives will come on line. This will result, in effect, in bringing overall fuel prices down long-term.
Posted by: Captain America ||
09/11/2005 0:53 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Recent technical advances have brought ethanol to a point where it is considerably past break even in areas near both corn production and distillaries.
In the rest of the country, it is still what Slate says it is.
#5
#3: Recent technical advances have brought ethanol to a point where it is considerably past break even in areas near both corn production and distilleries.
Ummm, Corn is actually a poor crop for this alcohol conversion, Sugar Beets would yield more, I'm sure some farmers out there can come up with several alternate crops far better (Yield per acre) than Corn.
I remember reading an article some years back listing about 10 field crops far better at alcohol production than Corn.
Another thing glossed over, after fermenting the alcohol, the corn yields a far MORE nutritious residue than the original corn, it's sold as cattle feed and cattle find it tastier as well, it's not just used for fuel then trashed, dual usage reduces costs tremendously.
Posted by: Redneck Jim ||
09/11/2005 2:02 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Another thing glossed over, after fermenting the alcohol, the corn yields a far MORE nutritious residue than the original corn, it's sold as cattle feed and cattle find it tastier as well,..
and straight ethanol makes a great brain fuel.
Posted by: Red Dog ||
09/11/2005 5:53 Comments ||
Top||
From the Weekend Edition of the Wall Street Journal. Registration required, so given here complete. Also, to be fair I must note that I believe it was the American Jewish Committee that succored my mother and her family when they arrived penniless in New York in 1946, and for which my grandmother worked until senility forced her into a retirement home when she was well into her 70s. Final comment: I realize that Jews make up a little under 2% of the U.S. population; However, when even one of the most Liberal-leaning groups in the U.S. starts trending conservative, that to me indicates the Democratic Party is totally screwed! ;-)
Pity Larry Lowenthal. His job as executive director of the Boston branch of the American Jewish Committee (AJC) includes finding and training leaders from among the 700,000 Russian Jews who have immigrated to the U.S. in the last 30 years. Mr. Lowenthal has fared well: Today there are Russians helping to guide a number of major Jewish organizations, like the one called Boston for Israel. But now these immigrants turn out to be . . . oh no! Republicans!
To judge by his public statements and writings, Mr. Lowenthal's idea of a faithful Jew is someone who opposes the nomination of Judge John Roberts to the U.S. Supreme Court, supports gay rights, abortion and euthanasia, and demands a strong separation of church and state. After all, as Mr. Lowenthal concluded approvingly in a July op-ed for the Jewish Advocate, Jews are "the most liberal" and "the least religious people in America."
Imagine his consternation when an avalanche of emails from Russian Jews began to pour in to the Web site of the Jewish Russian Telegraph, a daily blog, in response to his article. About 100 people wrote to say that Mr. Lowenthal needed to stop making "outrageous statements" on behalf of people whom he doesn't represent.
Alex Koifman, who arrived in the U.S. from Belarus in 1978, and whom Mr. Lowenthal trained for his position as a board member at the Boston AJC, criticized his old teacher for overstepping his bounds, saying: "Since when are these concerns [abortion, gay rights, and church-state separation] concerns that are specific to the Jewish community? These are the Left's concerns."
This was only the most recent in the Boston area's Russian Jewish population's battles with the so-called Jewish leadership. Last fall, Mr. Lowenthal came down hard on the Hasidic community in Wellesley for putting up a menorah display on public property. The Russian Jews wrote scores of emails to the AJC and Russian-language media in response, suggesting that the display was actually a triumph of religious freedom.
In August, Mr. Lowenthal found himself in hot water again. During an interview with the Boston public radio station, he showered praise on the leaders of the Islamic Society of Boston. When Russian Jews learned that the society was distributing Arabic-language pamphlets with the words of Dr. Yusuf Abdullah al-Qaradawi, a cleric who condones suicide bombings, they were outraged. The Telegraph editor wrote an article contrasting Mr. Lowenthal's intolerance toward their community with his embrace of the local Muslims.
Mr. Lowenthal finally became so exasperated by these conflicts that he emailed Jim Kaufman, the immediate past president of the local AJC: "I am sorry we ever started up with the Russians." Unfortunately, his confessional somehow fell into Russian hands, and Mr. Koifman published it in the Telegraph.
All these incidents have led a few dozen Russian Jews, who refer to themselves as "the new Boston Minutemen," to demand Mr. Lowenthal's resignation. He delivered an abject public apology for his email but didn't take back previous statements about what Jews should stand for.
To its great credit, the AJC has offered enormous help to Jews in the former Soviet Union and to new Russian Jewish immigrants. David Harris, the organization's national executive director, explains: "We could not have a higher priority than reigniting the flame of Jewish pride and identity in this vast [Russian] Jewish community and rebuilding bridges [to them]."
But the leaders created by the AJC's training programs are unlikely to fall into lockstep with much of the current American Jewish leadership. What explains the differences? Some of the Russians are very observant, and Orthodox Jews do tend to vote more conservatively. But most of the recent immigrants lead secular lives. Their sympathy toward Republicans is more a result of their experience in Russia. Sept. 11 reminded them of Islamist attacks in their homeland; they liked President Bush's personal strength in response to Islamic fundamentalism, which seemed to them like Ronald Reagan's stand against communism.
And they are not put off by the president's faith. In an AJC survey, Russians rated evangelical Christians as the least anti-Semitic of various ethnic and religious groups, something no one else in the Jewish community did. These attitudes manifested themselves in the 2004 election. According to an AJC exit poll of Russian Jews in several states, over 75% said that they had voted for Mr. Bush, compared with only 19% of the general Jewish population.
These conflicts between Russian and American-born Jews are occurring outside Boston as well. In Los Angeles, for instance, Russian Jews were shouted down when they tried to hand out pro-Bush pamphlets at a reading by a popular Russian-Jewish poet. The Russian Jews are fighting an uphill battle in their attempt to challenge the Jewish community's loyalty to the Democratic Party. But, as Larry Lowenthal can attest, they won't give up easily.
Mr. Carnes is senior news writer for Christianity Today.
#1
Russian Jewish immigrants are opposed to a party that allies itself with the Palestinians, Jihadis (or "freedom fighters" according to Michael Mooron) in Iraq, the Euro anti-semitic left, and Cindy Sheehan. Hmmm, go figure ...
#2
I think more and more American Jews agree with their Russian counterparts. I know this one does. And yes, it's very bad news for the Dems. We will soon see the Left become even more openly anti-semetic.
#4
I find this story very encouraging, seems that lightbulbs are going on all over the place. The hard left is the enemy of civilisation, and will ally itself with whomever it feels it has to do achieve its goal. Good for you Mr Koifman!
As to donations - the trouble is, you only need one Soros to make up for an awful lot of people donating smaller amounts.
Posted by: Tony (UK) ||
09/11/2005 6:46 Comments ||
Top||
#5
True, Tony. But in the end, Soros has only one vote, just the same as I.
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.
ROSEAU, Dominica -- Eugenia Charles, the former prime minister of Dominica, who gained widespread attention when she stood beside President Ronald Reagan as he announced the invasion of Grenada, died Tuesday on the island of Martinique. She was 86. She died at a hospital where she had been taken for treatment of a broken hip, said Dr. Bernard Yankey, a longtime associate. Dame Eugenia, the first woman to become a prime minister in the Caribbean, was known as the region's "Iron Lady." She survived two coup attempts during her tenure, which stretched from 1980 to 1995. She was made a dame of the British Empire in 1992. She stood with President Reagan at the White House on Oct. 25, 1983, when he announced the invasion of Grenada. She then dismissed critics who scorned her for supporting the United States military action. "The Grenadians wanted it, and that's all that counts," she told The Associated Press in a 1995 interview. "I don't care what the rest of the world thinks."
UNITED NATIONS - It was meant to be the centerpiece of UN chief Kofi Annanâs ambitious plan to reform the world body on its 60th anniversary. Enlarging the powerful, 15-member Security Council was supposed to reflect the 21st centuryâs new balance of forces, enshrining the enhanced status of economic powerhouses Germany and Japan - the World War II losers - and the emerging power of India and Brazil.
