Jan Egeland, the foolish former UN humanitarian chief who famously described the war in northern Uganda as the world's biggest forgotten crisis, has claimed in a new book that President Yoweri Museveni told him within months of the South Sudan mediated Juba peace process that only a "military solution" could end the conflict.
In "A Billion Lives: An Eye Witness Report From the Frontlines of Humanity", Mr Egeland recalls a November 2006 meeting during which Mr Museveni rebuked him for going into the jungle to visit rebel leader Joseph Kony. According to excerpts from Mr Egeland's book that were published on May 12, 2008 in The Black Star News, a New York newspaper with special interest in African-American affairs, Mr Museveni seemed to suggest that the peace talks were a waste of time.
Mr Egeland's recollections of his confrontation with Mr Museveni seem to suggest that the Ugandan leader was always cynical about the peace process. "You were just wasting your time in the bush with them (LRA). I told you so," Mr Museveni reportedly said when the two met, Mr Egeland recalls in the book.
And when Mr Egeland responded that the President's assessment was wrong, Mr Museveni reportedly said: "No, those talks were not to our benefit. Let me be categorical-there will only be a military solution to this problem."
Museveni, for all his problems, is at least clear-eyed on the issue. Egeland is an imperialistic fool thinking that the great white man from the great white continent can solve all the problems of the black and brown peoples ...
With the peace talks now in disarray, and especially since Kony has sent out a new message in which he says he will die fighting, Mr Museveni's views now appear prescient. Yet they could also be taken to reflect his own lack of commitment to negotiating peace with the Lord's Resistance Army (LRA).
During celebrations to mark International Labour Day at Kololo Independence Grounds on May 1, 2008, Mr Museveni said that he never sent the team that had been negotiating peace with the LRA. Mr Museveni also said that Internal Affairs Minister Ruhakana Rugunda, who led the delegation, was simply doing his job. "I have never and will never send a delegation of the [ruling] NRM party to talk with Kony. I hear some people begging Kony to come outÂ…I cannot [beg Kony]," he said.
Information Minister Kirunda Kivejinja said yesterday that Mr Museveni's early skepticism about the outcome of the peace talks was proof of his vision. "He saw fartherÂ…What's the use of a leader who sees behind?" Mr Kivejinja told Daily Monitor by telephone.
Mr Egeland's book, which was not yet available to Daily Monitor, is a memoir of his work when he headed the UN's Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) for three and a half years. The book, which details Mr Egeland's trips to some of the world's conflict zones, has a chapter that is titled "Uganda's Twenty Thousand Kidnapped Children".
Not that Mr. Egeland ever solved any of those problems while at the OCHA.
Posted by: Steve White ||
05/28/2008 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Dear Mr. Egeland:
The best way to look at Joseph Kony is to regard him as a power hungry, egotistical, selfish piece of shit just like you are.
Ethiopia's former ruler Mengistu Haile Mariam, sentenced to death by his country's supreme court, will remain in Zimbabwe under the protection of President Robert Mugabe's government, a government minister said on Tuesday. "He remains our guest in Zimbabwe. He will remain in Zimbabwe and we will protect him as we've always done," Deputy Information Minister Bright Matonga said.
Mengistu, sentenced to death in absentia on Monday, has lived a life of comfortable exile in Zimbabwe since he was toppled in 1991. He is unlikely to face punishment unless Mugabe loses a run-off election next month and gives up power.
The opposition Movement for Democratic Change, whose leader Morgan Tsvangirai will face Mugabe in the presidential vote on June 27, said dictators like Mengistu were not welcome. "We don't want dictators on our land," MDC spokesman Nelson Chamisa said, hinting Mengistu may be extradited if Tsvangirai wins next month.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/28/2008 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
AFFORDABLE solar energy for every household has moved closer to reality thanks to a ground-breaking discovery at the University of Queensland (UQ).
Professor Max Lu, from UQ's Australian Institute for Bioengineering and Nanotechnology, said researchers were one step closer to the holy grail of cost-effective solar energy.
"We have grown the world's first titanium oxide single crystals with large amounts of reactive surfaces, something that was predicted as almost impossible," Professor Lu said.
"The crystals absorb sunlight and convert it into electricity."
Prof Lu, who has been working on the project for the past 15 years, said the crystals were a cheaper alternative to solar panels.
He expects it to take up to 10 years for the technology to be commercially available.
Prof Lu said the crystals could also be used to purify air and water, and expected that to take about five years to commercialise.
The work was the result of a long-term international collaboration with Professor Hui-Ming Cheng's group from the Chinese Academy of Sciences.
#1
The way this technology seems to be developing points to an interesting conclusion: Multiple Marginal Use. That is, the technologies take care of *some* of people's high end needs, supplementary to existing technology.
For example, solar cells that in winter are used mostly to light your house, and maybe raise the temperature of the house by 20 degrees--thus reducing, but not eliminating the need for home heating oil considerably. In summer, just the opposite, cooling the crawlspace by 20 degrees turns hot to very warm, but really reduces the load on the house A/C.
Another example is nanotechnology low energy water purifiers, that will produce water so pure that a bit a sea salt is added to replace trace minerals. But it only does so for drinking water--the rest of the house water is city water. But it saves a fortune in buying bottled water.
Another example is a large algae tank that produces algae-vegetable oil, that is mixed with ethanol and sodium hydrochloride (lye), or some other process, to make biodiesel. Not enough for all your needs, but which can be mixed with gas station petroleum diesel to take a dollar a gallon off its pump price.
In each of these cases, by taking a little bit off the top, the marginal use, they can save lots of money.
BILLINGS, MONT. -- During an evening rally in Montana’s largest city Tuesday night, Hillary Clinton explained to the crowd why she should be the Democratic Party’s nominee, but what ensued was a list of overstatements and exaggerations as she made her case. “You have to ask yourself, who is the stronger candidate? And based on every analysis, of every bit of research and every poll that has been taken and every state that a Democrat has to win, I am the stronger candidate against John McCain in the fall,” she said.
The problem is, there are a number of polls that show Clinton in a close race with John McCain, many within the margin of error, not including a few that show Barack Obama beating McCain by a larger margin than Clinton. The comment was intended to prove to voters that despite Obama’s popularity, she has what it takes to beat John McCain. Clinton said that voters have to ask themselves, “Who is the stronger candidate against John McCain? We have not gone through this exciting, unprecedented, historic election, only to lose,” she said.
For days, Clinton has been grasping at almost anything to make her case to voters as the clock in the campaign winds down. Most recently Clinton compared the plight of Florida and Michigan voters to the struggles of the early suffragists and likened the primaries of those states to the fraudulent election that took place in Zimbabwe.
#3
What with all the out of work auto workers, this should sell pretty good to any professional panderer. My out of work agricultural cousin called to tell me so.
Posted by: Rustin B. Hard ||
05/28/2008 17:57 Comments ||
Top||
#7
Yep, Joe, but they also showed Kerry beating Bush till a week or so before the election. At this point in the process, poles are made up news to help fill the airwaves and print columns with material between the ads.
Perhaps I should have put the word "Grim" in quotes? Their idea of Grim is probably that she loses, leaving Mr. Experience to run against McCain.
If this campaign goes on much longer, what will be left of Hillary Clinton? Less than what's there now?
A woman uniformly described by her close friends as genuine, principled and sane has been reduced to citing the timing of Robert F. Kennedy's assassination as a reason to stay in the race -- an argument that is ungenuine, unprincipled and insane. She vows to keep pushing, perhaps all the way to the convention in August. What manner of disintegration is yet to come?
For anyone who missed it, Clinton was pleading her cause before the editorial board of the Sioux Falls, S.D., Argus Leader on Friday. Rejecting calls to drop out because her chances of winning have become so slight, she said the following: "My husband did not wrap up the nomination in 1992 until he won the California primary somewhere in the middle of June, right? We all remember Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June in California. You know I just, I don't understand it."
The point isn't whether you take Clinton at her word that she didn't actually mean to suggest that someone -- guess who? -- might be assassinated. The point is: Whoa, where did that come from?
Setting aside for the moment the ugliness of Clinton's remark, just try to make it hold together. Clinton's basic argument is that attempts to push her out of the race are hasty and premature, since the nomination sometimes isn't decided until June. She cites two election years, 1968 and 1992, as evidence -- but neither is relevant to 2008 because the campaign calendar has been changed.
In 1968, the Democratic race kicked off with the New Hampshire primary on March 12; when Robert Kennedy was killed, the campaign was not quite three months old. In 1992, the first contest was the Iowa caucuses on Feb. 10; by the beginning of June, candidates had been battling for about 3 1/2 months -- and it was clear that Bill Clinton would be the nominee, though he hadn't technically wrapped it up.
This year, the Iowa caucuses were held on Jan. 3, the earliest date ever. Other states scrambled to move their contests up in the calendar as well. When June arrives, the candidates will have been slogging through primaries and caucuses for five full months -- a good deal longer than in those earlier campaign cycles.
So Clinton's disturbing remark wasn't wishful thinking -- as far as I know (to quote Clinton herself, when asked earlier this year about false rumors that her opponent Barack Obama is a Muslim). Clearly, it wasn't logical thinking. It can only have been magical thinking, albeit not the happy-magic kind.
Clinton has always claimed to be the cold-eyed realist in the race, and at one point maybe she was. Increasingly, though, her words and actions reflect the kind of thinking that animates myths and fairy tales: Maybe a sudden and powerful storm will scatter my enemy's ships. Maybe a strapping woodsman will come along and save the day.
Clinton has poured more than $11 million of her own money into the campaign, with no guarantee of ever getting it back. She has changed slogans and themes the way Obama changes his ties. She has been the first major-party presidential candidate in memory to tout her appeal to white voters. She has abandoned any pretense of consistency, inventing new rationales for continuing her candidacy and new yardsticks for measuring its success whenever the old rationales and yardsticks begin to favor Obama.
It could be that any presidential campaign requires a measure of blind faith. But there's a difference between having faith in a dream and being lost in a delusion. The former suggests inner strength; the latter, an inner meltdown.
What Clinton's evocation of RFK suggests isn't that she had some tactical reason for speaking the unspeakable but that she and her closest advisers can't stop running and rerunning through their minds the most far-fetched scenarios, no matter how absurd or even obscene. She gives the impression of having spent long nights convincing herself that the stars really might still align for her -- that something can still happen to make the Democratic Party realize how foolish it has been.
Clinton campaigns as if she knows she will leave some Democrats with bad feelings. That's the Clinton way: Ask forgiveness, not permission. But every day, as more superdelegates trickle to Obama's side, it becomes a surer bet that she will not win. She and her family enjoy good health and fabulous wealth. They'll be fine -- unless, while losing this race for the nomination, Hillary Clinton also loses her soul. This article must have been written a little while ago . . . .
#2
I am of a mind that Clinton's RFK statement was not only made intentionally, but intended to create a hoo-hah. The Clintons are firm believers in the Hollywood adage that "No publicity is bad publicity".
When the media designs to bias against you, often they do so by ignoring you, and this can be a fate worse that death for a candidate's campaign. By creating an intentional slip, the media jump on it, hoping to humiliate. But in reality, all they end up doing is advertising.
This is true for another reason: you cannot shame the shameless.
By making this "mistake", Clinton may have extended her campaign for another week or two.
Look for her next "mistake" as soon as this one runs out of steam.
#3
Clinton is setting the stage for 2012. She will be in posession of the biggest "I told you so" in the Dme party, and can play the victim card by claiming the popular vote.
This all assumes that the press cannot continue its fawning over Obama and covering for his stupidity.
Its like mirror image of Bush - due to Bush being inarticulate they assumed he was stupid. Due to Obama being glib, they assume he is smart.
#6
I think even the Democrats in New York are beginning to feel a little "buyer's remorse" with Hillary. I think her political career is just about over, and even SHE knows it.
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
05/28/2008 12:51 Comments ||
Top||
#7
I'm waiting for someone to ask Obama to name a few world leaders. I bet he does worse than Bush from what I've heard so far.
#8
A woman uniformly described by her close friends as genuine, principled and sane
Unlike the rest of us, who uniformly describe her as a faker, unprincipled, and certifiably insane.
Posted by: Rambler in California ||
05/28/2008 12:56 Comments ||
Top||
#9
A woman uniformly described by her close friends as genuine, principled and sane
I don't want to sound mean here, but... who are these people? I mean: she doesn't strike me as the sort of person who has a lot of close friends.
Posted by: Grenter Protector of the Geats4975 ||
05/28/2008 13:34 Comments ||
Top||
#10
"Grim scenario" is in the eye of the beholder.
#11
Polls are still indic that OBAMA will lose to MCCAIN come November, and MCCAIN's well-reported, overt, pro-war anti-Iran sentiments bears the risk of ENTICING RADICAL ISLAM TO EXERCISE ANY AMER HISROSHIMA OPTIONS AND STRIKE AMER FIRST BEFORE POTUS MCCAIN CAN ACT IN THE ME.
All things equal, my instincts are telling me that both MCCAIN + OBAMA-CLINTON, etc. are waiting to see whether the US will engage in war agz IRAN or not. Both camps realize that US-led MIL ACTION IS JUST AS DANGEROUS AS US-LED NON-ACTION VV NUCLEAR JIHAD-ISLAMISM-TERROR, AND NEITHER WANTS THEIR PARTY TO GET THE BLAME THIS ELEX YEAR. IMO, AS BEFORE IT COMES DOWN TO "POLITICS/CORRECTNESS AS USUAL" i.e. BOTH SIDES DESIRING DUBYA TO TAKE DECISIVE ACTION BEFORE NOVEMBER WHILE BEING ABLE TO CRITICIZE HIM FOR DOING WHAT THEY COVERTLY DESIRED HIM TO DO.
* 2008-2012 > Whomever wins in November will be responsible for the success or failure of BOTH NASCENT US-CENTRIC/DOMIN OWG-NWO, AS WELL AS THE NUCLEARIZATION, OR NOT, OF ISLAMIST IRAN + ISLAMIST TERROR + ISLAMIST JIHAD + ISLAMIST EMPIRE-BLOC IN CENTRAL ASIA.
#12
This all assumes that the press cannot continue its fawning over Obama and covering for his stupidity.
Dangerous assumption that. The press never stopped fawning over and carrying water for John Kerry despite the fact that he was just another old white guy. Obama's status as a sacred cow of the left guarantees that he'll receive zero scrutiny through the ordinary channels.
The spokesman who defended President Bush's policies through Hurricane Katrina and the early years of the Iraq war is now blasting his former employers, saying the Bush administration became mired in propaganda and political spin and at times played loose with the truth.
In excerpts from a 341-page book to be released Monday, Scott McClellan writes on Iraq that Bush "and his advisers confused the propaganda campaign with the high level of candor and honesty so fundamentally needed to build and then sustain public support during a time of war."
"[I]n this regard, he was terribly ill-served by his top advisers, especially those involved directly in national security," McClellan wrote.
McClellan also sharply criticizes the administration on its handling of Hurricane Katrina and its aftermath.
"One of the worst disasters in our nation's history became one of the biggest disasters in Bush's presidency," he wrote. "Katrina and the botched federal response to it would largely come to define Bush's second term."
Bush spokeswoman Dana Perino said the White House would not comment Tuesday because they haven't seen the book.
Frances Townsend, former Homeland Security adviser to Bush, said advisers to the president should speak up when they have policy concerns.
"Scott never did that on any of these issues as best I can remember or as best as I know from any of my White House colleagues," said Townsend, now a CNN contributor. "For him to do this now strikes me as self-serving, disingenuous and unprofessional." Scott, it would be easier if you just beat your face on an oak tree or something.
Fox News contributor and former White House adviser Karl Rove said on that network Tuesday that the excerpts from the book he's read sound more like they were written by a "left-wing blogger" than his former colleague.
In a brief phone conversation with CNN Tuesday evening, McClellan made clear that he stands behind the accuracy of his book. McClellan said he cannot give on-the-record quotes yet because of an agreement with his publisher.
Early in the book, which CNN obtained late Tuesday, McClellan wrote that he believes he told untruths on Bush's behalf in the case of CIA agent Valerie Plame, whose identity was leaked to the media.
Rove and fellow White House advisers Elliot Abrams and I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby were accused of leaking the name of Plame -- whose husband, former U.S. ambassador Joseph Wilson, had gone public with charges the Bush administration had "twisted" facts to justify the war in Iraq.
Libby was convicted last year of lying to a grand jury and federal agents investigating the leak. Bush commuted his 30-month prison term, calling it excessive. At the time, McClellan called the three "good individuals" and said he spoke to them before telling reporters they were not involved.
"I had allowed myself to be deceived into unknowingly passing along a falsehood," he wrote. "It would ultimately prove fatal to my ability to serve the president effectively."
McClellan wrote he didn't realize what he said was untrue until reporters began digging up details of the case almost two years later.
A former spokesman for Bush when he was governor of Texas, McClellan was named White House press secretary in 2003, replacing Ari Fleischer. McClellan had previously been a deputy press secretary and was the traveling spokesman for the Bush campaign during the 2000 election.
He announced he was resigning in April 2006 at a news conference with Bush.
"One of these days, he and I are going to be rocking in chairs in Texas talking about the good old days of his time as the press secretary," Bush said at that conference. "And I can assure you, I will feel the same way then that I feel now, that I can say to Scott, job well done." You can buy Scott's book on Amazon, of course.
#2
he was terribly ill-served by his top advisers
One of whom was you, idiot. No trouble "speaking truth to power" now that Bush is almost out the door and you've got a book to sell, huh? Sell it to the kos kiddies, you wanker.
Nothing wrong with using truth in propaganda. Of course there is still perception, as non-Donks look at the Swifties as dealing in white propaganda while koolaid drinking Donk have to believe that it was all black propaganda.
#6
I would have to argue that a WH communications guy is "in the loop". In fact, they are most often left out of the loop, precisely so they won't have a slip of the tongue.
If they attend meetings, the conclusion of the meeting is based on their *opinion*, even if it is not the consensus or decision reached by the group or the leader. You don't want that. Instead, after the meeting, they are given the *summary* of the meeting to rewrite into a press briefing.
If classified information is given at the meeting, you especially don't want them there.
#10
One CANNOT be completely candid and open in war, or in diplomacy. One must be incredibly naive to expect such.
In my opinion we went to war in Iraq for all the reasons stated, plus one overriding unstated reason - because it was the only place where we COULD 'legally' expand the war against Islamofascism. Fighting them in Iraq was and is far more practical than doing so in Afghanistan (logistics, population characteristics).
And while it was not ALL about the oil, it was about the oil. Not just Iraqi oil, but that of the whole Gulf region. And not specifically for our own supply, but for stability of the world supply - it's a fungible commodity, and besides, all major economies are interconnected anyway.
Whether Scott thinks so or not, Bush was probably right to take us to war in Iraq, and to do so in a less-than-candid and open way. In the PROSECUTION of the war there were certainly shortcomings (what's the saying? In war, the enemy also has a vote?) And although in hindsight we may think the solution would have been X-Y-Z, we'll never really know, because that was not the path taken, and so the obstacles which certainly would have arisen cannot be known. For instance, many are claiming we should not have disbanded the Iraqi Army - but if they had stayed intact might there have been a much stronger Shia-Sunni civil war? Or that we should have reached out to the tribes sooner - but would they have received us before feeling the horrors of Al Quaeda rule?
The one thing I actually have confidence in is that our leaders who made all these difficult decisions did so to the best of their (considerable) ability and with the best interests of the country at heart. They, like everyone else, were imperfect, but certainly not incompetent buffoons and crooks.
#12
Who was Scott McClellan prior to being WH Press Secretary? I'd never heard of the cat, and I wasn't exactly blown away by his way in front of the press corps.
Posted by: Grenter Protector of the Geats4975 ||
05/28/2008 15:08 Comments ||
Top||
#13
Glenmore, I think your comment wins today's grand prize for "right on" analysis. I particularly agree with your statement on reaching out to the tribal leaders. Sadly for our troops and treasure, the enemy needed to experience the fatigue of war/horror of AQI before being open to a US-led alternative.
#15
McClellan? McClellan? Wasn't that the name of a mediocre general during Civil War, who ran against Lincoln in 1864 and who had between his partisans, many people whose acts bordered treason or were deep in it?
#18
I have always been critical of the WH press secretary for not putting the press corps in their place from the beging. The started out looking weak and went backwards from their. McCain should hire someone like Ann Coulter or Melanie Morgan when he steals wins. Sure they will call them a bitch but not to their face and press briefing will somehow come off a lot more....respectful.
#19
The guy always looked like he was gonna piss his drawers. He had that deer in the headlights look that just tossed the power baton over the dias and into the hands of the press corps. Now he is whining. Wotta surprise.
#21
McCain had a good point when he said he's speak before Congress every week and answer questions and defend his policies the way the Prime Minister does. I'm not sure Bush could but a President should be able to rather than hide behind Press Secretaries.
This would force the Congress to do their job and question things and unlike the media they would be held accountable for rude questions as most of these sessions would be covered and then turned into campaign commercials by both sides.
I hope McCain brings up the idea and in some way forces the Democrats to accept it because it would help our Democracy.
#3
That's the good old PA voter we all know but don't love - smart enough to see through the obamessiah in the primary, but dumb enough to vote dem if lied to correctly.
Posted by: M. Murcek ||
05/28/2008 12:25 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Gleason backed Murtha. He's part of the problem and needs to go too...
Posted by: M. Murcek ||
05/28/2008 12:26 Comments ||
Top||
#5
To be honest he isn't really saying they lied, he said they overestimated their ability to do what they hoped to do.
Barack Obama's campaign says the candidate made a mistake when he said a great uncle helped liberate the Nazi death camp at Auschwitz during World War II.
Obama said Monday that his uncle was among the first US troops at Auschwitz. But Auschwitz was liberated by Soviet forces. The campaign said Tuesday that he named the wrong camp. They said it was actually Buchenwald. Aides said his grandmother's brother, Charlie Payne, helped liberate a Buchenwald sub-camp in April 1945 as part of the 89th Infantry Division.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/28/2008 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
We all have tale spinners in our families. Outsiders call them: LIARS.
#2
Buchenwald or Auschwtiz, so what. Obama has such a resume of his own accomplishments that he has to tag his grandmother's honky brother to get standing in a community. That's digging real deep to find some tenuous connection in that hood.
#6
But he has lied so often it's almost pathological.
I think he has major pathological issues. I believe he wants to belong to a group so badly, he will do anything to gain acceptance. Even if he is only speaking to them. So, he will lie, cheat and do anything else to make them like him.
#11
Seems relatively simple to check Army records to see if Charlie Payne was actually there in the 89th at the time. And since the 'story' was used by BO to rip the administration regarding funding for PTSD, it would be interesting to note the medals and type of discharge...not that we don't trust BO...
#12
He's from chicago. If there's no difference between a bribe and a campaign contribution, then what's the big deal (in obammy's mind) about the name of some camp?
Posted by: M. Murcek ||
05/28/2008 12:28 Comments ||
Top||
#13
Last fact check of the 89th I heard of showed a couple of C. Paynes....no confirmation yet of a "Charlie"
Posted by: Rex Mundi ||
05/28/2008 12:41 Comments ||
Top||
#14
pretty soon he'll be saying to the best of my recollection...
Posted by: Jan ||
05/28/2008 12:47 Comments ||
Top||
#15
Obama said Monday that his uncle was among the first US troops at Auschwitz.
Sure his uncle liberated Auschwitz, Uncle Joe that is, but I don't think he was ever part of the US troops, although I could be wrong.
KATHMANDU - A newly elected assembly that will rewrite Nepal's constitution was sworn in on Tuesday, one day before the Maoist-dominated body is expected to abolish the monarchy.
"This is an epoch-making day,' Maoist leader Prachanda, who is slated to head the country's next government, told reporters before entering the conference centre to be sworn in. 'For the past 50 years people have been fighting for this,' said Prachanda. 'From tomorrow, the institution of the monarchy will formally come to an end.'
Political leaders said the assembly will dissolve the impoverished country's 240-year-old monarchy and sack the unpopular King Gyanendra when it holds its first session on Wednesday.
Minutes after the swearing-in ceremony, the king was seen leaving the palace in a small convoy of three vehicles. The king was driving himself and Queen Komal in a black Mercedes sedan, an AFP reporter at the palace gates said. The palace press secretariat said it did not know where the king was going, or if he was leaving for good -- in line with Maoist demands he vacate the palace. 'The only people who would know where he is going are his security detail,' a palace official said.
Posted by: Steve White ||
05/28/2008 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
No worry... Prachanda will be the eternal emperor..
Posted by: john frum ||
05/28/2008 15:55 Comments ||
Top||
#1
But crucially, the United States, Russia, China, India, Israel and Pakistan - all major producers and stockpilers of cluster bombs - were all absent from the Dublin talks, and thus not part of the agreement.
In other words, countries that may not even have a single cluster bomb in their arsenal, who probably could not fight their way out of a wet paper bag, have decided not to use them.
What an agreement...
Posted by: john frum ||
05/28/2008 19:31 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Basically, the countries that have had the weapons used against them vs. the countries that have said weapons.
#3
United States — Population: 301,139,947
Russia — Population: 141,377,752
China — Population: 1,321,851,888
India — Population: 1,129,866,154
Israel - Population: 7,282,000
Pakistan — Population: 164,741,924
Total ------------------ 3,066,259,665
World — Population: 6,602,224,175
If everybody else on the planet was considered signed or no opinion - 3,535,964,510
%46.5 no
%53.5 no opinion or yes
So not knowing the size of no opinion but guessing it is much bigger than %3.5 I would have to say the Nay's have it on population alone
It is an anti-poverty program...for UN officials.
The multibillion-dollar procurement business of the United Nations Development Program (UNDP), the U.N.Â’s flagship anti-poverty agency, is a gigantic shambles, according to UNDPÂ’s own investigators.
Moreover, UNDP’s management has privately acknowledged that fact and is scrambling to fix the mess — even as it loudly denied concerns of a procurement scandal that have been raised by FOX News, among others.
In a confidential report obtained by FOX News, UNDPÂ’s auditors have described the UNDP procurement organization that is spending well over $2 billion annually as:
— overwhelmed by its caseload at headquarters and in the field, while procurement ballooned from $800 million in 2003 to $2.5 billion in 2006 and $2.2 billion last year;
— often failing to provide plans to support its buying activities, which the report says causes many purchases of goods and services to be carried out on an "ad hoc basis" (in fact, more than $595 million worth of non-existent purchases were recorded, although the audit notes that they were not paid for);
— wallowing in shoddy paperwork and faulty bidding processes, which contributed to a "high number of waivers of the competitive process and to quality problems in the procurement process in general";
— lacking the expertise to evaluate hundreds of millions of dollars worth of its most expensive and important purchases in civic construction and high-tech communications;
— drastically unqualified: Fully half of the organization’s procurement staff around the world were not certified for the basic requirements of their jobs, while the auditors also found the six-hour course for those who were certified to be "inadequate." Additionally, the auditors noted, "there are entire offices without a single certified buyer";
— suffering from an "apparent" conflict of interest at the top, where the people charged with vetting the procurement process for flaws are also members of the procurement office staff.
The same potentials for conflict of interest apparently dog local staffers, who, the report says, had not received official guidelines for disclosing their finances and interests, even though a policy demanding those declarations had been issued a year earlier.
Even more ominously, the same auditors point out that UNDP:
— has no sure way of knowing whether it is doing business with organizations that the U.N. itself has condemned for terrorist ties and says UNDP country offices find the current manual system of cross-checking with U.N. terrorist sanctions lists to be "cumbersome and inefficient";
— has no formal policy for suspending or removing vendors for poor performance or corruption;
— and doesn’t ask new vendors for the identity of their owners or other corporate ties. This raises the possibility that vendors caught out for corruption or poor performance could simply switch names and reapply for approved status.
Gosh, it's almost as if the process was designed for corruption!
#2
Hundreds of millions of people have been lifted out of poverty in China and India (with India about a decade behind China). The UN has had no role in this.
Plain old capitalist economic reforms are responsible. And the wicked globalisation that the anti-poverty types are so hung up about.
Posted by: john frum ||
05/28/2008 15:51 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Man, I'm in the wrong business. I should join the UN so I could make a fortune stealing from the poor. Not even the most moustache-twirling tophat capitalist villians do that.
#4
The UN is designed as a graft distribution channel. It work likes this ... the US taxpayer gives their money to the UN ... corrupt leaders appoint their cronies to the UN who then distribute that money out to their pals.
Following consultations late Tuesday night, Defense Minister Ehud Barak is seriously considering presenting Prime Minister Ehud Olmert with an ultimatum on Wednesday: Either the premier resign, or Barak will pull Labor out of the coalition, thus forcing new elections.
Channel 1 first reported on the matter late on Tuesday, saying that Barak made his decision after consulting with advisers at his house. However, the Labor chairman issued a statement soon after which denied that such consultations took place at his home, and that only after holding a meeting with Labor ministers and MKs early Wednesday morning would he actually make any decisions.
Barak is expected to convene a Labor faction meeting on Wednesday, during which the issue of an ultimatum will be brought up. Following that meeting, the defense minister is reportedly leaning towards holding a press conference, at which time he will present his decision.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/28/2008 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
You know for one, brief second I thought BO was threatening Olmert.
Indonesia on Wednesday said it would withdraw from Opec at the end of this year because, as a net oil importer, its interests were no longer served by being a member of the oil producersÂ’ cartel.
Purnomo Yusgiantoro, energy and mineral resources minister, said Indonesia – the cartel’s only Asian member – would like world oil prices to fall while Opec’s 12 other members would like prices to remain high.
Analysts said the decision would have little effect on either Indonesia or Opec since IndonesiaÂ’s production, of about 1m barrels a day, was only 3.1 per cent of the groupÂ’s 31.9m b/d April output.
Mr Purnomo said Indonesia would like to quit now but since it cannot recoup its 2008 membership fees, it would remain active until its dues expire. However, he said Indonesia might follow the example of Ecuador, which left Opec in 1992 and rejoined last November.
IndonesiaÂ’s oil production peaked in 1976 and, after fluctuating for two decades, started to decline in 1995 due to aging fields and a lack of investment. It became a net oil importer in 2005. The energy ministry said production would average about 1m barrels a day while usage would be at least 20 per cent higher than this. Current reserves are 8.4bn barrels.
The country remains a net energy exporter due to its massive gas and coal reserves. It is the worldÂ’s second largest liquefied natural gas exporter and second largest exporter of thermal coal, which is used mostly for power generation.
Mr Purnomo said IndonesiaÂ’s gas and 2008 coal production was expected to be equivalent to 1.5m and 2m barrels of oil a day, respectively.
Kurtubi, the director of the Centre for Petroleum and Energy Economic Studies in Jakarta, said IndonesiaÂ’s decision was appropriate in light of its net importer status but that it would have little impact on either the country or Opec.
“It’s the right decision because Indonesia wants oil prices to fall to stop its state budget bleeding as much as it has been recently,” he said. “It will also act as a warning to the industry and society that the country must do something to increase production.”
Indonesia raised prices of subsidised fuels, which account for 95 per cent of consumer use, by an average of 28.7 per cent last Saturday. This cut its fuel subsidy bill by Rp35,000bn ($3.76bn), or about 20 per cent.
Mr Kurtubi said it would be at least 10 years before Indonesia recovered its net oil exporter status because the 2004 oil and gas law was less investor friendly than previous legislation. Oil companies are now taxed during the exploration phase in addition to the production period.
#1
"Mr Kurtubi said it would be at least 10 years before Indonesia recovered its net oil exporter status because the 2004 oil and gas law was less investor friendly than previous legislation. Oil companies are now taxed during the exploration phase in addition to the production period."
Good grief - I hope it doesn't give Congress any ideas....
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
05/28/2008 18:11 Comments ||
Top||
YANGON, Myanmar - Myanmar's military junta extended the detention of opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi on Tuesday, ignoring worldwide appeals to free the Nobel laureate who has been detained for more than 12 of the past 18 years, an official said.
The duration of the extension was not immediately known, the official said on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak to the media. In the past, the junta has renewed Suu Kyi's detention for six-month or one-year periods. Suu Kyi was personally informed of her continued imprisonment by officials from the Home Ministry who entered her home prior to the announcement, the official said.
Suu Kyi, who has been under house arrest continuously since May 2003, has long been the symbol of the regime's brutality and the focus of a worldwide campaign that has lobbied for her release.
The extension was issued despite a Myanmar law that stipulates no one can be held longer than five years without being released or put on trial. Few expected Suu Kyi to be released, despite urging by both the United Nations and some members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations.
“Their failure to abide by their own law by refusing to release (Suu Kyi) ... is a clear slap in the face to (U.N. Secretary-General) Ban Ki-moon and the ASEAN diplomats," U.S. lawyer Jared Genser, hired by Suu Kyi's family to push for her release, said earlier this week. “They are out of time to hold her under their own law."
Posted by: Steve White ||
05/28/2008 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
If this doesn't work they will put her on TRIPLE super secret detention!
Posted by: bruce ||
05/28/2008 7:26 Comments ||
Top||
Does Dunkin' Donuts really think its customers could mistake Rachael Ray for a terrorist sympathizer? The Canton-based company has abruptly canceled an ad in which the domestic diva wears a scarf that looks like a keffiyeh, a traditional headdress worn by Arab men. Some observers, including ultra-conservative Fox News commentator Michelle Malkin, were so incensed by the ad that there was even talk of a Dunkin' Donuts boycott. "The keffiyeh, for the clueless, is the traditional scarf of Arab men that has come to symbolize murderous Palestinian jihad," Malkin yowls in her syndicated column. "Popularized by Yasser Arafat and a regular adornment of Muslim terrorists appearing in beheading and hostage-taking videos, the apparel has been mainstreamed by both ignorant and not-so-ignorant fashion designers, celebrities, and left-wing icons." The company at first pooh-poohed the complaints, claiming the black-and-white wrap was not a keffiyeh. But the right-wing drumbeat on the blogosphere continued and by yesterday, Dunkin' Donuts decided it'd be easier just to yank the ad. Said the suits in a statement: "In a recent online ad, Rachael Ray is wearing a black-and-white silk scarf with a paisley design. It was selected by her stylist for the advertising shoot. Absolutely no symbolism was intended. However, given the possibility of misperception, we are no longer using the commercial." (In case you're wondering, the stylist who selected the offending scarf was not Gretta Enterprises boss Gretchen Monahan, who appears on Ray's TV show as a style consultant.) For her part, Malkin was pleased with Dunkin's response: "It's refreshing to see an American company show sensitivity to the concerns of Americans opposed to Islamic jihad and its apologists."
Although LGF was probably the biggest drum in the "right-wing drumbeat" mentioned, my brother's blog had a small role too. It attracted the attention of both Dunkin' Donuts and lefties incensed by the controversy. You can see the development in the comments section in this post. My brother says that they got more than 5000 hits over the weekend, not bad for a blog with a primary focus on Arizona politics.
#3
it's the Boston Globe (Boston.com), loser subsidiary of the loser NY Times. Whadya expect?
Posted by: Frank G ||
05/28/2008 9:55 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Sorry, but Michelle is VERY wrong here.
I have watched Rachel Ray's shows for years and this is perfectly consistent with her fashion choices. Is the Right Wing (of which I consider myself a member) so abusurd that they complain anytime someone wears a scarf that happens to be black and white?
This is ridiculous. The pattern is totally different than Yasser's hounds tooth check and it's worn around the neck not the head and there is no towel bar holding it on.
Good grief people take a deep breath and get a grip.
#5
I have to agree with AlanC here. Anybody who has ever watched Rachel Ray will understand immediately how ridiculous this is. Gimme a frickin' break.
Posted by: Abu Uluque ||
05/28/2008 12:04 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Concur w/AlanC - my wife watches Rachel Ray, from what I've seen of her she's pretty apolitical. This makes our side of the house look stupid. Reminds me of some uninformed comments Newt Gingrich made about pop culture about 10 yrs ago.
(Unless there's some super plot to get more muslims to buy the morning dunkin' java and an apple fritter afoot...)
#8
The pattern is totally different than Yasser's hounds tooth check and it's worn around the neck not the head and there is no towel bar holding it on.
From the numerous examples I've seen here (both male and female), the fashion is to wear it around the neck.
#9
Pappy, the fashion for ALL scarves is to wear them around the neck, it's kinda like the defining characteristic of the fashion. Keffiyah's are often worn bandana like but they also are worn on the head (see Uncle Yasser).
This is as stupid as people that won't countenance the color Red cause it represents Commies.
The whole thing is just plain stupid.
As far as her politics go I've only seen here on her cooking and food shows where politics have never ever been relevant.
1) never flaunt your power especially around enemies that you may need to surprise violently someday...soon.
2) Don't get tied up in petty tactical squabbles where you may wind up frittering away Strategic Power.
3) Who cares about Rachel Ray visa vi the WOT?
4) Who cares about some damn scarf that she may wear.
I'm surprised that Michelle Malkin picked this fight..
Last but not Least to Hell with Carol Beggy and Mark Shanahan, they are Nothing but two more Liberal Morons riding Arafish Camels for the Boston Globe..
#11
Malkin ia an asshole and does tend to fly far off the handle on trivial stuff, and remain dead silent on other things.
She also has a hatred of some people that she allows to overwhelm her reason. Fred Thompson is one of those people by the way, so its not always ideological.
Sometime Malkin is just a stupid loudmouthed lout.
#13
Pappy, the fashion for ALL scarves is to wear them around the neck, it's kinda like the defining characteristic of the fashion.
Gee, thanks for the tip, dearie. In the area where I live, our resident moonbats/rock-climbers/wannabe-artists/raconteurs wear the keffiyah around their necks.
Keffiyahs are often worn bandana like but they also are worn on the head
No shit? Three tours in the Middle East, and I never realized that.
Look - When I saw a still-clip of the commercial, it did look like a keffiyah. Dunkin Donuts' explanation makes sense, and I'll still drink their coffee in any case. Something about it reminds me of 'home'.
And you're right -it's indeed an incredibly stupid thing to get worked up over.
But a little cynical part of me wonders if it was intended to echo that fashion style. Wouldn't be the first time.
#14
I would agree that this is not an important issue by any means, but I don't think that the objection was to Rachael Ray or her personal political views - despite the first sentence of the article. The only thing that is of any concern is the mainstreaming of the keffiyeh, in the same way that some object to the mainstreaming of, say, the Che Guevara t-shirt (which to me seems a somewhat better analogy than that of objecting to the color red). But I still find the comments section of the Exurban League post amusing, sort of flame wars interspersed with official communiques from Dunkin' Donuts and droll sidebar controversies about whether the print was paisley and the meaning of "pashmina". Of course, being amused by such things is one of the many reasons that I'm such a big Rantburg fan.
#19
Oh, no -- in my part of the world we're as likely to tie our scarves to purse handles or around our waists as draped ever so casually around our necks.
#20
TW, you ladies in Cincy are known for your style. And I wholly agree on the Michelle Malkin comments. She is not much more than a verbal bomb thrower. Doesn't add much toward the resolution of any issue in my experience.
#21
Iff its the same Rachel ad depicted on FOX + CNBC, I see little or nothing degrading or kowtowing to Muslim/Islamic Americans about it, as per supporting terror. In addition, many Muslim/Islamic Americans, practicing or former, are business people whom own franchises like DUNKIN DONUTS, ETC. or own investment shares in same - THEY'RE ENTITLED TO "NATIONAL/
INTERNATIONAL" CULTURAL-ETHNIC MARKETING NEPOTISM NOW AND THEN JUST LIKE ANYBODY ELSE, NOT JUST LOCAL.
#23
If someone wears a Scottish tartan, even as a Turbin, it says something. Miswearing the scarf because it's fashionable is still wearing the Keffiyeh. It sends a message of support of the Palestinaines. That is how those scarfs as marketed, as freedom scarfs. If Rachel Ray didn't know that someone at Duncan Donuts damn well should have.
Prices of single-family homes plunged a record 14.4 percent in March from a year earlier, while consumer confidence slumped to its lowest in 16 years in May as gasoline prices surged. The Standard & Poor's/Case Shiller composite index of 20 metropolitan areas released on Tuesday showed prices of previously owned homes fell 2.2 percent in March, deepening their year-on-year decline.
Separately, the Conference Board said its consumer confidence index slumped to 57.2 this month from 62.8 in April as rising gasoline costs and falling home prices made Americans increasingly nervous both about current conditions and the future.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/28/2008 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
D *** NG IT, SINGLE-FAMILY SUBURBIA smacks of decadent American-ski pre-OWG Capitalism, Democracy, Free Markets Federalism and Individualism. THIS IS A WAR FOR OWG-NWO/SWO, D *** NG IT, WE DEMAND TERMITE/ANT MOUND-, SNAKE-, AND TREE-SHAPED, ETC. DESIGNS FOR FUTURE OWG MEGALOPOLOLOLOSISISISISIS SHIRES [MegaCities/Megalopolises] = GLOBAL SOCIALIST GOVT. COLLECTIVES!
#2
So overvalued houses are now approaching their real value. Painful for those who bought high, but a correction for sure, and one that was bound to happen.
Posted by: no mo uro ||
05/28/2008 5:59 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Shhhhh. Take a deep breath, JosephM. If you really want to see snake-shaped Indian mounds, come visit me -- the real thing is in my area.
Separately, I read yesterday that home sales were actually up in April in terms of numbers of houses sold, and total inventory fell slightly. Just as it does every year during prime selling season (April - August).
Not according to a lot of historical trend analyses - those suggest we're only 1/3 of the way down so far. Of course it will be worse in some markets than others, just like the increases were higher in some markets (and not necessarily the same ones.)
Then the MSM has done its job of buffaloing people into believing that below 5% unemployment and below 4% inflation is a BAD economy.
The economy is every bit as good now as it was under Clinton, despite a war and our crippling ourselves by refusing to drill for oil on our own soil, and government overspending on stupid pork projects.
But the press has been hammering how miserable everyone should *feel*, and eventually it sinks in. They are trying to set up a Dem victory by pinning it all on the GOP and Bush.
Lying sons of bitches.
Want pain? Remember Jimmy Carter? Double digit unemployment AND double digit inflation AND fuel shortages AND a rotting military.
I swear we should take the press out and shoot them. they have become a partisan wing of the liberals, and have ceased to do their job of reporting facts in an objective manner instead of spinning for their political allies.
One of the morning "news" shows had a professor from MIT, who basically told them any 'recession' was the media's doing. Of course the fact that we aren't even half way to a recession is irrelevant to the media. Someone should tell them, it takes 2 consecutive quarters of negative growth to be a recession. We haven't even had one yet. Although we are in what some economists call a growth recession, meaning the economy is growing just not as fast as it was before. Ugh. BTW, homes in my area continue to rise in value. Yay me.
#8
I read something the other day that a comparative analysis of news reports revealed that reports about the economy are more negative now than they were during the Great Depression.
#10
It is going to get much worse before it gets better. Once the boomers start cashing in that house for the retirement investment the realtor told them it was, there is going to be a massive inventory of homes on the market.
#11
#6 below 5% unemployment and below 4% inflation I don't believe those statistics are even approximately right. Posted by: Anguper Hupomosing9418
Well, the government is reporting the unemployment rate as of April being 5.0%, and inflation was 4.2% since last April, not seasonally adjusted. I think the statistics Old Spook presented were pretty close, if not right on. You may not WANT to believe it, but the links will give you the same information they gave me (and probably OS as well).
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
05/28/2008 12:44 Comments ||
Top||
#12
By the time I looked up sources, you had already posted them, OP.
Guess I'm a day late & a doller short again. ;-p
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
05/28/2008 12:50 Comments ||
Top||
#13
Much of it is obviously in the poll numbers - if you poll folks in MI or OH you will likely get very low confidence. If folks in the Carolinas or TX are polled in might be higher. Figures can lie and liars always figure.
#15
Not according to a lot of historical trend analyses - those suggest we're only 1/3 of the way down so far.
Many commentators claim that house prices need to fall another 30% to bring them back in line with where they've been historically. They usually base this on analysis of house prices adjusted for inflation: Real house prices are still 30% above their 40-year, inflation-adjusted average, so they must fall 30%, they say.
Although this theory sounds plausible, it overlooks one major fact.
The majority of people buy their houses using mortgages. The most important point in granting a mortgage is ability to pay.
Nowadays the rate on a 30-year, fixed-rate mortgage is around 5.7%. Back in 1981,under Carter, the rate hit 18.5%. So at the time one could only afford a house one third the value in real terms
#16
Is this the same media which reported that a 8% INCREASE in the cost-of-living for social security seniors was a slash-cut which would starve millions? Back with Bush the Senior.
They knew they were lying. They even admitted they were lying through their teeth. But they still continued to lie.
That is one of the reasons I left the Democratic Party. Just got sick of the lies. And recently I discover that they have been lying about a great many things I took for granted.
I wouldn't believe the MSM if they told me my own name -- I'd still check out my drivers license.
#18
For years in San Diego developers and their pet politicians kept saying we need more "affordable housing". This, of course, was just a code meaning we need to let developers do whatever they want. But now that housing is actually becoming more affordable they're all crying about the "slump". The Union-Tribune, the local rag, reported yesterday that developers are laying off workers and some are even leaving town. Oh, boo-hoo. You just can't please some folks. BTW, if you have cash for a down payment, now is a great time to get into the market. One man's misery is another man's chance to score.
The boom in housing prices was caused by exotic, zero down payment, adjustable rate mortgages that should not have been legal and which the buyers should have read more carefully. When the rates were adjusted up the buyers couldn't pay so we had a gazillion foreclosures on the market. You didn't have to be a psychic to see it coming. What bothers me is that, instead of taking action years ago to make these types of mortgages illegal, the government is now rewarding the irresponsible morons and bailing them out with my tax dollars.
Posted by: Abu Uluque ||
05/28/2008 16:17 Comments ||
Top||
#19
Once the boomers start cashing in that house for the retirement investment the realtor told them it was,
Serious question, when they sell their home, Just where are they going to live?
Seems the boom is just going to shift to smaller Overpriced houses, instead of big overpriced houses.
Posted by: Redneck Jim ||
05/28/2008 16:57 Comments ||
Top||
#20
They'll move into Motorhomes and travel the US, because gas is cheaper...er....nevermind
/emily littella
Posted by: Frank G ||
05/28/2008 17:13 Comments ||
Top||
#21
They will move in with their kids so their kids will have to put up with their bullshit, pay their expenses, and generally give up their lives for their spoiled parents......
#22
Serious question, when they sell their home, Just where are they going to live?
Seems the boom is just going to shift to smaller Overpriced houses, instead of big overpriced houses.
#24
Or for people without enough cash to pay for them.... Then the federal government will bail them out from their own stupid decisions with *our* tax dollars.
#25
The most important point in granting a mortgage is ability to pay.
That used to be the case when the system was flush with cash to lend. I doubt any of us will ever see that situation again.
Now, the most important point in granting a mortgage is the willingness of the lender to lend against the property and crucially how much will they lend.
It doesn't make the front page, but banks are in a desperate scrambled to raise capital wiped out by bad real estate debts.
The math is simple. A bank has $10 capital for every $100 they lend. If 10% of their loans go bad and can't be recovered then the Bank's capital is totally wiped out. The bank is bankrupt.
In fact, it only needs 2 or 3% of loans to go bad before a bank's capital is reduced to the point it is legally required to reduce lending.
I'd say the bursting of the real estate bubble will bankrupt every bank in the developed world. One thing is certain, loans will be a lot harder to get for a very long time.
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.
BILLINGS, MONT. -- During an evening rally in Montana’s largest city Tuesday night, Hillary Clinton explained to the crowd why she should be the Democratic Party’s nominee, but what ensued was a list of overstatements and exaggerations as she made her case. “You have to ask yourself, who is the stronger candidate? And based on every analysis, of every bit of research and every poll that has been taken and every state that a Democrat has to win, I am the stronger candidate against John McCain in the fall,” she said. 
YANGON, Myanmar - Myanmar's military junta extended the detention of opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi on Tuesday, ignoring worldwide appeals to free the Nobel laureate who has been detained for more than 12 of the past 18 years, an official said.
