Multinationals fuel graft in poor states: watchdog

By Sylvia Westall

BERLIN (Reuters) - Multinational companies and financial institutions that use bribery and tolerate illicitly gained wealth are helping fuel corruption in the world's poorest countries, a global corruption watchdog said on Wednesday.

Berlin-based Transparency International (TI) said in its latest corruption perceptions report that while poorer countries should tackle their own graft problems, richer states are also responsible, and often to blame.

"Bribe money often stems from multinationals based in the world's richest countries. It can no longer be acceptable for these companies to regard bribery in export markets as a legitimate business strategy," the report said.

The survey, compiled from surveys covering 180 countries and territories, ranked them according to perceived levels of corruption among public officials and politicians.

Somalia and Myanmar shared the lowest score of 1.4. At the other end were Denmark, Finland and New Zealand, prized for fair judiciaries and transparent public finances, with 9.4.

Global financial centers play a central role in allowing corrupt officials hide and invest funds, TI said, citing the example of Nigeria and the Philippines, where officials looted millions of dollars.

"Criticism by rich countries of corruption in poor ones has little credibility while their financial institutions sit on wealth stolen from the world's poorest people," Akere Muna, TI Vice Chair, said.

Forty percent of countries scoring below three, which indicates corruption is perceived as rampant, are classified by the World Bank as low income countries, TI said.

War-stricken countries such as Afghanistan, Iraq and Sudan have also deeply suffered from rampant corruption and are at the bottom of the table, TI Chair Huguette Labelle told Reuters.

She said even efforts to rebuild countries devastated by violence through large infrastructure projects also make them particularly vulnerable.

"This is a very ripe area for corruption as everybody tries to get these lucrative contracts and are more inclined to try to put money under the table," she said.

"Corruption manufactures poverty, it seeds violence and it destabilizes countries dramatically."

The report said significant progress had been made in some African countries including Namibia, Swaziland and 2010 World Cup host South Africa, thanks to genuine anti-corruption efforts and political reform.

The European Union accession process has also helped countries like Romania tackle corruption, TI said.

Source: Reuters

God love globalism. Multinationals will save us all. I guess we shouldn't expect anything different...they do the same thing back home, they just get caught once in a while.

Iraq to end contractor 'immunity'

The Iraqi interior ministry has said it has drafted legislation regulating private security companies following a shooting allegedly involving a US firm.

The new code would require contractors to be subject to Iraqi law and to be monitored by the Iraqi government.

The draft is being considered by the consultative State Shura Council before being passed to parliament for debate.

The circumstances of the shooting two weeks ago, in which 11 Iraqis died, are being investigated by a US-Iraqi panel.

The contractor under suspicion, Blackwater USA, has said its guards reacted lawfully to an attack on a US diplomatic convoy.

'Impunity'

A spokesman for the Iraqi interior ministry, Maj-Gen Abdul Kareem Khalaf, said the new guidelines would cover everything to do with the operations of private security contractors.

"The companies will come under the grip of Iraqi law, will be monitored by the interior ministry and will work under its guidelines," he said.

"They will be strictly punished for any [violations] on the street."

Blackwater is the biggest private security firm operating in Iraq, with contracts including protecting the US embassy in Iraq and its diplomatic staff.

Tens of thousands of often heavily-armed security contractors work in the country.

Correspondents say their behaviour has incensed Iraqis who view them as private armies acting with impunity on their soil.

The contractors are currently granted immunity from prosecution under Iraqi law by Order 17 of the Coalition Provisional Authority - the now-defunct interim body set up by the US-led coalition in the wake of the fall of Saddam Hussein.

The agreement was extended shortly before the CPA was disbanded in June 2004.

Last week, Prime Minister Nouri Maliki called for the US government to end its contract with Blackwater immediately, although on Monday he agreed they should await the findings of the probe.

From BBC News: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7012853.stm

Well, it's a start. I would still like to see the contractors (if we must allow civilian contractors to work in Iraq, and I can't see why we do since they are mercenaries in no uncertain terms) fall under very specific US laws, both military and civilian. It is a little appalling that currently no court has the clear authority to try contractors if they intentionally or recklessly injure or kill civilians.

Iraq Reconsidering US Security Firms

The Iraqi government declared today it would examine the status of all foreign security firms amid growing anger over the death of eight Iraqis after US private contractors opened fire.

The decision came despite the US secretary of state, Condoleezza Rice, apologising for the deaths in an attempt to prevent the expulsion of the American firm involved, Blackwater USA.

Staff of other foreign companies - believed to number up to 180,000 personnel - may now face restrictions or even expulsion.

Government spokesman Ali al-Dabbagh said today: "It is necessary to review the status of local and foreign private security companies working in Iraq according to what is suitable with Iraqi laws."

Mr al-Dabbagh said the cabinet had confirmed the interior ministry's decision to withdraw Blackwater's licence, launch an investigation and ensure all those who attacked civilians were held accountable.

"The company should respect Iraqi laws and the dignity of the citizens," he said.

Eight Iraqi civilians were killed and 13 wounded in Mansour, Baghdad, when shots were fired from a US state department convoy on Sunday.

Brigadier-general Adam-Karim Khalaf, an interior ministry spokesman, said that foreign security contractors opened fire after mortar rounds landed near the convoy. "They opened fire randomly at citizens," he said.

........

Under a law issued by the Coalition Provisional Authority before Iraq regained sovereignty in June 2004, the companies have immunity from Iraqi prosecution.

The private security firms have proven controversial and many Iraqis view them as trigger-happy. US soldiers can face court martial if accused of unprovoked assaults or over-reaction, although the ratio of those convicted is low. But the law in relation to private security firms remains vague.

Source: The Guardian. Full story available at: http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,,2171904,00.html

About bloody time. I still don't see how 'civilian' security firms can operate as if they were military personnel but without any of the legal constraints or oversight to which the military is usually subject. The whole security contractor issue has always seemed dubious to me at best, unethical and dangerous at least, and criminal at worst. Perhaps now there will be a little more open discussion of the matter.

Romney tells U.N. to Reject Ahmadinejad

Romney tells U.N. to Reject Ahmadinejad

By GLEN JOHNSON
Associated Press Writer

BOSTON (AP) -- Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad should not be allowed to address the U.N. General Assembly next week, but instead should be greeted "with an indictment under the Genocide Convention," Republican presidential contender Mitt Romney said Monday.

"The Iranian regime under President Ahmadinejad has spoken openly about wiping Israel off the map, has fueled Hezbollah's terror campaign in the region and around the world and defied the world community in its pursuit of nuclear weapons - capabilities that make these threats even more ominous," Romney said in a letter to U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon posted on his campaign Web site, http://www.mittromney.com .

In New York, Romney told reporters: "I think the invitatiom should be withdrawn. I think instead, Ahmadinejad should be indicted under the Genocide Convention."

Romney routinely talks about the threat the United States faced from "radical jihadists," and he has staked out a hard-line position against Iran in particular.

In January, he called for economic sanctions against the Central Asian nation "at least as severe" as those imposed on South Africa during its apartheid era, aiming to isolate the country and convince it to give up its pursuit of a nuclear weapon.

Last September, while still serving as governor of Massachusetts, Romney ordered all state agencies to refuse any assistance if requested when the former president of Iran visited Massachusetts. Romney said Mohammed Khatami oversaw torture and the murder of dissidents, as well as Iran's secret nuclear program, while in office from 1997 to 2005.

"State taxpayers should not be providing special treatment to an individual who supports violent jihad and the destruction of Israel," Romney said at the time.

Opponents of the current Iranian regime including Nobel Prize Winner Elie Wiesel and Harvard Law professor Alan Dershowitz have previously called for Iran's explusion from the United Nations.

(Original AP story click here)

On a traitorous matter...

I was looking for a good way to go into this topic, but while looking, I found an amazing letter on Congress.org that some one had written to the president that expresses pretty much my exact thoughts on this, as I see it, traitorous, immoral and criminal matter.

(Here's the link to the original)

Subject: Let the Iraqi Oil Hunt Begin! To: President George Bush September 14, 2007 In one of the strangest moves to date, an American oil company signed a deal with Iraq's Kurdish regional government. This occurred as the Bush administration continues to press for a national Iraq oil law, one that shares the proceeds, however meager, with "all the citizens" of Iraq. What makes it even more odd is the U.S. company is Hunt Oil, whose CEO Ray Hunt is a personal friend of President George W. Bush. Ray recently dined on Dover Sole with Queen Elizabeth in the Bush version of the Clinton Lincoln Bedroom. Who says Bush doesn't wine and dine his major donors? Ray even made Pioneer status. While the Kurdish region passed an oil law last August, there is risk in Hunt Oil's inking a deal prior to the signing of a national law. President Bush holds the trump card with his Executive Order 13303, intended to maintain the integrity of Iraq's oil resources. Might he or the Treasury Chief declare the Hunt deal illegal? Doubtful, as Ray served as Chair of the Dallas Federal Reserve System Bank. As for President Bush, the two men are thick as thieves. Ray Hunt served as Chairman of the Board of Southern Methodist University, future home of the Bush Library. He still sits on the board of that august institute of higher learning. Unfortunately the Bush Library will paint the Bush Presidency as something other than an eight year exercise in partisan division. Hopefully Freedom's Watch will get a corner with windows as it rode in to save the long suffering Bush legacy. Ray Hunt's connections wind throughout the Iraq oil deal. Ray serves on President Bush's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board and a member of the National Petroleum Council which advises the Secretary of Energy. Mr. Hunt shares the boardroom table at EDS, founded by Ross Perot. The only other oil firm to ink a deal in Kurdistan is associated with Ross Perot Jr. It looks like politically connected Ray is ready to do more Texas style wildcatting. I think the Iraqi people have enough problems without unleashing a rabid Republican into their midst. For links go to: http://peureport.blogspot.com/2007/09/let-iraqi-oil-hunt-begin.html San Angelo , TX

Dennis Kucinich on Poverty (part two)

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

Dennis Kucinich Policies (part one)

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

Russia PM goes as Putin dissolves government

President Vladimir Putin has dissolved the Russian government on the request of the prime minister.

It is expected that the resulting new head of government will be seen as Putin's chosen successor once he steps down in the spring.

Prime Minister Mikhail Fradkov said he asked for the dissolution because with elections approaching, Putin needed to have a free hand to make decisions, including those concerning appointments.

Putin then said:
"You might be right that we must all think about how to structure the government so that it better suits the pre-election period and prepares the country for what will happen after the parliamentary and presidential elections."

Under the Constitution, Putin now has two weeks to propose a new head of government

One of the leading contenders for succeeding Putin is Dmitry Medvedev, a top executive at OAO Gazprom.


Story from The Independent:
http://news.independent.co.uk/europe/article2954274.ece

US surge plan in Iraq 'working'

The military objectives of the US troop surge in Iraq "are largely being met", the top US military commander in Iraq, Gen David Petraeus, has said.

Gen Petraeus' comments came as he and Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker began testifying before Congress.

The testimony has been billed as "make or break" for President George W Bush's resolve to stay the course in Iraq.

A record 168,000 US troops are now in Iraq after 30,000 arrived in the surge between February and June.

In his testimony before the joint House Armed Services and Foreign Affairs committees, Gen Petraeus said that:

• "security incidents", including sectarian violence, had declined significantly since the surge began;
• he envisioned the withdrawal of some 30,000 US troops by summer, beginning with 2,000 marines in September;
• he expected a decision on further troop cuts next March;
• improvements had been "uneven", and the situation in Iraq remained "difficult"

Speaking after Gen Petraeus, Mr Crocker said he believed it was possible for the US to see its goals achieved in Iraq.

He said security was attainable, but it would not be achieved quickly, warning that the path would be punctuated by setbacks.

General's warning

Gen Petraeus told the joint committees that troop numbers could be reduced to pre-surge level by next summer without jeopardising the security situation in Iraq.

SURGE HEARINGS - KEY DATES 10 Sept - Gen Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker begin two days of testimony in Congress 12 Sept - White House report to be released 13 Sept - President Bush TV address is expected

But he warned that "a premature draw-down of our forces would likely have devastating consequences".

"While noting that the situation in Iraq remains complex, difficult and sometimes downright frustrating, I also believe that it is possible to achieve our objectives in Iraq over time, although doing so will be neither quick, nor easy," he said.

Before Gen Petraeus began his testimony, House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Tom Lantos, Democrat, said President Bush's policies in Iraq had "created a fiasco".

Mr Lantos also called for a dramatic change of course, and said the US needed to get out of Iraq immediately.

Gen Petraeus said his testimony had not been cleared by the Pentagon or the White House before he gave it, and that he had written it himself.

His testimony was slightly delayed after a microphone did not work. Several hecklers were also removed from the hearing.

Shortly before his testimony, the US military said nine of its troops died in Iraq on Monday, including seven in what it described as a vehicle accident in Baghdad.

Iraq survey

The Congressional hearings come as a new opinion poll suggested about 70% of Iraqis believe security has deteriorated in the area covered by the surge.

The survey by the BBC, ABC News and NHK of more than 2,000 people across Iraq also suggests that nearly 60% see attacks on US-led troops as justified.

However, Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri Maliki said violence since the surge began had fallen 75% in the provinces of Baghdad and Anbar, and that 14,000 militants linked to al-Qaeda had renounced violence.

"We have succeeded in preventing Iraq from sliding into the abyss of a sectarian war which was threatening our beloved country," Mr Maliki told the Iraqi parliament on Monday.

BBC defence correspondent Rob Watson says rarely has the testimony of a US general to Congress received so much advanced billing.

He says Gen Petraeus has become something of a talisman for President Bush - the commander he has entrusted to rescue his policy in Iraq.

President Bush is hoping the general's more upbeat message on security will be enough to stave off calls for a timeline for a US withdrawal, our correspondent says.

Last Thursday Democrats seized on a report from a key US security commission recommending a cut in troop numbers by early 2008.

Mr Bush, who decides on force levels in Iraq, has said he will follow advice from commanders on the ground, rather than bowing to political pressure.

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/americas/6986461.stm

Guinness good for you - official

The old advertising slogan "Guinness is Good for You" may be true after all, according to researchers.

A pint of the black stuff a day may work as well as an aspirin to prevent heart clots that raise the risk of heart attacks.

Drinking lager does not yield the same benefits, experts from Wisconsin University told a conference in the US.

Guinness were told to stop using the slogan decades ago - and the firm still makes no health claims for the drink.

The Wisconsin team tested the health-giving properties of stout against lager by giving it to dogs who had narrowed arteries similar to those in heart disease.

They found that those given the Guinness had reduced clotting activity in their blood, but not those given lager.

Heart trigger

Clotting is important for patients who are at risk of a heart attack because they have hardened arteries.

A heart attack is triggered when a clot lodges in one of these arteries supplying the heart.

Many patients are prescribed low-dose aspirin as this cuts the ability of the blood to form these dangerous clots.

The researchers told a meeting of the American Heart Association in Orlando, Florida, that the most benefit they saw was from 24 fluid ounces of Guinness - just over a pint - taken at mealtimes.

They believe that "antioxidant compounds" in the Guinness, similar to those found in certain fruits and vegetables, are responsible for the health benefits because they slow down the deposit of harmful cholesterol on the artery walls.

Caloo Calay I chortled in my joy. What more can I say. Guinness is as good for your heart as aspirin. Take that T-totalers! Little red wine, little of the dark stuff...I may damn well live forever.

Bin Laden 'to issue 9/11 video'

Osama Bin Laden is said to be preparing to release a video message to the American people to coincide with the sixth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks.

The announcement was made on an Islamist website, where al-Qaeda's media arm frequently posts messages.

US homeland security officials could not confirm the existence of a tape, and said there was "no credible information of an imminent threat".

Al-Qaeda has put out similar statements in the past but no video has followed.

Bin Laden has not been seen in a video since October 2004, when he threatened new attacks against the US on the eve of the presidential election.

An audio tape was released in January 2006.

Dyed beard?

A banner advertisement for the video, written in Arabic, read: "Soon, God willing, a video tape from the lion sheikh Osama Bin Laden, God preserve him."

It carried an al-Sahab logo - regarded as a signature of al-Qaeda recordings.

There were no indications of the content of the video or when exactly it might appear.

The website also included a photograph, which appeared to show Bin Laden has aged compared with previous pictures - although his beard now looks dark rather than greying.

Correspondents say a new video - if indeed one does appear - would serve to dispel persistent rumours that the al-Qaeda leader might have died.

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/americas/6982803.stm

Is it just me, or does he look like a bizarre muppet of some sort. Dying his beard, I think that fact alone is going to hurt his street cred. Plus he is wearing the same clothes as in the last video. Isn't he the son of a wealthy developed? I mean, I don't put much stock in fancy clothes, but I am a fan of at least two sets of clothes. Perhaps it's not actually him... maybe it is a muppet.

You know, if he is going to be releasing videos he really should get sponsorship. I think that considering their falling profits someone like K-Mart might like that kind of exposure. He could get some nice summer clothes and all he would have to do is have a K-Mart logo on the screen along with the al-Sahab logo and upon conclusion of his message of terror say, "This message has been brought to you by your friends at K-Mart, 'Come for the Blue Light Specials, stay for the value'. Praise Allah."

West Bank village hails victory

By Martin Asser
BBC News, Bilin

The Bilin Popular Committee meets on Wednesday night to plan the next step in a campaign that turned this Palestinian farming community into a symbol of unarmed resistance against the Israeli occupation.

Thousands of Palestinian, Israeli and foreign activists have joined villagers on weekly protest marches to the controversial barrier built by Israel in the West Bank, which cuts Bilin from most of its agricultural land.

The Israeli government says the barrier is a security measure to stop suicide bombers, but critics say the structure is a calculated effort to annex occupied land.

On Tuesday the village scored a notable victory in the second part of its campaign - fighting the barrier's route through the Israeli courts.

The Supreme Court ordered the government to draw new boundaries near Bilin because the current route was "highly prejudicial" to the villagers and not justifiable on security grounds.

"The only thing Israel listens to is the Israeli courts," says Nsseir Samara, a member of the 10-man committee.

"Now we have to make sure the decision by the court is implemented and our lawyers will be asking Israel every day about that."

"We are told we will get back between 1,000 dunums (100 hectares or 250 acres) and 1,400 dunums of land - out of more than 2,000 dunums seized - but it still depends on the army to draw the new line."

Before rejoining battle in the courts and with the marches, the village has declared a week of festivities, the first of which took place on Tuesday.

From: BBC
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6979923.stm

Well, it's nice to know that once in a great while things work out for the best...well, for the better...for the Palestinians. The sad thing seems to be that often court rulings are overturned on security grounds (like they are in the US) and the most troubling cases are all heard in military courts. But still, this is good; a step in the right direction.

“Legalization Is the Best Approach”

It might be. Global drug prohibition is clearly a costly disaster. The United Nations has estimated the value of the global market in illicit drugs at $400 billion, or 6 percent of global trade. The extraordinary profits available to those willing to assume the risks enrich criminals, terrorists, violent political insurgents, and corrupt politicians and governments. Many cities, states, and even countries in Latin America, the Caribbean, and Asia are reminiscent of Chicago under Al Capone—times 50. By bringing the market for drugs out into the open, legalization would radically change all that for the better.

More importantly, legalization would strip addiction down to what it really is: a health issue. Most people who use drugs are like the responsible alcohol consumer, causing no harm to themselves or anyone else. They would no longer be the state’s business. But legalization would also benefit those who struggle with drugs by reducing the risks of overdose and disease associated with unregulated products, eliminating the need to obtain drugs from dangerous criminal markets, and allowing addiction problems to be treated as medical rather than criminal problems.

No one knows how much governments spend collectively on failing drug war policies, but it’s probably at least $100 billion a year, with federal, state, and local governments in the United States accounting for almost half the total. Add to that the tens of billions of dollars to be gained annually in tax revenues from the sale of legalized drugs. Now imagine if just a third of that total were committed to reducing drug-related disease and addiction. Virtually everyone, except those who profit or gain politically from the current system, would benefit.

Some say legalization is immoral. That’s nonsense, unless one believes there is some principled basis for discriminating against people based solely on what they put into their bodies, absent harm to others. Others say legalization would open the floodgates to huge increases in drug abuse. They forget that we already live in a world in which psychoactive drugs of all sorts are readily available—and in which people too poor to buy drugs resort to sniffing gasoline, glue, and other industrial products, which can be more harmful than any drug. No, the greatest downside to legalization may well be the fact that the legal markets would fall into the hands of the powerful alcohol, tobacco, and pharmaceutical companies. Still, legalization is a far more pragmatic option than living with the corruption, violence, and organized crime of the current system.

Excerpt from editorial by Ethan Nadelmann published in the this month's Foreign Policy Journal. Full story available at: http://www.foreignpolicy.com/story/cms.php?story_id=3932

Wow...6% of global trade. That is staggering. I agree with the author, the war on drugs is a ridiculous farce. It is lost; it is a drain of resources that could be better spent elsewhere; it is counterproductive because it criminalizes abuses that should be treated as medical issues.

BeliefWatch: Reincarnate

By Matthew Philips

Newsweek

Aug. 20-27, 2007 issue - In one of history's more absurd acts of totalitarianism, China has banned Buddhist monks in Tibet from reincarnating without government permission. According to a statement issued by the State Administration for Religious Affairs, the law, which goes into effect next month and strictly stipulates the procedures by which one is to reincarnate, is "an important move to institutionalize management of reincarnation." But beyond the irony lies China's true motive: to cut off the influence of the Dalai Lama, Tibet's exiled spiritual and political leader, and to quell the region's Buddhist religious establishment more than 50 years after China invaded the small Himalayan country. By barring any Buddhist monk living outside China from seeking reincarnation, the law effectively gives Chinese authorities the power to choose the next Dalai Lama, whose soul, by tradition, is reborn as a new human to continue the work of relieving suffering.

At 72, the Dalai Lama, who has lived in India since 1959, is beginning to plan his succession, saying that he refuses to be reborn in Tibet so long as it's under Chinese control. Assuming he's able to master the feat of controlling his rebirth, as Dalai Lamas supposedly have for the last 600 years, the situation is shaping up in which there could be two Dalai Lamas: one picked by the Chinese government, the other by Buddhist monks. "It will be a very hot issue," says Paul Harrison, a Buddhism scholar at Stanford. "The Dalai Lama has been the prime symbol of unity and national identity in Tibet, and so it's quite likely the battle for his incarnation will be a lot more important than the others."

So where in the world will the next Dalai Lama be born? Harrison and other Buddhism scholars agree that it will likely be from within the 130,000 Tibetan exiles spread throughout India, Europe and North America. With an estimated 8,000 Tibetans living in the United States, could the next Dalai Lama be American-born? "You'll have to ask him," says Harrison. If so, he'll likely be welcomed into a culture that has increasingly embraced reincarnation over the years. According to a 2005 Gallup poll, 20 percent of all U.S. adults believe in reincarnation. Recent surveys by the Barna Group, a Christian research nonprofit, have found that a quarter of U.S. Christians, including 10 percent of all born-again Christians, embrace it as their favored end-of-life view. A non-Tibetan Dalai Lama, experts say, is probably out of the question.

URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20227400/site/newsweek/

I know this is actually an important political issue at its base, but...hehe, hehe, hehehe, HAHAHAHAHA!!!! You gotta admit, it's funny.

Rich 'can pay poor to cut carbon'

By Roger Harrabin
Environment analyst, BBC News

Rich nations should be absolved from the need to cut emissions if they pay developing countries to do it on their behalf, a senior UN official has said.

The controversial suggestion from Yvo de Boer, head of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), has angered environmental groups.

They say climate change will not be solved unless rich and poor nations both cut emissions together.

But Mr de Boer said the challenge was so great that action was needed now.

Carbon credits

The UN's binding global climate agreement, the Kyoto Protocol, currently requires industrialised nations to reduce the majority of emissions themselves.

But Mr de Boer said this was illogical, adding that the scale of the problem facing the world meant that countries should be allowed to invest in emission cuts wherever in the world it was cheapest.

"We have been reducing emissions and making energy use more efficient in industrialised countries for a long time," he told BBC News.

This proposal simply won't deliver the cuts we need in time Mike Childs, Friends of the Earth

"So it is quite expensive in these nations to reduce emissions any more.

"But in developing nations, less has been done to reduce emissions and less has been done to address energy efficiency," Mr de Boer observed.

"So it actually becomes economically quite attractive for a company, for example in the UK, that has a target to achieve this goal by reducing emissions in China."

He said rich nations should be able to buy their way out of 100% of their responsibilities - though he doubted that any country would want to do so.

Green groups said the proposal was against the spirit of the UN, which agreed that wealthy countries - who were responsible for climate change - should do most to cure it.

Mike Childs from Friends of the Earth said: "This proposal simply won't deliver the cuts we need in time. The scientists are telling us that we need to cut carbon dioxide (CO2) by 50-80% by 2050.

"Unless rich countries start to wean themselves off fossil fuels right away this won't happen."

Doug Parr of Greenpeace was equally critical of Mr de Boer's suggestion.

"The current trading system is not delivering emissions reductions as it is," he said. "Expanding it like this to give rich countries a completely free hand will simply not work."

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/science/nature/6957328.stm


Alright, all in favor of the proposal say aye... Ok, all opposed say, "Are you a f**king idiot?" and, "Can we get someone who is not a completely brain dead jerk-off to be the head of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change?"

The Failing Surge

The outcome of the war in Iraq may now rest in large part on the success or failure of the so-called surge. Beginning in February, the White House sent an additional 28,000 U.S. troops to Baghdad in an effort to quell the violence there. Securing the capital with overwhelming force is a key component of the anti-insurgency plan developed by Gen. David Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq and the military’s foremost expert on counterinsurgency tactics. It took until June for all the U.S. forces to be put in place, and the number of American troops in Iraq is now at its highest level since 2005. But is Petraeus’s plan working?

The index’s (Center for American Progress Terrorism Index) experts don’t think so. More than half say the surge is having a negative impact on U.S. national security, up 22 percentage points from just six months ago. This sentiment was shared across party lines, with 64 percent of conservative experts saying the surge is having either a negative impact or no impact at all. When the experts were asked to grade the government’s handling of the Iraq war, the news was even worse. They gave the overall effort in Iraq an average point score of just 2.9 on a 10-point scale. The government’s public diplomacy record was the only policy that scored lower.

These negative opinions may result in part from the experts’ apparent belief that, a decade from now, the world will still be reeling from the consequences of the war. Fifty-eight percent of the index’s experts say that in 10 years’ time, Sunni-Shiite tensions in the Middle East will have dramatically increased. Thirty-five percent believe that Arab dictators will have been discouraged from reforming. Just 5 percent, on the other hand, believe that al Qaeda will be weaker, whereas only 3 percent believe Iraq will be a beacon of democracy in the Middle East.

Source: Foreign Policy Journal

See the entire report at: http://www.foreignpolicy.com/story/cms.php?story_id=3924
(you might need to register)

I have a subscription to this journal and frequently use it in the class I teach in international politics. I like FP because it is more accessible than normal academic journals, but also because it usually presents an even, well-balanced, and well-researched analysis of issues by leading figures from academia, politics, and policy, often with rebuttals from an opposing side. I find it interesting, disheartening, but rather not surprising that one of their lead stories for this month would be on the general and growing consensus among policy experts that the surge is failing. It's sad. Most everyone now agrees that the US-led invasion has f***ed the entire region for years to come. Super. Remember this when you go vote. Find a candidate that doesn't think war is a good idea, maybe one that wants to establish a Department of Peace. Yeah, sounds a little cooky, right? How does it sound compared to a multi-trillion dollar war that has cost upwards of half a million lives and destabilized a whole region. A little less nutty? Yeah, I thought so.

Snow to leave White House early

White House spokesman Tony Snow has announced that he is resigning from the job early for financial reasons.

Mr Snow did not give the date he would leave but said he had taken a pay cut since he joined President George Bush's team from Fox News TV in April 2006.

He has also been undergoing chemotherapy for colon cancer.

His announcement comes just days after one of Mr Bush's closest advisers, Karl Rove, announced that he was leaving at the end of the month.

Mr Snow announced his intentions on the conservative radio program The Hugh Hewitt Show.

"I've already made it clear I'm not going to be able to go the distance, but that's primarily for financial reasons," he said.

"I've told people when my money runs out, then I've got to go."

Colon cancer

Mr Snow had joined the White House in April 2006, at a time when Mr Bush was increasingly under fire for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Doctors discovered in March a recurrence of his colon cancer which forced Mr Snow to undergo chemotherapy.

Mr Bush has lost some of his closest advisors in recent months. The latest was his top strategist, Karl Rove, who said he would quit at the end of the month.

Other aides have left since the Democrats took control of Congress in January 2007.

They include counsellor Dan Bartlett, chief White House attorney Harriet Miers, budget director Rob Portman, political director Sara Taylor, deputy national security adviser J.D. Crouch and Meghan O'Sullivan, another deputy national security adviser who worked on Iraq.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6952579.stm

Two things: One, he is leaving because he isn't being paid enough? I would totally understand if he were leaving for health reasons, but greed? Two, is everybody gonna jump off this sinking ship?

Analysis: New US-Israeli arms deal

By Jonathan Marcus
BBC diplomatic correspondent

This new agreement sets increased levels of US military aid for Israel over the coming decade.

In broad terms, Israel will receive a total of some $30bn (£14.8bn) in military aid, a significant increase over $24bn (£12bn) it received over the past 10 years.

This is welcome news for Israel.

Last summer's war between Israel and the Lebanon-based Hezbollah demonstrated a complacency and lack of training within the Israel Defence Force (IDF).

Putting this right will require additional spending.

But improving the combat capabilities of Israel's infantry and armoured formations must go hand-in-hand with trying to find improved technical solutions to the threat of missile attack against Israeli population centres.

Israeli military planners must also contend with what they see as the potential long-range threat from Iran. So, there is no shortage of things to spend money on.

Increasing instalments

Israel has not got everything its own way.

Indeed, the visit of the US Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs, Nicholas Burns, was postponed earlier this month after it became clear that the US was not in a position to deliver the aid in quite the way the Israelis wanted.

US ARMS AID TO ISRAEL $30bn over 10 years 1st payment of $2.55bn in 2008 Annual payments rising to $3.1bn by 2011 26.3% can be spent in Israel Rest must be spent on US arms

The Israeli government would have preferred to get equal instalments each year over the 10-year period.

Instead, the aid will increase by some $150m (£76m) each year. In other words, Israel will get less of the money during the initial period of this deal than it had wanted.

The Israeli defence ministry will be able to spend a little over 25% of the military aid inside Israel itself - an important factor both in maintaining Israel's own industrial base and in maintaining its technical edge over any combination of adversaries.

Israel would probably like to have spent even more on domestically-produced weaponry but the Bush administration, mindful of pressure from America's own defence lobby, was unwilling to give more ground.

'Broader strategy'

Quite apart from the boost this gives to Israel's armed forces, it also sends a powerful signal of Washington's continued support for its principal ally in the region.

Israel is not the only recipient of US military largesse.

At the end of July, US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice unveiled a series of multi-billion dollar arms deals, involving not just the Israel package, but more weaponry for Egypt, Saudi Arabia and other key Gulf allies.

This would, Ms Rice said, "bolster forces of moderation and support a broader strategy to counter the negative influences of al-Qaeda, Hezbollah, Syria and Iran".

She argued that more weaponry for Egypt and Saudi Arabia in particular would "bolster our partners' resolve in confronting the threat of radicalism and cement their respective roles as regional leaders".

'Not the solution'

Critics will argue that additional weapons sales to this troubled region will not serve the cause of peace.

Part of the reason for Israel's increased package, they say, is to maintain its edge in the face of sophisticated weapons deliveries to Egypt and Saudi Arabia.

Indeed, in the wake of the somewhat compromised policy of spreading democracy in the region - an approach which threatened to sow a good deal of chaos in the short-term - these arms deals signal a return to a more traditional US approach; arming friends so better to bolster an alliance against common enemies.

Arms sales in themselves are not the solution to the region's problems. But it is probably wrong to see them simply as part of the problem.

The Bush administration's toppling of Saddam Hussein has caused a good deal of instability way beyond Iraq's borders. It has fundamentally altered the strategic map of the region.

And with Iran in the ascendancy, many of America's allies feel vulnerable.

Addressing their concerns is a necessary part of stabilising the region.

But arms sales have to be part of an integrated approach that brings together diplomatic peace efforts and a mix of carrots and sticks to try to win over potential or actual enemies.

Many of the Bush administration's critics argue that - despite its increased efforts to engage in the peace process - it still has not got this package quite right.

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/middle_east/6949904.stm

My "Experiment" in Shopping

Before I begin, allow me to state that this is obviously not a scientific study. I am technically on the border of NC and SC, so I went to 2 Bi-Lo stores and they had the exact same prices in both NC and SC, therefore I am correctly or incorrectly assuming the prices should be relatively comparable. Please feel free to check my math on any of this.

(lowest price in green, highest in red)
Bread (white) - 1.07 - W, 1.09 - B, 0.96- T, 2.29 (1.59) - H
Milk (2%) - 4.22 - W, 3.99 - B, 4.64 - T, 3.69 - H
Lunchmeat, Ham - 0.50 - W, 0.79 (0.60) - B, 0.52 - T, 0.79 - H
Lettuce (Iceberg) - 1.28 - W, 1.59 - B, 1.29 - T, 1.59 - H
Bean (Black Beans in a can) - 0.50 - W, 0.82 (0.70) - B, 0.54 - T, 0.64 - H
Soft Drink (2 liter Coke) - 1.33 - W, 1.59 (1.25) - B, 1.49 - T, 1.69 (1.59) - H
Laundry Detergent (125 oz liquid) - 2.27 - W, 2.50 - B, 3.34 - T, 3.49 (2.50) - H
Ketchup (24 oz Heinz) - 1.62 - W, 1.79 - B, 1.47 - T, 1.79 - H
Soap (3 bars of Irish Spring) - 1.78 - W, 2.19 - B, 1.79 - T, 2.39 (1.50) - H
Cereal (Corn Flakes) - 1.33 - W, 1.99 - B, 1.67 - T, 2.69 - H

Totals
Super Wal-Mart - $15.40
Bi-Lo - $18.34 ($17.81 - with Bonus Card)
Super Target - $17.71
Harris Teeter - $21.10 ($18.42 with VIC card)

More than Wal-Mart
Bi-Lo = 19% (16%)
Super Target = 15%
Harris Teeter = 37% (20%)

At $100 a week for a year, you pay _____ more at ______ than at Super Wal-Mart.
$988 ($832) Bi-Lo
$780 Super Target
$1924 ($1040)Harris Teeter

What I could have done to improve this "experiment"? I think next time, the thing to do would be to compare unit prices on the best bargains. Reason being, I passed up some really good deals at both Target and Bi-Lo because I had already chosen which products I was pricing. That being said, do I think that it would make one of them cheaper? No, of course not, but it could probably cut the price down to about 10% or so above the Super Wal-Mart price.

Even taking the above as gospel, I would still rather pay 15-20% more for groceries than do what I consider selling my soul. My ethics (or soul) are not worth even 2 grand a year. That is just the way I see it.

US retailers warn of tough times

Two US retailing giants, Wal-Mart and Home Depot, have warned about a poor year ahead after their latest results.

Wal-Mart's profits hit $3.1bn (£1.54bn) between May and July, from $2.08bn last year, but missed forecasts.

In contrast, Home Depot saw profits fall to $1.59bn from $1.86bn in the same period a year earlier, but beat expectations.

But both firms expect earnings to fall in the months ahead, amid fears that the US economy will continue to cool.

Rising costs

Following the results, Wal-Mart chief executive Lee Scott said earnings had been harmed by wider economic pressures.

"It is no secret that many customers are running out of money toward the end of the month," said Mr Scott.

In a bid to entice more customers, Wal-Mart has been reducing many items before the back-to-school period.

The combination of higher petrol prices and higher interest rates, that have pushed up mortgage payments, have both been factors squeezing customers, leaving them with less disposable income.

Higher costs have curbed people's appetite for home improvement, harming Home Depot and other such firms.

The company said sales from outlets open at least a year dropped by 5.2% for the quarter.

The results come as recent market turmoil has raised fears that a wider global contraction could be on the horizon.

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/business/6946029.stm