Saviours' Day Gift 2013 Drive

Tuesday, September 29, 2009

Chavez makes diplomatic inroads in Africa

Presidents and delegates attend the plenary session during the second day of the AP – Presidents and delegates attend the plenary session during the second day of the Africa and South America …
PORLAMAR, Venezuela – Hugo Chavez made diplomatic inroads in Africa on Sunday at a summit of South American and African leaders where he offered Venezuela's help in oil projects, mining and financial assistance.
Chavez and Libya's Moammar Gadhafi led about 30 leaders in agreeing to strengthen "South-South" ties at the two-day meeting, where Gadhafi proposed the two continents form a NATO-like defense alliance.
"With this summit, a new era begins in the unity of South America and Africa," the Venezuelan president said.
Venezuela signed agreements to work together on oil projects with South Africa, Mauritania, Niger, Sudan and Cape Verde. Chavez's government agreed to partner with South Africa's state oil company PetroSA in developing oil fields in Venezuela, and offered to help with oil projects in the other countries.
Venezuela also intends to form joint mining companies with nations including Namibia, Mali, Niger and Mauritania, Chavez said, adding that "we're going to get results." He said the two regions together have enormous economic potential.
It is unclear how much investment and aid Chavez is prepared to offer in Africa since his oil-producing country is coping with a sharp drop in its revenues due to lower world crude prices.
The summit on Venezuela's Margarita Island addressed a wide range of concerns, from hunger in Africa to the economic crisis and a common response to climate change. It also gave Chavez an opportunity to increase his influence in Africa while criticizing U.S. and European influence in poorer nations.
"There will no longer be a unipolar world," Chavez said, referring to U.S. dominance. "In the 21st century, the African Union and South America will be truly great powers."
Gadhafi, who is making his first visit to Latin America, said the two regions should unite to wield more influence and form a defense bloc, a "NATO for the South," calling it "SATO."
He criticized the "imperialism" of some wealthy countries, saying through an interpreter, "They think the planet is divided into two parts: masters and slaves. The masters are in the North and in the South are the slaves."
Gadhafi denounced the U.N. Security Council as an elite club where nations such as Libya have no voice, and called for the two continents to unite to demand change — something all the leaders agreed to do in a summit declaration, saying the council should be more "democratic" and "representative."
The Libyan leader said of leading world powers, without mentioning which countries: "They say they face terrorism. They're terrified. ... But they themselves have created the phenomenon."
"In the North, they live in a state of terror as a result of the hatred they've generated," said Gadhafi, who said a larger role for African and South American countries can help restore "equilibrium at the international level."
Presidents from Brazil's Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva to Zimbabwe's Robert Mugabe agreed on a need for U.N. reform, and called for unity to speak with a stronger voice.
"We're 65 countries with more than 1 billion inhabitants who want to be heard," Silva said.
The Brazilian president urged countries in the Africa-South America bloc — dubbed ASA — to "stop guiding ourselves by the compass of the developed countries." He said closer integration will help the two regions confront the economic crisis.
Chavez said the crisis reveals the failures of "speculative, plundering" capitalism in wealthy countries.
"We have to create a new international system, and we're doing it," the socialist president said. "The solution is in our hands. It's not in handouts from the North." South American leaders signed an agreement to create a regional development bank with $20 billion in startup capital, and Chavez offered to help create a "South-South bank" with African countries in the future. Chavez said Venezuela signed an agreement with the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization offering agricultural assistance in Africa, from seeds to help with irrigation systems. "South-South" cooperation was a buzzword at the summit, which brought together both the African Union and the South American bloc Unasur. Gadhafi, who has ruled Libya since he seized power in a 1969 coup, has sought a higher profile internationally in recent years and is currently chairman of the African Union. He met Chavez in one of his trademark Bedouin tents, set up next to the hotel pool, and plans to stay in Venezuela on Monday for more one-on-one events with Chavez. African leaders including South Africa's Jacob Zuma and Algeria's Abdelaziz Bouteflika met eight South American presidents at the summit.
Zimbabwe's Mugabe criticized economic sanctions imposed against his government by the U.S. and the European Union, but said "we are going ahead" nevertheless. The EU and other Western nations say that even though Mugabe now presides over a coalition government, not enough has been done to begin democratic reforms after years of authoritarian rule.
Chavez defended Mugabe saying "they demonize him" in the news media because he's an "anti-colonialist."
"We have to line up in his defense," Chavez said.
Chavez has also built close ties with other countries at odds with Washington such as Iran and Syria, and has defended Iran's nuclear program while saying that Venezuela also plans to develop atomic energy for peaceful purposes — and that it shouldn't concern nations such as the U.S.
Asked by reporters about Venezuela's efforts to detect uranium deposits, Chavez said with a smile that "we have a lot of uranium — lots and lots."
___
AP reporters Fabiola Sanchez and Thom Walker contributed to this report.

Thursday, September 24, 2009

Michael Moore 'Capitalism is anti-Jesus'

In a Fortune interview, the flame-throwing director explains why his new film brings his religion into the picture for the first time.

By Scott Cendrowski, reporter

michael_moore.03.jpg
Michael Moore, director, "Capitalism: A Love Story"
michael_moore_capitalism1.03.jpg
Moore outside the New York Stock Exchange, trademark megaphone in hand
NEW YORK (Fortune) -- The title of Michael Moore's latest film, "Capitalism: A Love Story," may be ironic, but there's nothing subtle about the message, right from the opening scenes.
The two-hour documentary begins with footage of a family being evicted from their foreclosed home by a half dozen police officers. Then he presents more incriminating evidence: a bankrupt Chicago factory where workers are denied pay, a privately run juvenile prison that paid off judges to give convicts longer sentences, and last year's $700 billion bailout of the banking system.
Moore, 55, ends with this conclusion: "Capitalism is an evil and you can't regulate evil. You have to replace it with something that is good for everyone."
The writer-director-partisan, who rose to prominence after his 1989 takedown of GM in the documentary "Roger & Me" and his mainstream hit "Fahrenheit 9/11" in 2004, spoke with Fortune on the eve of his film's Wednesday opening in New York City and Los Angeles (it opens nationwide on Oct. 2).
Moore talked about how his Catholic upbringing influenced the film, why Corporate America still irks him, and how to fix his economically troubled home state of Michigan. Excerpts:
You've said you started filming "Capitalism: A Love story" a year and a half ago. Did the film change after Lehman went bankrupt and the stock market crashed?
I've thought about this for 20 years. Ever since "Roger and Me," I've felt the problem here is an economic system that is unjust and unfair. It's not democratic. And I keep making these films but I dance around the subject: it's General Motors here, the health-care industry there, and I started thinking, "Why don't I just name it?"
I started out wanting to explore the premise of capitalism being anti-American, and anti-Jesus, meaning it's not a Democratic economy. And it's not run with a moral or ethical code. But when the crash happened, it added a third plot line: not only is capitalism anti-American and anti-Jesus, it doesn't work.
[The wealthiest Americans] proved that the free market is something they really don't believe in, they don't believe in competition, they actually do believe in socialism, that we the people should use our tax dollars to keep them in their mansions and their yachts.
I think they exposed themselves to a lot of middle class people who did believe in their system and they showed everybody the Ponzi scheme that it is. It's set up like a pyramid, so that the richest 1% at the top have more financial wealth than the 95% beneath them.
But the trick here is to get the 95% believing that if they work hard and slave away, they would get to the top of the pyramid. Of course, as we know, only a few people can stand on top of a pyramid. The fact that this crash exposed our economic system as a corrupt scam was something I didn't intend on happening while I was making the movie.
How is this film different from your previous ones?
I talk about my religion, which I have never talked about. I think religion should be a private matter. But I thought it was important to this discussion. I'm not a proselytizer, but I do have very strong beliefs and these beliefs were formed not in the school of Karl Marx, but in the Catholic Church. Priests and nuns taught me these lessons of how we're to treat each other, how we're to treat the poor, and how we're to divide up the pie.
I'm one of the few people on the left who's been fortunate to have access to a mainstream audience. I'm always thinking about ways to communicate with them and stay true to myself, because I am them, and I come from Middle America. I have very conservative values that go contrary to the fictional character that's been created of me by Bill O'Reilly, Rush Limbaugh, and the Fox News Channel. I've been with the same woman for 30 years, I don't invest my money in anything but a savings account.
Has your view of corporate America changed since your first film, "Roger & Me," opened in 1989?
I've become all the more agitated, especially with what I've seen and with having a peak behind the curtain. Having the life I do, working in an industry that's owned by major corporations. [Moore's film is distributed by a unit of Liberty Media, whose CEO John Malone is a formidable capitalist.]
Just a couple weeks ago, the film was going to debut in the Toronto Film Festival in the Elgin Theatre. Visa sponsors the theater, so during the festival it's called the Visa Screening Room. So they had [the film studio] call me to ask, Is there any reference against Visa in the movie? And this is while they're still deciding whether to put the movie in the festival.
Are there any good things happening in American business?
I see very little support for the things we really need to be investing in. Where's the cure for cancer? Where's the bullet train to take us from New York to L.A. in 10 hours? Where are the alternative energy systems to save us when we run out of oil?
I wish these were the priorities. But when Wall Street sucks up our best mathematicians, physicists, engineers, when they should be working on these other things and instead they're working to create derivatives ... c'mon. We're in deep, deep trouble. We need the best minds working on these things.
You live in Michigan, where you were born and raised. How can Detroit be saved?
It revolves around good-paying jobs. We've allowed the middle class to be decimated over the last 30 years. We've allowed our industrial infrastructure to collapse. So instead of initially giving bailout money to a General Motors that was never going to change or to banks so they can cover losses from crazy betting schemes, this money should be going to helping to create jobs in places like Detroit. People need to work. There are so many things we need to build and create for the 21st century.
I would do what my friend Dan Kildee is doing in Flint, Michigan. He's the county treasurer and he's taken over 9,000 homes that have been abandoned. He's tearing them down and his idea essentially shrank the city in physical size. They restored neighborhoods by building parks, fields and woods.
For crime in Detroit: what is the chance, if the person down the street is making $50,000 to $60,000 a year, [that he would] break into your home to steal your TV?
You tried to get Hank Paulson on the phone in the film, but weren't successful. If you got him on the phone today, what would you ask?
If I had a chance to talk to him, I'd want him to come clean and tell me the truth about how he rigged this whole thing. Tell us what happened because we don't know the details. How did so many Goldman people end up in the administration? How is it that Goldman's chief competitors are left to die -- not bailing out Lehman Bros., Bear Stearns falls apart, Merrill Lynch is absorbed into Bank of America -- and look who's left standing: the company that's got all their boys inside the administration.
If capitalism is evil, what's the solution?
Some people say to me, democracy is not an economic system, it's a political system. My answer to that is, you think capitalism has nothing to do with politics?
Let's quit talking like we're back in Economics 101. Capitalism is not only an economic system that legalizes greed, it also has at its foundation a political system of capitalism that is, "We have to buy the political system because we don't have enough votes. We're only 1% of the votes. We have to buy the people, and we have to buy the people by convincing them if they work hard, they too can be rich one day." [Americans] have gone along with it for the last 30 years. To top of page

© 2009 Cable News Network. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved. Terms under which this service is provided to you. Privacy Policy
Copyright © 2009 BigCharts.com Inc. All rights reserved. Please see our

http://money.cnn.com/2009/09/22/news/economy/michael_moore_capitalism_love.fortune/index.htm?postversion=2009092308


Information Researched By: Sister Anonymous


Tuesday, September 22, 2009

Fed Rejects Geithner Request for Study of Governance, Structure

Bloomberg AnywhereBloomberg ProfessionalAbout Bloomberg
Fed Rejects Geithner Request for Study of Governance, Structure

By Craig Torres and Robert Schmidt

Sept. 21 (Bloomberg) -- The Federal Reserve Board has rejected a request by U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner for a public review of the central bank’s structure and governance, three people familiar with the matter said.

The Obama administration proposed on June 17 a financial- regulatory overhaul including a “comprehensive review” of the Fed’s “ability to accomplish its existing and proposed functions” and the role of its regional banks. The Fed was to lead the study and enlist the Treasury and “a wide range of external experts.”

Some top central bank officials, after agreeing to the review, saw a potential threat to Fed independence after the Treasury released the proposal, two of the people said. The Obama plan said the Treasury would consider recommendations from the review and “propose any changes to the Fed’s governance and structure.”

“It is not obvious at all why that is a Treasury responsibility or even appropriate why the Treasury would undertake that kind of study,” said Robert Eisenbeis, chief monetary economist at Cumberland Advisors Inc. in Vineland, New Jersey, and a former Atlanta Fed research director. “The Fed was created by Congress and it is not part of the executive branch.”

U.S. lawmakers have also called for a review of the Fed’s power and structure, saying Fed Chairman Ben S. Bernanke overstepped his authority as he bailed out creditors of Bear Stearns Cos. and American International Group Inc. while battling a crisis that led to $1.62 trillion in writedowns and losses at financial firms.

No Work Done

While the report requested by the Treasury hasn’t been formally scrapped, no work has been done on the project, which was due Oct. 1, the people said. Treasury spokesman Andrew Williams declined to comment, as did Fed spokeswoman Michelle Smith.

The central bank is performing its own reviews of possible operational changes following the financial crisis. Fed Governor Elizabeth Duke is leading an internal study of the roles of the directors that serve on each of the boards at regional Fed banks.

“The institution is trying to keep a low profile,” said Vincent Reinhart, a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute in Washington and the former director of Division of Monetary Affairs at the Fed Board. “To publish a report now invites comment on that report.”

‘Associated Costs’

The Senate passed 96-2 a nonbinding budget amendment in April supporting “an evaluation of the appropriate number and the associated costs” of the district banks. The measure was sponsored by Senate Banking Committee Chairman Christopher Dodd, a Connecticut Democrat, and Alabama Senator Richard Shelby, the senior Republican on the panel.

House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank, a Massachusetts Democrat, has also called for more scrutiny of the central bank, saying last year he aims to probe how the 12 regional Fed presidents are appointed and their role in setting interest rates. The Fed banks are semi-private entities, each overseen by a nine-member board of directors.

Legislation in both houses of Congress would allow for audits by the Government Accountability Office of the central bank’s monetary policy and other operations. Bernanke opposes the measure, which was introduced in the House by Representative Ron Paul of Texas, a Republican. Frank has scheduled a committee hearing on the issue for Sept. 25.

Lessons Learned

Along with the study by Duke, the Fed is reviewing how to overhaul supervision based on lessons learned from the financial crisis.

The Treasury interest in a Fed structural review partially stems from the administration’s proposal to make the central bank the lead regulator for the largest, most inter-connected financial institutions.

Fed Governor Daniel Tarullo, an Obama appointee, is working on changes to the supervisory process that are preparing the central bank for a larger role in tracking risks across the financial system.

Tarullo is focusing on bank-to-bank comparisons and quantitative scenario testing of bank portfolios. The Fed is currently examining the vulnerability of banks with assets under $100 billion to falling commercial real estate values.

Congressional leaders have balked at the notion of giving the Fed more power and are leaning toward vesting authority over capital, liquidity and risk-management practices of big banks in a council of regulators.

Supervisory Council

“There will be a council,” Frank told Bloomberg Television Sept. 14.

The review led by Duke followed the resignation in May of Stephen Friedman as New York Fed chairman because of ties to Goldman Sachs Group Inc. Friedman is a director on Goldman Sachs’s board.

Goldman Sachs became a bank holding company in September 2008, a change that would have normally barred Friedman from continuing to serve in his New York Fed post. Officials gave him a waiver so he could remain in the job, which has mostly an advisory role.

Friedman, chairman of Stone Point Capital LLC, said at the time of his resignation that he had complied with all the Fed’s rules and his service on the board was “mischaracterized as improper.”

Some analysts said a Fed revision of the role of directors is overdue.

“Allowing local bankers to play a leading role in selecting reserve bank presidents is the most worrying aspect of the current system,” Lou Crandall, chief economist at Wrightson ICAP LLC, wrote to clients in July.

District bank presidents are nominated by committees made up of people whose institutions the nominees may have supervised.

“The conflicts of interest inherent in the current system are glaring,” Crandall said.

To contact the reporters on this story: Craig Torres in Washington at ctorres3@bloomberg.net; Robert Schmidt in Washington at rschmidt5@bloomberg.net.

Last Updated: September 21, 2009 00:01 EDT



Thursday, September 17, 2009

Blacks in Mexico Seek Government Recognition

Blacks in Mexico Seek Government Recognition

The first town of freed African slaves in the Americas is not exactly where you would expect to find it - and it isn't exactly what you'd expect to find either. First, it's not in the United States. Yanga, on Mexico's Gulf Coast, is a sleepy pueblito founded by its namesake, Gaspar Yanga, an African slave who led a rebellion against his Spanish colonial masters in the late 16th century and fought off attempts to retake the settlement. The second thing that is immediately evident to vistors who reach the town's rustic central plaza: there are virtually no blacks among the few hundred residents milling around the center of town.
Mirroring Mexico's history itself, most of Yanga's Afro-Mexican population has been pushed to neighboring rural villages that are notable primarily for their deep poverty and the strikingly dark skin of their inhabitants. Mexico's independence from Spain and new focus on building a national identity on the idea of mestizaje, or mixed race, drove African Mexicans into invisibility as leaders chose not to count them or assess their needs. Now many blacks want to fight back by improving the shoddy education and social services available to them and are petitioning for the constitution to recognize Afro-Mexicans as a separate ethnic group worthy of special consideration. (See graphics of slavery and the Americas.)
"The two races that are most discriminated against here are the blacks and the indigenous - but it is more accepted against blacks," says Hemeregildo Fernandez, a doctor in Yanga and one of the few blacks still living in town. His office is tucked on a narrow street that juts off the main square, where the rotund man with warm brown skin and salt-and-pepper hair receives a fluctuating stream of patients. The majority of the black Mexican population works in agriculture, fishing or construction, and while, like Fernandez, some have achieved notable positions in coastal towns, he says, "Most blacks have no economic power." (Read a story about the indigenous custom of bride-selling.)
Many of the country's mexicanos negros (black Mexicans), as they are called, know that their ancestors arrived in chains on boats that docked at ports in the sultry, steamy state of Veracruz. But they don't know much else. Indeed, Afro-Mexicans say that much of the history of los mexicanos negros is untaught or ignored by the rest of the country. Apart from Yanga, Afro-Mexicans claim Vicente Guerrero, who served briefly as President in the early 19th century and gave his name to the state of Guerrero, as one of their own, as well as revolutionary JosÉ MarÍa Morelos, who was executed by the Spaniards in 1815. (Read a story about an indigenous mother who might lose her child because she doesn't speak English.)
Black Mexican activists estimate the population of Afro-Mexicans at about 1 million, but there are no official figures. Earlier this year, they petitioned the National Institute of Statistics and Geography to include the Afro-Mexican population as a separate category in the next census, in 2010. Official statistics do not recognize blacks as a separate ethnic group (56 indigenous groups are officially accredited, the largest ones being the Nahuatl and the Maya, numbering more than 2 million each). As a result, Afro-Mexicans say they have been left out of institutional programs and are without a cultural identity. The group Mexico Negro A.C. is linking with similar Afro-descendant organizations in Latin America that have achieved success in securing better treatment. "We no longer want to be detained by security agents in our own country who say that in Mexico there are no blacks," says Rodolfo Prudente Dominguez, an activist with Mexico Negro.
The Afro-Mexicans face considerable hurdles. Prevailing stereotypes paint the group as happy to live the simple life apart from the rest of society, with no interest in education. The all-black shantytowns near Yanga lack schools, and eager young migrants who move to bigger cities for work complain of blatant discrimination. A report released late last year by Mexico's Congress said that roughly 200,000 black Mexicans who reside in the rural areas of Veracruz and Oaxaca and in tourist cities like Acapulco are out of the reach of social programs like employment support, health coverage, public education and food assistance.
Afro-Mexican culture expert Luz Maria Montiel acknowledges that blacks are particularly marginalized and excluded, to the point that it is impossible to find any mention of them in official records. Yet she argues that it is impractical for blacks to seek constitutional recognition. "It would be impossible to make a law for each of the populations that make up our multicultural nation," she says. Dominguez disagrees: "We are a totally different cultural group from indigenous groups and mestizos of our country, with a particular lifestyle and characteristics that do not respond to public policies that are designed for indigenous groups."
View this article on Time.com

Related articles on Time.com:

Copyright © 2009 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.

Information Researched By: Sister Anonymous


Tuesday, September 15, 2009

U.S. Extends Cuba Embargo




|
|
|
|










HOME | Cuba

U.S. Extends Cuba Embargo

WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama extended for a year the U.S. economic embargo against Cuba under what is known as the Trading With the Enemy Act, the White House said Monday.

“I hereby determine that the continuation for one year of the exercise of those authorities with respect to Cuba is in the national interest of the United States,” Obama said in a Sept. 11 memorandum to Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and Treasury chief Timothy Geithner.

The signing of the measure has become routine, with the embargo being extended year by year.

In this case, however, it takes on a symbolic character since it represents the first extension during the presidency of Obama, who in his first months in power eliminated restrictions on Cuban-Americans’ travel and remittances to the communist-ruled island.

With this signing, Obama indicated he was continuing the embargo imposed in 1962.

The application against Cuba of measures provided for in the Trading with the Enemy Act would have expired Monday if it had not been renewed.

The law, which bans U.S. companies from trading with hostile nations, had its origins in 1917, when it was approved in anticipation of the United States entering World War I.

Under the 1996 Helms-Burton Law, the president must get congressional approval to end the Cuba embargo.

Cuba is the only country in the world subject to sanctions under the Trading with the Enemy Act, after the Bush administration in 2008 chose not to renew its application against North Korea following Pyongyang’s agreement to release details of its nuclear program.

Obama’s decision to renew sanctions comes despite calls from organizations like Amnesty International, which at the beginning of this month urged the U.S. president to repudiate the measure as a first step toward ending the embargo. EFE




Copyright Latin American Herald Tribune - 2008 © All rights reserved


Information Researched By: Sister Anonymous

Monday, September 14, 2009

Russell to Jordan: Game on

Bryon Russell has a message for Michael Jordan: Whenever you’re ready, I’ll be waiting in California – in my basketball shorts.

“I’ll play his a— right now,” Russell told Yahoo! Sports. “This is a call-out for him to come play me. He can come out here in his private jet and come play. He’s got millions of dollars. He can pay for the jet. He can meet me at the Recreation Center in Calabasas.

“We can have Mark Jackson do the commentating. We can have Mitch Richmond do the officiating. We can put it on TV and see if Michael’s still got it.”

Jordan spent much of his enshrinement speech at the Naismith Memorial Basketball Hall of Fame singling out players and coaches who had slighted, criticized or motivated him. Russell merited a special mention.

After Jordan’s first retirement from the NBA, he was playing minor-league baseball and stopped by the Chicago Bulls’ practice facility, where the Utah Jazz were working out. Jordan said Russell, then a rookie with the Jazz, introduced himself and challenged him.

“…At this time I had no thoughts of coming back and playing the game of basketball,” Jordan said during his speech. “Bryon Russell came over to me and said, ‘Why’d you quit? You know I could guard you. If I ever see you in a pair of shorts…’

“When I did come back in 1995 and we played Utah in ’96, I’m at the center circle and Bryon Russell is standing next to me. I said, ‘You remember the [comments] you made in 1994 about, ‘I think I can guard you, I can shut you down, I would love to play against you? Well, you’re about to get your chance.’ ”

When the teams met in the ’98 Finals, Jordan hit his famous championship-clinching shot after knocking Russell backward. Jazz coach Jerry Sloan and point guard John Stockton, who also were being inducted, both shook their heads as Jordan told the story.

“From this day forward,” Jordan said, “if I ever see him in shorts, I’m coming at him.”

Russell said Jordan’s story was accurate and that he was honored, not offended, by his words.

“It was during my rookie year,” Russell said. “He turned to Karl [Malone] and said, ‘Hey Karl, is that your rookie?’ I really did say that to him. Karl was laughing and [Jordan] was laughing, too. …I guess I motivated him to come back. There had to be other reasons. You know he likes all challenges.

“Out of all the people he came across, he thought about me. I’m happy to be in his Hall of Fame speech.”

Russell said “not a single day passes” in which someone doesn’t ask him about Jordan’s shot over him. While playing for the Denver Nuggets, Russell and then-Nuggets interim coach Michael Cooper got in a heated debate about whether Jordan’s shot over Russell or Julius Erving’s famous acrobatic dunk over Cooper was more embarrassing. Looking back, Russell said he wasn’t humiliated to be part of such a historic play.

“To me, that’s the greatest play in basketball history,” Russell said. “It will stay that way because he will always be the greatest player to play the game. I didn’t mind. But the referees didn’t make the call on the push off.

“It’s long done and gone. It was a call that wasn’t made on a play that was great.”

Russell didn’t watch the Hall of Fame induction ceremony live because he was running errands with his 11-year-old son, Brandon, in Calabasas, Calif., but he did record it. After Jordan mentioned him, Russell received a voice message from his old Long Beach State coach, Seth Greenberg. Several other friends and family members also called and sent him text messages. As soon as Russell got home, he rushed to the television to watch Jordan.

Jordan and Russell were teammates with the Washington Wizards during the 2002-03 season, Jordan’s last in the NBA. Russell said Jordan never brought up the story while they were together and they never played one-on-one, either. Russell, now 38, last played in the NBA during the 2005-06 season, but he works out daily and is eager to “guard [Jordan] again and beat him.”

Russell encouraged Jordan to get his phone number from a mutual friend if he’s up for the challenge. Until then, he wants Jordan to know this:

“I keep my basketball shorts on.”

Brought to you by: Yahoo Sports

Sunday, September 13, 2009

Prince Turki al-Faisal, Op-Ed Contributor - Land First, Then Peace

Published: September 12, 2009
Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
THE United States and other Western powers have for some time been pushing Saudi Arabia to make more gestures toward Israel. More recently, the crown prince of Bahrain urged greater communication with Israel and joint steps from Arab states to revive the peace process.
Saudi Arabia is the birthplace of Islam, the custodian of its two holy mosques, the world’s energy superpower and the de facto leader of the Arab and Muslim worlds — that is why our recognition is greatly prized by Israel. However, for all those same reasons, the kingdom holds itself to higher standards of justice and law. It must therefore refuse to engage Israel until it ends its illegal occupation of the West Bank, the Gaza Strip and the Golan Heights as well as Shabaa Farms in Lebanon. For Saudis to take steps toward diplomatic normalization before this land is returned to its rightful owners would undermine international law and turn a blind eye to immorality.
Shortly after the Six-Day War in 1967, during which Israel occupied those territories as well as East Jerusalem and the Sinai Peninsula, the United Nations Security Council passed a resolution stating that, in order to form “a just and lasting peace in the Middle East,” Israel must withdraw from these newly occupied lands. The Fourth Geneva Convention similarly notes “the occupying power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies.”
Now, Israeli leaders hint that they are willing to return portions of these occupied territories to Arab control, but only if they are granted military and economic concessions first. For the Arabs to accept such a proposal would only encourage similar outrages in the future by rewarding military conquest.
After the Oslo accords of 1993, Arab states took steps to improve their relationships with Israel, allowing for recognition in the form of trade and consular agreements. Israel, however, continued to construct settlements, making its neighbors understandably unwilling to give up more without a demonstration that they would be granted something in return.
Today, supporters of Israel cite the outdated 1988 Hamas charter, which called for the destruction of Israel, as evidence of Palestine’s attitude toward a two-state solution, without considering the illegalities of Israel’s own occupation. Israel has never presented any comprehensive formulation of a peace plan. Saudi Arabia, to the contrary, has done so twice: the Fahd peace plan of 1982 and the Abdullah peace initiative of 2002. Both were endorsed by the Arab world, and both were ignored by Israel.
In order to achieve peace and a lasting two-state solution, Israel must be willing to give as well as take. A first step should be the immediate removal of all Israeli settlements in the West Bank. Only this would show the world that Israel is serious about peace and not just stalling as it adds more illegal settlers to those already occupying Palestinian land.
At the same time, the international community must pressure Israel to relinquish its grip on all Arab territory, not as a means to gain undeserved concessions but instead as an act of good faith and a demonstration that it is willing to play by the Security Council’s rules and to abide by global standards of military occupation. The Arab world, in the form of the Arab peace initiative that was endorsed by 22 countries in 2002, has offered Israel peace and normalization in return for Israeli withdrawal from all Arab territories including East Jerusalem — with the refugee issue to be solved later through mutual consent.
There have been increasing well-intentioned calls for Saudi Arabia to “do a Sadat”: King Abdullah travels to Israel and the Israelis reciprocate by making peace with Saudi Arabia. However, those urging such a move must remember that President Anwar el-Sadat of Egypt went to Israel in 1977 to meet with Prime Minister Menachem Begin only after Sadat’s envoy, Hassan el-Tohamy, Sadat’s envoy, was assured by the Israeli foreign minister, Moshe Dayan, that Israel would withdraw from every last inch of Egyptian territory in return for peace. Absent a similar offer today from Israel to the leaders of Palestine, Lebanon and Syria, there is no reason to look at 1977 as a model.
President Obama’s speech in Cairo this summer gave the Arab and Muslim worlds heightened expectations. His insistence on a freeze on settlement activity was a welcome development. However, all Israeli governments have expanded settlements, even those that committed not to do so.
No country in the region wants more bloodshed. But while Israel’s neighbors want peace, they cannot be expected to tolerate what amounts to theft, and certainly should not be pressured into rewarding Israel for the return of land that does not belong to it. Until Israel heeds President Obama’s call for the removal of all settlements, the world must be under no illusion that Saudi Arabia will offer what the Israelis most desire — regional recognition. We are willing to embrace the hands of any partner in peace, but only after they have released their grip on Arab lands.
Prince Turki al-Faisal, the chairman of the King Faisal Center for Research and Islamic Studies, is a former director of Saudi Arabia’s intelligence services and ambassador to the United States.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/13/opinion/13turki.html?th&emc=th

Information Researched By: Sister Anonymous


Friday, September 11, 2009

Zimbabwe sanctions dominate S.Africa-EU summit

AFP – Swedish Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt (right) shakes hands with South African president Jacob Zuma …
KLEINMOND, South Africa (AFP) – South Africa lobbied the European Union to drop sanctions against its troubled neighbour Zimbabwe Friday on the eve of a landmark trip to Harare by a delegation from Brussels.
Swedish Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt, whose country holds the EU presidency, began talks Friday with South African President Jacob Zuma which are also to focus on efforts to increase flourishing trade.
But the summit was in danger of being overshadowed by differences over Zimbabwe, with South Africa determined to push for an end to sanctions even though Reinfeldt has insisted the EU is not ready to lift them.
Zuma and other leaders of the Southern African Development Community (SADC) called this week for an end to the sanctions against veteran President Robert Mugabe, and he made clear that he will push the same demand with Reinfeldt.
"We are saying both of us understand where SADC comes from and where the EU comes from. But we are saying precisely because of that we need to engage so we can try and persuade the EU to lift sanctions," Zuma said on Thursday.
An EU delegation is to visit Zimbabwe this weekend, six months after the signing of a unity accord between Mugabe and his long-time rival Morgan Tsvangirai who was appointed prime minister under the agreement.
"Hopefully that will give us an on the spot description and possibility to learn more about the actual situation in Zimbabwe and we welcome that very much," Reinfeldt said during opening remarks at Friday's summit.
The Swedish premier has however said the visit is not in preparation to lift sanctions, maintaining that the measures will be kept in place.
"I want to be clear: the EU is not prepared (for) lifting the restrictions we have on Zimbabwe," he said at a public address in Johannesburg Thursday.
"It is not the restrictions that are creating problems in Zimbabwe, it is the mismanagement ... not respecting of human rights."
Britain and other EU countries imposed a travel ban and freeze on bank accounts belonging to Mugabe and his inner circle, over claims that he rigged a 2002 election and allegations of rights abuses.
But African nations insist progress has been made with the signing of the unity accord which was negotiated by South Africa after disputed elections last year.
Mugabe has blamed the sanctions for his country's problems, including a crippling economic crisis which saw Zimbabwe lumbered with the world's highest rate of inflation before it abandoned the local currency.
Although the unity government has brought a degree of stability, Tsvangirai's party says its members still face persecution.
Zuma argues that an end to the sanctions will help stabilise events in Harare.
"Once you have got sanctions there are things you cannot do in Zimbabwe, but if the sanctions are not there you give more scope for that agreement to be implemented. That is the point we are making."
Aid commissioner Karel de Gucht will lead the highest-level EU mission to Zimbabwe in seven years, to meet Mugabe and Tsvangirai on Saturday and Sunday.
Government officials in Harare said in the state-run Herald newspaper Friday that they expected the EU not only to end the sanctions but apologise for their imposition in the first place.
"There can be no ties where one nation is treated as inferior. It is not in our national interest to allow foreigners to dictate to us how we should govern ourselves," an information ministry official said.
Other African hotspots like Sudan and Somalia will also feature at Friday's talks along with issues of climate change.
The EU is South Africa's biggest trade and development partner, accounting for 80 percent of foreign direct investment in the country which is the EU's biggest export region.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20090911/wl_afp/safricaeusummitdiplomacy_20090911121853;_ylt=Ah4yvEai4X5O4gEGO_JsQgIV6w8F;_ylu=X3oDMTE2ZXFmcmFrBHBvcwMyBHNlYwN5bi1yLWItbGVmdARzbGsDZXYtemltYmFid2Vz

Information Researched By: Sister Anonymous


Wednesday, September 9, 2009

Obama to seal US-UN relationship

Barack Obama will cement the new co-operative relationship between the US and the United Nations this month when he becomes the first American president to chair its 15-member Security Council.
The topic for the summit-level session of the council on September 24 is nuclear non-proliferation and nuclear disarmament – one of several global challenges that the US now wants to see addressed at a multinational level.
“The council has a very important role to play in preventing the spread and use of nuclear weapons, and it’s the world’s principal body for dealing with global security cooperation,” Susan Rice, US envoy to the UN, said last week.
Her remarks were the latest by the Obama administration to emphasise a shift from the strategy of the previous Bush administration, sometimes criticised by its UN partners for seeking to use the world body principally to endorse its own unilateral policies. The US currently holds the month-long rotating presidency of the Security Council.
Mr Obama will join other heads of government in New York during the week of the nuclear summit for the opening of the 64th session of the UN General Assembly. The annual meeting of world leaders is this year raising expectations on a number of fronts.
UN officials hope a climate change debate on September 22 will give fresh impetus to the search for a global climate deal at Copenhagen in December. There are also hopes a possible meeting between Benjamin Netanyahu, Israeli prime minister, and Mahmoud Abbas, Palestinian Authority president, that Mr Obama would host, could lead to a breakthrough about a timetable for Middle East peace.
Heads of state are also likely to consider how to deal with Iran’s nuclear ambitions. Mr Obama gave Tehran a September deadline to reply to his offer of negotiations. Iran’s Mahmoud Ahmadi-nejad will attend the General Assembly “to encourage Iranian views in managing the world,” an aide said.
US officials are concerned Libya’s Muammar Gaddafi might try to steal the limelight during his first visit to New York. A public outcry at the Libyan leader’s visit after he last month welcomed home Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed Al Megrahi, the freed Lockerbie bomber, has already stymied his plans to pitch his tent in Central Park.
“How President Gaddafi chooses to comport himself, when he attends the General Assembly and the Security Council in New York, has the potential either to further aggravate those feelings and emotions or not,” Ms Rice said.
The State Department has not ruled out the possibility that Mr Obama and Colonel Gaddafi would cross paths. They are both due to address the General Assembly on the same day, and the Libyan leader, whose country is a temporary member of the Security Council, is entitled to attend the nuclear summit session that Mr Obama will chair.

By Harvey Morris at the United Nations
Published: September 8 2009 19:59 | Last updated: September 8 2009 19:59



Information Researched By: Sister Anonymous