Reihe: GENIAL DAGEGEN/ kuratiert von Robert Misik

Montag, 6. September, 19.00 Uhr

Bruno Kreisky Forum für internationalen Dialog | Armbrustergasse 15 | 1190 Wien

Anmeldungen unter: Tel.: 3188260/20 | Fax: 318 82 60/10 | e-mail: einladung.kreiskyforum@kreisky.org

FRANZ WALTER

Institut für Demokratieforschung Göttingen

VORWÄRTS ODER ABWÄRTS?

Hat die Sozialdemokratie noch eine Zukunft?

Moderation:   Robert Misik, Journalist und Autor

Vorwärts oder Abwärts?: Zur Transformation der Sozialdemokratie (edition suhrkamp)

Jospin, Blair, Schröder: 1998 sah es so aus, als stünde die europäische Sozialdemokratie vor einem goldenen Zeitalter. Elf Jahre später hat die SPD 10.192.426 Millionen Stimmen verloren und sechs Parteivorsitzende verschlissen, die niederländische Partij van de Arbeid fuhr 2002 das schlechteste Ergebnis ihrer Geschichte ein, die schwedischen Sozialdemokraten 2006, die österreichischen 2008. Der »Dritte Weg« erwies sich als Weg ins Abseits, längst ist vom Ende einer Volkspartei die Rede.

Es sieht so aus, als hätten die Sozialdemokraten keine überzeugende Antwort auf den radikalen Wandel der Arbeitswelt, auf Individualisierung und Globalisierung.

Franz Walter, einer der profiliertesten deutschen Parteienforscher, untersucht die Ursachen für den Niedergang der SPD. Er wirft einen Blick über die Grenzen Deutschlands und fragt, was Freiheit, Gleichheit und Solidarität in unserer Zeit bedeuten.

Melitta Campostrini
Bruno Kreisky Forum
for International Dialogue
Armbrustergasse 15
A-1190 Vienna
tel.: ++43 1 3188260/11
fax: ++43 1 3188260/10
e-mail: kreiskyforum@kreisky.org

www.kreisky-forum.org

Fareed Zakaria discusses CC with Jeff Sachs (Columbia), Pat Michaels (Cato, ex-UVA) & NASA’s Gavin Schmidt.
http://bit.ly/cCQO4Y

Pat Michaels says he is 40% funded by Petroleum Industry. There is no need to fight global warming.

Gavin Schmidt says he thinks we’re too sane not to do something about global warming.

Jeffrey Sachs says – if we do not act we will end up with a catastrophic planet.

Is it clear?

===============

Fareed Zakaria talks to Hirsi Ali who rejected Islam and Irshad Manji who wants to reform Islam.

Hirsi Ali, African Black, born in Mogadisho, Somalia and immigrated to Holland where she went to university and after 9/11 left Islam to become an atheist that says if you need a God take Christ. Her family says she risks hell for leaving Islam.

She says don’t lock 1.57 billion Muslims in a book written in the 7th century. She wrote “Nomad” about her leaving Islam.

She worked with Teo Van Gogh on a movie “Submission” about women in Islam, when he was killed. She was a member of the Netherlands Parliament, and now lives with security in the US and is a fellow at the American Enterprise Institute.

She says that most Americans are unaware of Saudi Funded proselytizing in America.

Irshad Manji , with Pakistani African complexion, born in Uganda, with her family escaped to safety the US in Idi Amin’s days. She heads project Ifthihad at the Moral Courage Institute at NYU. She wants to reform Islam. Good popular cause backed by a good university, but who listens? She tells about a group of young boys in Detroit listening to her mother.

At the Second International Conference on Climate, Sustainability and Sustainable Development in Semi-arid Regions, in Fortaleza, Ceara, Brazil, during the days that a large part of Pakistan is already submerged under water, some of the parts that are not submerged – in the Baluchistan region, were subject of Pakistani presentations on water scarcity.

Desertification – the challenge of desertification and sustainable development in semi-arid regions:

“Participants attended this session on Monday and heard presentations on, inter alia, land degradation and desertification in the Arab region, and the management of scarce water resources in the drylands of Pakistan.

They also discussed a case study on the development of a hydro-environmental project in Canindé municipality, Ceará, Brazil, and noted ongoing adaptation work, including planting drought-resistant crop varieties.”

—————

The final insult, as described by Matthew Green in The Financial Times of today is to get both effects in the same location.

The story is about a farmer who owns one acre near the Indus river and this year lost his wheat crop because there was no water. Then of a sudden the river burst its banks and his home was washed away.

The people were telling their stories in a refugee camp at a school in Sukkur.

The article continues with plain truth:

“In future years, Pakistan’s ability to manage its dwindling water resources may play a bigger role in deciding whether a nuclear-armed country beset by poverty and an Islamist insurgency starts to prosper or face worse instability.

‘Water shortages are one of the biggest challenges Pakistan faces,’ said F.M. Mughal, a specialist in water issues in Sindh. “Unless the government takes action we will see huge numbers of people sinking deeper into poverty.”

Before the flood, the Indus had shrunk to little more than a muddy puddle in parts of Sindh, forcing farmers to rely increasingly on wells drawing saline groundwater that saps the fertility from their soil, hitting yields of cotton, rice and wheat.

Farmers cite the diversion of upstream waters to feed farms in the populous Punjab province, Pakistan’s agricultural heartland, as the chief drain on their river’s vigour. Skewed patterns of ownership place most of Sindh’s land in the hands of an elite who win a disproportionate share of waters distributed through a rotational irrigation system.”

So, diversion of water to feed Punjab agriculture left other rural areas wanting, but this is not all – the second effect comes from the melting Himalayan Glaciers:

“Melting Himalayan glaciers because of rising temperatures, have exacerbated Pakistan’s shortages, according to a 2009 report by the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. The World Bank says Pakistan could face a “terrifying” 30-40 per cent drop in river flows in 100 year’s time.

The result is that Pakistan may be more prone to both droughts and flood. As more water is diverted to feed agriculture, average flow speeds have fallen, dumping silt on river beds. Shallower channels are less able to cope with sudden rainfall, rendering Pakistan more vulnerable to extreme flooding.

In the weeks leading up to the recent floods, angry farmers marched through villages in Sindh demanding access to water. Those who can no longer turn a profit in the fields are increasingly resorting to banditry or migrating to urban shanties.”

And now the observation:

“Rural Sindh has proved more resistant to the radical Islamist ideology that has fuelled the Taliban insurgency in northwest Pakistan. But in southern Punjab, the rural poor have formed a ready pool of recruits for an array of militant organisations including Lashkar-e-Taiba, which was blamed for the 2008 Mumbai attacks.

In Sukkur, as in many other parts of Pakistan, people have lost faith in the ability of President Asif Ali Zardari’s fragile coalition government to overhaul a water management system riddled with inefficiency and graft.”

“We are highlighting every problem, but are getting no response,” said Moinuddin Shaikh of Civil Society Sukkur, a pressure group.

Whether Sindh can solve its dearth of water after the floods will depend on how far Pakistan’s layers of provincial and federal administration can embrace change. Much of the public discussion about the floods has lamented the state’s failure to build more dams, though experts debate how far they might have averted the crisis.

Some say the government should focus on reducing the huge wastage in inefficient irrigation systems where up to 70 per cent of water is lost through evaporation and seepage.

“It’s a critical issue, but it’s a solvable issue,” said Daanish Mustafa, a water specialist and a senior lecturer at King’s College London. “But it needs a kind of imagination and creativity that the Pakistani water bureaucracy does not have.”

Noting that Brazil’s Amazon forest is well known, but not its drylands,  a Brazilian delegation to the Bonn headquarters of the UNCCD convention Just as prior to Rio Summit of 1992 stressed the need to draw attention to the importance of the well being of the drylands people in Brazil and elsewhere, and to advocate an agenda for policy development. The delegation comprised of Francisco José Pinheiro, Vice Governor of the State of Ceará, the region threatened by desertification and the State hosting the Conference, Professor Antonio Rocha Magalhães, Director of the ICID 2010 Conference, and José Roberto de Lima, Brazil’s designated Technical Focal Point for the Convention in the Ministry of Environment.

UNCCD Executive Secretary Luc Gnacadja welcomes the delegation from Brazil to Bonn: (l to r) Jacob Acevedo (UNCCD), José Roberto de Lima (Brazil), Francisco José Pinheiro (Brazil), Luc Gnacadja (UNCCD), Prof. Antonio Rocha Magalhães(Brazil) and Heitor Matallo (UNCCD)

IISD – EARTH NEGOTIATIONS BULLETIN – LINKAGES – Volume 177 Number 5 – Monday, 23 August 2010
 https://mail.google.com/mail/?shva=1#inb…

and  http://www.viafanzine.jor.br/site_vf/pag…

The Fortaleza Declaration: On the challenges and opportunities of sustainable development and climate change, the Declaration calls for:

• better governance of the drylands, representation of their populations and enhanced livelihoods;

• the enhancement of climate-sensitive sustainable development interventions in drylands;

• recognition of potential synergies to reduce vulnerability and increase resilience for the poor;

• the creation of favorable conditions for sustainable development in drylands through integrated actions to fight land degradation, mitigate drought effects, conserve biodiversity and adapt to climate change; and

• investment opportunities to exploit the comparative advantage of drylands in renewable energy production.

On political representation on multiple scales, the Declaration urges:

• enhanced representation of dryland populations in local, national and international policymaking and in the implementation of development activities;

• strengthening the capacity of dryland nations to influence the global environment and development agenda;

• the UN to consider the plight of dryland nations;

• preparatory meetings of Rio+20 be organized on a global ecosystem basis, to highlight issues pertaining to communities living in, inter alia, the drylands and tropical forests; and

• development and implementation of community-level information strategies to educate people on the implications of climate change.

On synergies among global environmental and development initiatives, the Declaration emphasizes:

• prioritizing sustainable use and conservation of biodiversity; and

• creation of synergies between local, national and global interventions to mitigate and adapt to climate change, conserve biodiversity and curb desertification.

On financing climate-sensitive sustainable development, it calls for:

• absorption of costs related to sustainable development by national economies;

• honoring previous financial obligations to support sustainable development by industrialized countries, the expansion of existing financial instruments, and acceleration of the disbursement of the Climate Investment and Adaptation Funds to local and national capacities; and

• including dryland regions in financial innovations to advance sustainable development under climate change conditions.

On education for sustainable development, the Declaration calls for the prioritization of education for communities in dryland areas.

On knowledge and information exchange, it recommends:

• the design and implementation of an integrated climate research, observation, modeling and applications programme to inform the policy process;

• greater inputs from the social sciences on the causes and effects of climate change and variability;

• bridging the gap between scientific information and political action; and

• expansion and strengthening of knowledge networks.

On integrated planning and implementation of development strategies and programmes, the Declaration calls for increased convergence in development strategies and programmes, especially relating to land and water resource management, forestry and the fight against desertification.

Finally, on responding to urgency, the Declaration calls for decisive action from the international community on climate, development and sustainability challenges.

———————————————————————-

further: A Decade for Deserts and the Fight against Desertification was declared at the meeting by the UN, with the blessing of UNSG Ban Ki-moon.
The United Nations Decade for Deserts and Desertification was launched in Fortaleza, Brazil, yesterday, during the Second International Conference: Climate, Variability, Sustainability and Development, ICID 2010, and at the United Nations Environment Programme in Nairobi, Kenya.

——————————–

CONFERENCE KEYNOTE SPEECH

On Wednesday, Jeffrey Sachs, Director, Earth Institute, Columbia University, US, gave a keynote speech in which he warned that “we may be losing the battle” on anthropogenic climate change, underscoring the many climate-linked disasters in the past year, accompanied by “miserable outcomes” on the political front.

He recommended the ICID 2010 final declaration: declare the climate crisis in semi-arid lands a growing global security threat and a direct threat to the fulfillment of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs); call for a UN Security Council special session on violence, security and semi-arid lands; and advocate the formation of a new political Alliance of Semi-Arid Countries (ASAC) to speak in a unified voice at the sixteenth Conference of the Parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC COP 16) to be held in Cancún, Mexico, in December 2010. He suggested that the ASAC call for: timely disbursement of adaptation funding, with the priority being hard-hit ASAC countries; the implementation of a global carbon tax to finance adaptation and mitigation efforts; large-scale solar power programmes in ASAC countries where appropriate, focusing on regions trapped in energy poverty.

SYNERGIES AMONG THE UN CONVENTIONS: On Tuesday morning, a plenary session convened, chaired by Luis Alberto Figueiredo Machado, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Brazil.

Via video message, Christiana Figueres, UNFCCC Executive Secretary, suggested better water management practices at the local level to bring the relevant UN Conventions closer together. Director Magalhães called for including indigenous peoples and local communities in the talks on creating synergies. Sergio Zelaya, UNCCD, on behalf of Jaime Webbe, CBD, described future initiatives including a proposed joint liaison group, joint expert group and scientific body, as well as a joint extraordinary session of the Rio Convention COPs at the upcoming Rio+20 Earth Summit. Margarita Astrálaga, UN Environment Programme (UNEP), highlighted that the Rio Conventions can draw from other processes where the synergistic approach is already being implemented.

Nora Berrahmouni, UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), called for integrated action plans to secure resource bases, conserve and preserve livelihoods, and to mitigate and adapt to climate change.

Walter Vergara, World Bank, emphasized the importance of understanding the costs and benefits of various adaptation approaches.

Luc Gnacadja, UNCCD Executive Secretary, called for greater investment in sustainable land and water management to ensure food security, decrease the rate of climate change, alleviate drought and avert further biodiversity loss.

In the ensuing discussion, participants discussed, inter alia: increased civil society involvement; greater information sharing on the Rio Conventions; and the inclusion of human rights in the synergies discussion.

THEMATIC PROCESS

From Monday to Thursday, over 70 thematic panel sessions and roundtables convened to address issues related to climate change adaptation, vulnerability and sustainable development. Panels were organized around the four sub-themes of the conference: climate information; climate and sustainable development; climate governance, representation, rights, equity and justice; and climate policy processes. A selection of panel sessions is presented below.

Global Network of Dryland Research Institutes (GNDRI): In this session on Wednesday, participants were briefed about the GNDRI. National institutes from Argentina, Brazil, India, Israel, Syria and the US discussed their institutions’ work and research priorities, including sustainable use of cultural resources, food security, water management, alternative agricultural systems, biodiversity and the creation of “climate ready” crops.

Lessons learned about lessons learned: In this session on Thursday, participants examined how lessons and recommendations developed from past crisis assessments and negotiating processes have not been heeded or implemented, including post-event assessments of natural disasters, problems faced in getting responses from hazard early warning systems, the lessons from the process leading to the Montreal Protocol, and lessons from the disappearance of the Aral Sea.

It was generally agreed that policy recommendations in “lessons learned” reports should always discuss increased risks from not heeding lessons.

Early warning systems for droughts: During this session on Thursday, participants heard presentations on essential components of early warning systems, the South American drought monitoring systems, indices and indicators for monitoring and assessing drought conditions worldwide, and the development of an international drought clearinghouse.

Among the recommendations discussed were the need for fuller understanding of drought impacts; use of a standardized precipitation index in addition to current tools; the development of a user manual on indicators and indices; and the implementation of indices and early warning systems with the end user in mind.

THEME 2: CLIMATE AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT: Participants attended sessions relating to this theme from Monday to Thursday. The theme broadly dealt with climate and sustainable development, with a specific focus on arid and semi-arid lands.

Desertification – the challenge of desertification and sustainable development in semi-arid regions: Participants attended this session on Monday and heard presentations on, inter alia, land degradation and desertification in the Arab region, and the management of scarce water resources in the drylands of Pakistan. They also discussed a case study on the development of a hydro-environmental project in Canindé municipality, Ceará, Brazil, and noted ongoing adaptation work, including planting drought-resistant crop varieties.

———————————

As announced by Xinhua:

International conference on semi-arid regions begins in Brazil.

August 17, 2010

Op-Ed Columnist at The New York Times says – Islam needs a Mandela and means three of them.

Surprise, Surprise, Surprise.

By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN

Published: August 21, 2010

I love that line: “We have to surprise them.” I was watching the movie on an airplane and scribbled that line down on my napkin because it summarizes what is missing today in so many places: leaders who surprise us by rising above their histories, their constituencies, their pollsters, their circumstances — and just do the right things for their countries.

I tried to recall the last time a leader of importance surprised me on the upside by doing something positive, courageous and against the popular will of his country or party. I can think of a few: Yitzhak Rabin in signing onto the Oslo peace process. Anwar Sadat in going to Jerusalem. And, of course, Mandela in the way he led South Africa.

But these are such exceptions. Look at Iraq today. Five months after its first truly open, broad-based election, in which all the major communities voted, the political elite there cannot rise above Shiite or Sunni identities and reach out to the other side so as to produce a national unity government that could carry Iraq into the future. True, democracy takes a long time to grow, especially in a soil bloodied by a murderous dictator for 30 years. Nevertheless, up to now, Iraq’s new leaders have surprised us only on the downside.

Will they ever surprise us the other way? Should we care now that we’re leaving? Yes, because the roots of 9/11 are an intra-Muslim fight, which America, as an ally of one faction, got pulled into. There are at least three different intra-Muslim wars raging today. One is between the Sunni far right and the Sunni far-far right in Saudi Arabia. This was the war between Osama bin Laden (the far-far right) and the Saudi ruling family (the far right). It is a war between those who think women shouldn’t drive and those who think they shouldn’t even leave the house. Bin Laden attacked us because we prop up his Saudi rivals — which we do to get their oil.

In Iraq, you have the pure Sunni- versus-Shiite struggle. And in Pakistan, you have the fundamentalist Sunnis versus everyone else: Shiites, Ahmadis and Sufis. You will notice that in each of these civil wars, barely a week goes by without one Muslim faction blowing up another faction’s mosque or gathering of innocents — like Tuesday’s bombing in Baghdad, at the opening of Ramadan, which killed 61 people.

In short: the key struggle with Islam is not inter-communal, and certainly not between Americans and Muslims. It is intra-communal and going on across the Muslim world. The reason the Iraq war was, is and will remain important is that it created the first chance for Arab Sunnis and Shiites to do something they have never done in modern history: surprise us and freely write their own social contract for how to live together and share power and resources. If they could do that, in the heart of the Arab world, and actually begin to ease the intra-communal struggle within Islam, it would be a huge example for others. It would mean that any Arab country could be a democracy and not have to be held together by an iron fist from above.

But it will be impossible without Iraqi Shiite and Sunni Mandelas ready to let the future bury the past. As one of Mandela’s guards, watching the new president engage with South African whites, asks in the movie, “How do you spend 30 years in a tiny cell and come out ready to forgive the people who put you there?” It takes a very special leader.

This is also why the issue of the mosque and community center near the site of 9/11 is a sideshow. The truly important question “is not can the different Muslim sects live with Americans in harmony, but can they live with each other in harmony,” said Stephen P. Cohen, an expert on interfaith relations and author of “Beyond America’s Grasp: a Century of Failed Diplomacy in the Middle East.”

Indeed, the big problem is not those Muslims building mosques in America, it is those Muslims blowing up mosques in the Middle East. And the answer to them is not an interfaith dialogue in America. It is an intrafaith dialogue — so sorely missing — in the Muslim world. Our surge in Iraq will never bear fruit without a political surge by Arabs and Muslims to heal intracommunal divides. It would be great if President Obama surprised everyone and gave another speech in Cairo — or Baghdad — saying that.

Fareed Zakaria: Right these days – Germany is booming – not China or the other developing counties. The US is falling behind compared  to both of them.

German Consumers did not over spend on credit cards like in the US.
Germany still has manufacturing going on – they did not switch to outsourcing like the US. The government encouraged and sustained manufacturing.
German manufacturers did not fire workers – they retained them for the return of better days by going to half time work.
Germany instituted reforms in such areas as pension systems, the labor market was freed – so their workers are less expensive but still have work

GERMANY – WITH THE IMPROVEMENT OF THE GLOBAL ECONOMY HAS REGAINED BY NOW ALL THE JOBS THAT WERE LOST NEVERTHELESS DURING THE RECESSION.

———————

China is now in second place in the global economy. In 2030 China will overtake the US.

Niall Ferguson wrote “High Financier” about Goldman Sachs and Ascent of Money.” Sees 14% growth in China.

Zachary Karabell spoke of “Super-fusion” of the US and China economies and looks at the US where it took 18 months to make grants for green business while it took China a plain government decision to achieve a similar goal.

Minxin Pei, a former Chinese dissident that goes back to Tiananmen Square, and works now with Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, said that most dictatorships misallocate resources but the Chines did better – this because they believe the government must show competence to have claim to power, but is behind in environmental protection and education.

Tina Hachigian, added – With a per capita income income one tenth of the US China chose instead to have to say more on intellectual property and trade.

Karabell thinks it is now beneficial to have China as the weaker party in Chimerica – but China wants more like we saw in its relations to Australia. China is dependent on investments from abroad and the World is doing better when China is doing well.

Ferguson thinks the marriage may be now on the rocks and perhaps beyond counselling.

Nina Hichigian did not think this will happen very fast – We work together on Terrorism, north Korea (though not as well lately, on CLIMATE CHANGE – if this will not happen we all are sunk.

Pei still did not forgive China and said they will be lucky to grow 7% for the next 10-15 years – this because workers will get higher wages. The low labor costs were the strength.

Niall Ferguson seems rather optimistic by saying that we will witness in China the fastest INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION and an economic story rather then an ideological radicalization. They have had it already and now he sees the evolution of a large middle class. THEY WANT HIGHER WAGES BECAUSE THEY WANT TO CONSUME. And here Pei added -  AND DO NOT THINK OF THE “Square.” That is as in Tienanmen Square.

Nina said that 40% of Americans think they are already the domineering power today (that is China), but if we make right domestic policy decisions in the US we could still be ahead.

——

But did she look at Washington lately? Is this Washington capable of making decisions or every tea cap holder will just stay in the way? Did anyone look at Germany? Is there anything to learn from them still, or the boat has left already and the US is just irretrievably behind?

—–

And Fareed’s reading recommendation for the week:

The Birth of Plenty: How the Prosperity of the Modern World was Created by William Bernstein.

Bernstein argues that from the birth of civilization until 1820 there was little change in the standard of living. And then all of sudden came the prosperous life.

And what brought about such a change? Science, innovation, communication and more.

Fareed says this is a fascinating look at how we got to where we are today, with lessons for how we can continue to be prosperous.

————————————-

Footnote: We read in the paper that France looking at Germany that is again doing well – says that because it fell deeper, Germany got up faster. Oh well! We would have expected better logic from a tall good looking French Finance Minister.

Imran Khan Niazi (born 25 November 1952) is a retired Pakistani cricketer who played international cricket for two decades in the late twentieth century and has been a politician since the mid-1990s. He is considered a National hero in Pakistan.

Currently, besides his political activism, Khan is also a charity worker and cricket commentator.

In April 1996, Khan founded and became the chairman of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (Movement for Justice), a small and marginal political party, of which he is the only member ever elected to Parliament.^[3] He represented Mianwali as a member of the National Assembly from November 2002 to October 2007.^[4] Khan, through worldwide fundraising, helped establish the Shaukat Khanum Memorial Cancer Hospital & Research Centre in 1996 and Mianwali’s Namal College in 2008.

He is an outspoken intellectual with Pakistan at his heart – if this is not an oxymoron.

The good looking Imran was educated at Aitchison College, the Cathedral School in Lahore, and the Royal Grammar School Worcester in England, where he excelled at cricket. In 1972, he enrolled to study Philosophy, Politics and Economics at Keble College, Oxford, where he graduated with a second-class degree in Politics and a third in Economics.^[8]

On 16 May 1995, Khan married English socialite Jemima Goldsmith, a {Jewish} convert to Islam, in a two-minute Islamic ceremony in Paris. A month later, on 21 June, they were married again in a civil ceremony at the Richmond register office in England, followed by a reception at the Goldsmiths’ house in Surrey.^[9] The marriage, described as “tough” by Khan,^[7] produced two sons, Sulaiman Isa (born 18 November 1996) and Kasim (born 10 April 1999).^[10] As an agreement of his marriage, Khan spent four months a year in England. On 22 June 2004, it was announced that the Khans had divorced because it was “difficult for Jemima to adapt to life in Pakistan”.^[11]

Khan now resides in Bani Gala, Islamabad, where he built a farmhouse with the money he gained from selling his London flat. He grows fruit trees, wheat, and keeps cows, while also maintaining a cricket ground for his two sons, who visit during their holidays.[7

He is Fareed Zakaria’s favorite Pakistani.

Today Imran said that it is when the flood waters recede we get to know the full extent of the disaster that is still growing these days.

People were left without food, shelter, the cotton crop for income, the cattle, – this is 20 million people completely destitute.

Pakistan has not come to terms how to deal with this. He went a couple of times to the camps and saw people fighting over the goods that were brought in. The government has to put the army to keep them from fighting.

You speak of Cathrina – but Bush did not go to visit his chateau and burnish the image of his son when the flooding went on!

There is no help money coming in and there is no leadership in Pakistan now.

Fareed asked: Islamic fundamentalists make inroads just because there was no government – is that true?

And the anwer was clear – The WORLD MUST STOP TO LOOK AT AN ISLAMIC COUNTRY JUST BECAUSE A RELIGIOUS PARTY DOS CHARITY WORK – FOR PAKISTAN THIS IS NOT AN ISSUE.

IF THIS CONTINUES FOR THREE MONTHS THE COUNTRY WILL IMPLODE WITH 20 MILLION PEOPLE NOT HAVING WHERE TO GO.

We feel that if the data here is accurate, Arab business is rather looking for new talent in the new world. We believe that most young recruits to businesses in North Africa and the Middle East are returning young talent and that this positions well these business companies for the changing global atmosphere. It is rather that then looking to hire on the cheap. The business slow down has just helped refresh the human capital of MENA (The Middle East – North Africa Arab region).

—————
 http://www.arabianbusiness.com/595422-me…

MENA firms hire new graduates to cut costs – poll

by

Elsa Baxter,  Sunday, 22 August 2010.

GRADUATES: 37.6 percent of people said their employers preferred to hire fresh graduates post recession. (Getty Images)

Almost 40 percent of Middle East and North African (MENA) employees said their company was more interested in hiring new university graduates since the global recession, according to the latest poll by Bayt.com.

The survey, which consulted 13,197 respondents from across the region, found that 37.6 percent of people said their employers preferred to hire fresh graduates, while 26.4 percent said they were less inclined to do so. A further 19.2 percent of respondents said things were unchanged.

More than half (51.7 percent) of participants said the number one motivation behind the hiring was financial because new graduates command lower salaries and fewer benefits, while 12.7 percent said it was because they would have more passion for the job.

A further 10.4 percent it was because new graduates would have more creativity, 8.4 percent said it was due to their fresh analytical thinking, and 5.1 percent cited better communication skills. {our math says this is 37.6% or that one out of 2,9 respondents was honest about the motives. The others belong to the commonly held  idea that age makes people wiser while we rather think that today ag makes most people more obsolete}

“The results of our most recent poll show that in times of economic strife employers are perceived as more likely to hire fresh graduates mostly due to the fact that they accept a lower salary and require fewer benefits,” said Amer Zureikat, vice president of sales, Bayt.com.

The US is pulling out its combat forces from Iraq, but the Sunday TV main topic was THE MOSQUE.  As always – the best conversation was on Fareed Zakaria’s CNN/GPS program.

His guest were Bret Stephens from The Wall Street Journal and Peter Beinart – Senior Political Writer at the blog The Daily Beast, Associate Professor of Journalism and Political Science at the City University of New York, and a Schwartz Senior Fellow at the New America Foundation – till 2006 he was with The New Republic and still lives in Washington DC.

Stephens said that the legalities are clear but the issue is if this Mosque at that location advances interface dialogue and the answer is NO!

Beinart said you cannot divorce the right for building a Mosque from the right to decide where to build it. What about military bases? Will you next say that because there is sensitivity to Americans killed in wars in Muslim countries you cannot have a Mosque on a military base?

Stephens asked – wait – what if the German Government decides to build a tolerance center across the street from a concentration camp – this is much more like the present case.

Zakaria said – that is about irrational sensitivity – do you call this bigotry?

Stephens answered that the rights are indisputable and Bret said that you cannot ask people in the right not to use the right – this is equal to taking away the right.

Zakaria concluded that we talk past each other so the discussion is over. And that is the true state of these matters today.

We hope that Zakaria realizes now that his returning a prize to the ADL of the Bnei Brith was – well – premature.

Also, as he said that the discussion is really not ended – we suggest he invites next time also Anne Barnard whose article in today’s New York Times he did mention.

Anne Barnard is now on the city desk of the paper, but she is not a newcomer to these issues as sh worked in the Middle East – in Israel, Palestine, Iraq and Egypt. She has seen sensitivities from very close – not your regular city desk person. We know Anne for many years – actually since she was a kid – and have met her in different locations as well. We continue here with her material and hope she continues to keep her sights on the developments we expect when Imam Raouf returns from his Middle East tour.

———-

Further comments about Beinart. His parents immigrated to the US from South Africa and work in Cambridge where he was born. His mother remarried theater personality Robert Brustein. Beinart is Jewish and belongs to a liberal synagogue in Washington.

Peter Beinart has written: “The Icarus Syndrome – A History of American Hubris,” HarperCollins, June 1, 2010, and
“The Good Fight: Why Liberals–and Only Liberals–Can Win the War on Terror and Make America Great Again,” HarperCollins, May 2006,

Beinart was a supporter of the 2003 U.S.-led invasion of Iraq.[7] and in a recent essay, he has argued that the tensions between liberalism and Zionism in the U.S. may tear the two historically-linked concepts apart.[8]

After leaving The New Republic, in 2007-2009, Beinart was a Senior Fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations.

———-

Further comments about Bret Stephens: He was born in 1973 and grew up in Mexico City. Stephens went to the University of Chicago and the London School of Economics.[2]

Stephens began his career at the Journal as an op-ed editor in New York and later worked as an editorial writer for the Wall Street Journal Europe in Brussels. In 2006 he took over the “Global View” column from George Melloan, who has retired.

Between 2002 and 2004 Stephens was editor-in-chief of the Jerusalem Post, a position he assumed at age 28 – the youngest person ever to hold that position. He is the winner of the 2008 Eric Breindel Award for Excellence in Opinion Journalism.
In 2005, Stephens was named a Young Global Leader by the World Economic Forum, where he was previously a media fellow. He is also a frequent contributor to Commentary magazine.[3]

———

Fareed Zakaria promised that on his program this emotional discussion will be rational – what he did not say was that he is in effect pitting against each other two well qualified Jews. We do not believe that THE MOSQUE – that is that particular Mosque – is only an issue for Jews. We indeed believe that his next panel will pull in other “suffering souls” as well.

————————————————–

Feisal Abdul Rauf’s Balancing Act in Mosque Furor – NYTimes.com

The full article by our friend Anne Barnard, as above, but as published front page The New York Times had the title:
Complicated Balancing Act for Imam in Mosque Furor – Complicated Balancing Act for Imam.
 http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/22/nyregi…

It includes The Imam’s history and his father’s history – both of them highly interesting people. While the father was an employee of the Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, and eventually led to the construction of the New York Islamic Center cum Mosque at the corner of East 96th Street and 3rd Avenue in Manhattan, Feisal became the Imam of the Sufi congregation downtown. Then he attempted also the building of a large Center cum Mosque.

William Sauro/The New York Times

Mr. Abdul Rauf’s father, Muhammad, in 1968. He ran the Islamic Center of New York.

————————-

Far away from New York, in Bend Oregon (by Western Communications, Inc.) retained the New York Times in print – name of the article – but our friend’s article was reshaped  as follows:
 http://bbedit.sx.atl.publicus.com/apps/p…

Complicated balancing act for imam in mosque furor.

By Anne Barnard / New York Times News Service

Published: August 22. 2010 4:00AM PST

Michael Appleton / New York Times News Service

Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf inside his mosque, housed in a building near the World Trade Center site in Lower Manhattan, in November. “We want to push back against the extremists,” the cleric says. Others worry about an anti-Muslim backlash.

For years, Feisal Abdul Rauf has encountered distrust as he tries to reconcile Islam with the West.

Muslims need to understand and soothe Americans who fear them; they should be conciliatory, not judgmental, toward the West.

That was Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf’s message, but not everyone in the Cairo lecture hall last February was buying it. As he talked of reconciliation between America and Middle Eastern Muslims — his voice soft, almost New Agey — some questions were so hostile that he felt the need to declare that he was not an American agent.

But one young Egyptian asked: Wasn’t the United States financing the speaking tour that had brought the imam to Cairo because his message conveniently echoed U.S. interests?

“I’m not an agent from any government, even if some of you may not believe it,” the imam replied. “I’m not. I’m a peacemaker.”

That talk, recorded on video six months ago, was part of what now might be called Abdul Rauf’s prior life, before he became the center of an uproar over his proposal for a Muslim community center two blocks from the World Trade Center site. He watched his father, an Egyptian Muslim scholar, pioneer interfaith dialogue in 1960s New York; led a mystical Sufi mosque in Lower Manhattan; and, after the Sept. 11 attacks, became a spokesman for the notion that being American and Muslim is no contradiction — and that a truly American brand of Islam could modernize and moderate the faith worldwide.

In recent weeks, Abdul Rauf has barely been heard from as a national political debate explodes over his dream project, including somewhere in its planned 15 stories near ground zero, a mosque. Opponents have called his project an act of insensitivity, even a monument to terror.

In his absence — he is now on another Middle East speaking tour sponsored by the U.S. State Department — a host of allegations have been floated: that he supports terrorism; that his father, who worked at the behest of the Egyptian government, was a militant; that his publicly expressed views mask stealth extremism. Some charges, the available record suggests, are unsupported. Some are simplifications of his ideas. In any case, calling him a jihadist appears even less credible than calling him a U.S. agent.

Growing up in America

Abdul Rauf, 61, grew up in multiple worlds. He was raised in a conservative religious home but arrived in America as a teenager in the turbulent 1960s; his father came to New York and later Washington to run growing Islamic centers. His parents were taken hostage not once, but twice, by American Muslim splinter groups. He attended Columbia University, where, during the Six-Day War between Israel and Arab states like Egypt, he talked daily with a Jewish classmate, each seeking to understand the other’s perspective.

He consistently denounces violence. Some of his views on the interplay between terrorism and American foreign policy — or his search for commonalities between Islamic law and this country’s Constitution — have proved jarring to some American ears, but still place him as pro-American within the Muslim world. He devotes himself to befriending Christians and Jews — so much, some Muslim Americans say, that he has lost touch with their own concerns.

“To stereotype him as an extremist is just nuts,” said the Very Rev. James Morton, the longtime dean of the Church of St. John the Divine, in Manhattan, who has known the family for decades.

Since 9/11, Abdul Rauf, like almost any Muslim leader with a public profile, has had to navigate the fraught path between those suspicious of Muslims and eager to brand them violent or disloyal and a Muslim constituency that believes itself more than ever in need of forceful leaders.

One critique of the imam, said Omid Safi, a professor of religious studies at the University of North Carolina, is that he has not been outspoken enough on issues “near and dear to many Muslims,” from Israel policy to treatment of Muslims after 9/11, “because of the need that he has had — whether taken upon himself or thrust upon him — to be the ‘American imam,’ to be the ‘New York imam,’ to be the ‘accommodationist imam.’ “

Akbar Ahmed, chairman of Islamic studies at American University, said Abdul Rauf’s holistic Sufi practices could make more-orthodox Muslims uncomfortable, and his focus on like-minded interfaith leaders made him underestimate the uproar over his plans.

“He hurtles in, to the dead-center eye of the storm simmering around Muslims in America, expecting it to be like at his mosque — we all love each other, we all think happy thoughts,” said Ahmed.

“Now he has set up, unwittingly, a symbol of this growing tension between America and Muslims: this mosque that Muslims see as a symbol of Islam under attack and the opponents as an insult to America,” he added. “So this mild-mannered guy is in the eye of a storm for which he’s not suited at all. He’s not a political leader of Muslims, yet he now somehow represents the Muslim community.”

Andrew Sinanoglou, who was married by Abdul Rauf last fall, said he was surprised the imam had become a contentious figure. His greatest knack, he said, was making disparate groups comfortable, as at the wedding bringing together Sinanoglou’s family, descended from Greek Christians thrown out of Asia Minor by Muslims, with his wife’s conservative Muslim father.

“He’s an excellent schmoozer,” Sinanoglou said of the imam.

Many different Islamic influences

Abdul Rauf was born in Kuwait. His father, Muhammad Abdul Rauf, was one of many graduates of Cairo’s Al-Azhar University, the foremost center of mainstream Sunni Muslim learning, whom Egypt sent abroad to staff universities and mosques, a government-approved effort unlikely to have tolerated a militant. He moved his family to England, studying at Cambridge and the University of London; then to Malaysia, where he eventually became the first rector of the International Islamic University of Malaysia.

As a boy, Abdul Rauf absorbed his father’s talks with religious scholars from around the world, learning to respect theological debate, said his wife, Daisy Khan. He is also steeped in Malaysian culture, whose ethnic diversity has influenced an Islam different from that of his parents’ homeland.

In 1965, he came to New York. His father ran the Islamic Center of New York; the family lived over its small mosque in a brownstone on West 72nd Street, which served mainly Arabs and African-American converts. Like his son, the older imam announced plans for a community center for a growing Muslim population — the mosque eventually built on East 96th Street. It was paid for by Muslim countries and controlled by Muslim U.N. diplomats — at the time a fairly noncontroversial proposition. Like his son, he joined interfaith groups, invited by James of St. John the Divine.

Hostage crisis

Unlike his son, he was conservative in gender relations; he asked his wife to not drive. But in 1977, he was heading the Islamic Center in Washington when they were taken hostage by a Muslim faction; it was his wife who challenged the gunmen on their lack of knowledge of Islam.

“My husband didn’t open his mouth, but I really gave it to them,” she told The New York Times then.

Meanwhile, Abdul Rauf studied physics at Columbia.

In his 20s, Abdul Rauf dabbled in teaching and real estate, married an American-born woman and had three children. Studying Islam and searching for his place in it, he was asked to lead a Sufi mosque, Masjid al-Farah. It was one of few with a female prayer leader, where women and men sit together at some rituals and some women do not cover their hair. And it was 12 blocks from the World Trade Center.

Divorced, he met his second wife, Khan, when she came to the mosque looking for a gentler Islam than the politicized version she rejected after Iran’s revolution. Theirs is an equal partnership, whether Abdul Rauf is shopping and cooking a hearty soup, she said, or running organizations that promote an American-influenced Islam.

A similar idea comes up in the Cairo video. Abdul Rauf, with Khan, unveiled as usual, beside him, tells a questioner not to worry so much about one issue of the moment — Switzerland’s ban on minarets — saying Islam has always adapted to and been influenced by places it spreads to. “Why not have a mosque that looks Swiss?” he joked. “Make a mosque that looks like Swiss cheese. Make a mosque that looks like a Rolex.”

In the 1990s, the couple became fixtures of the interfaith scene, even taking a cruise to Spain and Morocco with prominent rabbis and pastors.

Abdul Rauf also founded the Shariah Index Project — an effort to formally rate which governments best follow Islamic law. Critics see in it support for Taliban-style Shariah or imposing Islamic law in America.

Shariah, though, like Jewish law, has a spectrum of interpretations. The ratings, Kahn said, measure how well states uphold Shariah’s core principles like rights to life, dignity and education, not Taliban strong points. The imam has written that some Western states unwittingly apply Shariah better than self-styled Islamic states that kill wantonly, stone women and deny education — to him, violations of Shariah.

After 9/11, Abdul Rauf was all over the airwaves denouncing terrorism, urging Muslims to confront its presence among them, and saying that killing civilians violated Islam. He wrote a book, “What’s Right With Islam Is What’s Right With America,” asserting the congruence of American democracy and Islam.

That ample public record — interviews, writings, sermons — is now being examined by opponents of the downtown center.

Those opponents repeat often that Abdul Rauf, in one radio interview, refused to describe the Palestinian group that pioneered suicide bombings against Israel, Hamas, as terrorist. In the lengthy interview, Abdul Rauf clumsily tries to say that people around the globe define terrorism differently and labeling any group would sap his ability to build bridges. He also says: “Targeting civilians is wrong. It is a sin in our religion,” and, “I am a supporter of the state of Israel.”

“If I were an imam today I would be saying, ‘What am I supposed to do?’” said John Esposito, a professor of Islamic studies at Georgetown University. “‘Can an imam be critical of any aspect of U.S. foreign policy? Can I weigh in on things that others could weigh in on?’ Or is someone going to say, ‘He’s got to be a radical!’”

——————————————————————–

Could it be that the solution leads to a true CORDOBA HOUSE OF CULTURE AND INTER-RELIGIOUS UNDERSTANDING with all Cordoba three religions having footholds at the center – not  a Mosque.

In this case what if Rabbi Marc Schneier who started together with the East 96 Street Islamic Center’s Imams his good-will exchanges gets a foothold and offices there? The Battery Park Holocaust Museum could be linked, and the Archbishop of the Trinity Church of the neighborhood as well – that is with offices in the building. This would call for a joint board and joint ownership in the name of good intentions. It would be considered a step towards healing within the possible of the memory of 9/11/o1 within reach of the 10th memorial of the event. Clearly – this does not answer the call for a larger Mosque, neither will this be a place with Synagogue and church – we know that the institutions must be separate.

If separation is preferred, then a gesture of exchange of real estate for a different location would be appreciated.

——————————————————————

President Obama also went on TV today – breaking his vacation because of the media attacks on him branding him a Muslim.

Obama blamed this crazzy media culture when the main issue is the pulling out from Iraq but the focus is on “THE MOSQUE” – is this just an August diversion? By whom?

Michel Martin (an Emmy Award winning American journalist and correspondent for ABC News and National Public Radio. After ten years in print journalism, Martin has for the last 15 years become best known for her news broadcasting on national topics.), asks whom are we talking about as media? It is just the Conservative Pundits that keep on drumming? Or is there by now a symbiotic relationship between the right wing bloggers and the main-stream media? It does not make sense to pretend that there is not a concern with Islam. We heard on TV that Glen Beck said Lincoln Day has no meaning for him – so he calls for a rally at the mall on that day. Aha I said – if that is so – why do you expect more consideration from adherents of Islam – Americans or otherwise? Are Americans so dam by now that they cannot see that insensitivity breeds more insensitivity?

The infighting in the Israeli government prior to the restart of peace talks with the Palestinians, has produced an early interesting appointment for next Israeli Army Chief of Staff. The appointment was made by the Minister of Defence  Aharon Barack – a former, and most decorated, Chief himself,

Barack was the man that met President Obama rather then Foreign Minister Lieberman. Barack is ready for the upcoming negotiations while Lieberman is cold to these moves.

The training and past jobs that the February 2011 incoming new Chief brings with him include naval experience helpful with dealing with the Gaza strip, and ground forces experience that will be needed in dealing with all aspects of decision making. By not being directly versed with the Air Force, it can be concluded that Iran will not be the main objective as foreseen by Minister Barack. This probably pleases Washington but creates dissension in the Netanyahu Cabinet.

Rav Aluf (Lieutenant General) Yoav Gallant ( born November 1958 in Jaffa) was appointed today (August 22, 2010) to be the commander of the Israel Defense Forces Southern Command, and has been chosen to succeed Gabi Ashkenazi as the next Chief of General Staff.^[1]

Gallant received a B.A. in Business and Finance Management from the University of Haifa. He began his military career in 1977 as a naval commando in the unit called Flotilla 13, which he would later command^[2].

In the early 1980′s he worked as a lumberjack in Alaska^[3].

In the late 1990s Galant moved into land forces, commanding the Jenin Brigade of the West Bank Division, the 162nd Armored Division, and eventually attaining the rank of a major general while becoming the Military Secretary of the Prime Minister in 2002 and later commander of the Southern Command in 2005.

Today it was announced that he would become the IDF’s 20th Chief of Staff^[4]

Galant will become Israel’s 20th Chief of Staff, succeeding Lt.-Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi, whose term will end in February. Barak’s relationship with Ashkenazi has been rocky, and the relatively early appointment of Galant will not be comfortable for Ashkenazi.

Galant was chosen over four other candidates: Generals Benny Ganz, Gadi Eisencott, Gadi Shamni and Avi Mizrachi.

Several Israeli politicians have criticized the way in which Galant was chosen. MK Aryeh Eldad raised questions about the selection saying, “we won’t be able to fully trust the next Chief of Staff, if we don’t have confidence with the one who nominated him. If we don’t trust Ehud Barak, then we can’t trust the new Chief of Staff.” Eldad said Israel needs to conduct wider hearings on the candidates for the Chief of Staff.

This is written as last night I discovered new pits in the bus-network of the city.

The fact that nobody knows how you cross by bus the East River – that may be just a problem of information distribution.

The fact that many times the computerized card does charge twice when you transfer from bus-to-bus or subway-to-bus, may be a problem of intentional or just plain lack of maintenance of the charging machine.

The fact that lately buses were discontinued like cross-towns – M30 for example; routes shortened like M104 – what used to be a convenient “book reading way” to get from Columbia University to the UN, and now ends at Times Square; runs at larger intervals like the long line M15 – all this makes the taxi industry happy – we understand the political aspect and the reality of political life in New York City.

But what I discovered last night boggles the mind. In front of the Memorial Hospital and Research Center of Sloan Kattering Memorial Cancer Center – between East 67 and 68 Streets – last week a brand new bus shelter was established including the sign: “THIS IS NOT A BUS STOP – THE BUS STOP WAS MOVED ONE BLOCK SOUTH.” What? Why? Who Pays?

Now, the old stop was in front of the hospital for tens of years at the convenient location for the folks coming cross town, on East 68 Street from the West Side, with M66, catching the uptown M15, and those arriving from downtown and catching the cross-town M66 on East 67 Street. Moving it one block to the South, in front of a Church, close to East 66 Street makes no sense because M66 does not go through East 66 Street! True, there were no park meters in front of the Church either – so what?

Was this because the doctors at Sloan-Kattering needed the front available for the taxis that bring them to work?
The patients do not use that entrance. If the doctor’s lobby had to have its way, why build the new shelter in a place it was not wanted?

Is the Mayor ready to look at this little problem, and see that it is a very valid reason to investigate his own big problem with what is obvious deterioration of the Administration of his public transport system policy and management – specially when it is about the bus network? I brought the public transportation lagging policy up before – this with the Manhattan Borough President Mr. Scott Stringer. Is he ready to step in and fill the void?

Only extremely few journalists were left at the UN who really care to investigate the facts. The UN likes those that do not look under the rug – so they do not like us at all. Clearly, this makes our work harder, but we can still get information – and believe us – the stench comes  through the UN gates. Let us see:

As UN Denies Offer to Mediate for Cambodia, Dodges on Roma, Selective Answers.

UNITED NATIONS, August 20 — How does the UN choose which questions to answer, and to which publications? How should journalists know when to ask question about topics on which the UN rarely comments, like Guantanamo Bay, Chechnya, Tibet, Kashmir and many other Asian conflicts?

A week after Inner City Press asked the Spokesperson for Ban Ki-moon if he had received a letter from Cambodia asking Ban to mediate the country’s border dispute with Thailand, Deputy Spokesman Farhan Haq sent a response to another publication, then called its reporting inaccurate.

On August 12, Inner City Press asked

Inner City Press: Cambodia now says that they’ve sent a letter to the Secretary-General and the Security Council. I don’t know if it’s been received. And a Cambodian, the Prime Minister, has said that he’ll be asking the Secretary-General personally to somehow coordinate this border dispute that they’ve had for some time but that seems to be heating up, with Thailand saying that they’re going to fortify their border. Is it something that DPA [Department of Political Affairs] is watching? Have you gotten the letter and would the Secretary-General be willing to mediate?

Spokesperson Martin Nesirky: We’ve seen the reports. We have not received any request. And if requests are received, not just in this case, but in any case, from parties to a dispute or conflict, asking for mediation, then, obviously, the United Nations, the Secretary-General would look at that. But we have not received a request from one or either or both.

This was the last Inner City Press heard from the UN. Then on August 20 a publication in the region reported that “The deputy spokesperson for UN Secretary General, Farhan Haq, replied to an email from the Cambodian press on August 18 saying that, ‘The Secretary-General is willing to mediate situation when both sides request him to do so.’”

Inner City Press asked Haq about the statement, including why it was not sent out more broadly, including to Inner City Press which had asked the question. Video here, from Minute 15:10.

Haq first said that the report that Ban was “willing to mediate” was inaccurate. Haq said that all he sent out was that Ban “stands ready to help.” But where then did the press in the region get the quote?

How are journalists at the UN to guarantee that they receive the UN’s responses to questions they have previously asked, or have NOT asked because of the UN’s historic unwillingness to comment on the problems of the Permanent Five Security Council members, any one of which could veto a second term by Ban Ki-moon, such as Chechnya, Guantanamo Bay, Tibet or, as Inner City Press asked earlier in the briefing, France’s expulsion of the Roma to Romania. Video here, from Minute 13:51.

Haq said the UN is monitoring it and if it has anything to say, we’ll know.

—- {and regarding France and the Roma} —-

In front of the General Assembly on August 20, Inner City Press asked the French charge d’affairesl’affaire Roma, and was met with blank stares. Let us know if there is a meeting on that, was the answer. and a French spokesman about But there are rarely meetings at the UN on controversial acts by Permanent Five members of the Security Council.

They can block them in the Council, and the S-G- and his spokespeople don’t seem to like to ruffle P-5 feathers, with a second term on the line….

UN’s Ban cozy with Sarkozy, comment on expelled Roma not shown

If you ask, we try, Haq said more generally.

But what if you don’t ask because the UN never comments? How can a reporter go on record as wanting statements about peace and security, without going down the line of all possible questions?

Someday it does feel like you go down the line, Haq said. And still we try.

—-{then on India!} —

But why send out responses selectively, like Haq sent his Kashmir response to other three journalists, and gave the UN’s answer on the death of DSS staffer Louis Maxwell to a publication in Germany and not to Inner City Press, which had been asking about the case in the noon briefing in New York every day for a week? This, Haq did not answer.

UN’s Kashmir Email was Drafted by DPA from its “Morning Prayers,” Watered Down by Nambiar, Blamed on Haq.

UNITED NATIONS, August 5 — When the UN made a statement on Kashmir, then stepped away from it and blamed it on an Associate Spokesman, there was more than met the eye. Inner City Press has inquired and finds the following: the initial response on the violence in Kashmir was produced by the UN Department of Political Affairs, in what is called its “morning prayers” meeting, chaired by DPA chief Lynn Pascoe.

Then, even before the statement was released, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon’s chief of staff Vijay Nambiar, a former Indian diplomat and intelligence operative, edited the statement, “watering it down” as one senior UN official puts it.

After UN Associate Spokesman Farhan Haq emailed the statement to four journalists and it was published, the Indian Mission to the UN protested. They came to meet with the UN, Mr. Nambiar, for more than two hours. Apparently, Nambiar did not fully disclose his initial role in editing the statement.

Next, the UN Spokesman Martin Nesirky stepped away from the statement, emphasizing that Ban Ki-moon never said it, and it was mere “guidance from the Secretariat,” and claiming that it had been misinterpreted. How?

UN’s Nambiar and Pascoe, Kashmir statement and morning prayers not shown.

On August 4, Inner City Press asked Nesirky to think it through: if he could walk away from this statement attributable to the Office of the Spokesman for the Secretary General, how can any of his future statements be taken seriously? I have said all I am going to say, Nesirky replied. Okay…

Footnote: attendees that DPA’s “morning prayers” quote Pascoe, for example that “Hillary Clinton is going to Colombia, what does she think she can accomplish?”  While some attendees conclude from this that Pascoe is aligned with US Republicans who appointed him, others say it establishes his “street cred” as an international civil servants. But is this what HRC and Obama want?

—

From the UN’s August 3 noon briefing transcript:

Inner City Press: a controversy has arisen around a statement that Farhan Haq had put out, talking about Indian-occupied Kashmir and calling for restraint. And, basically, it says that the Indian Foreign Ministry or Ministry of External Affairs has taken issues with it, that your Office has clarified that the Secretary-General never made those comments. Have you seen that story, and what can you do to clarify the seeming discrepancy between the Indian Foreign Ministry and your Office?

Spokesperson Nesirky: The Spokesperson’s Office released to the media guidance which was prepared by the UN Secretariat, and that seems to have been taken out of context. This was not a statement of the Secretary-General.

Question: What was taken out of context? This was a formal statement.

Spokesperson: Let me repeat what I just said: the Spokesperson’s Office released to the media guidance which was prepared by the UN Secretariat, and it seems to have been taken out of context. This was not a statement of the Secretary-General. That’s what I have; I don’t have anything to add.

Question: But the statement said the Secretary-General calls for restraint, and is there concern about it?

Spokesperson: As I said, I don’t have anything to add to what I’ve just said.

–

From the UN’s August 4 noon briefing transcript:

Inner City Press: Some think that the way that it was answered yesterday — it’s hard for them to take; what weight should statements by the Spokesperson for the Secretary-General be given if they’re later characterized as mere guidance and the Secretary-General didn’t mean them. For your own purposes, how do we — is this a one-off, or does this somehow change; you get a statement today about Tanzania — is that a statement of the Secretary-General, or is it mere guidance, and from who — who gave the guidance on Kashmir?

Spokesperson Nesirky: You know very well what it said [on Tanzania]: it said “a statement attributable to the Spokesperson for the Secretary-General”, and that clearly is a statement. But I don’t have anything beyond what I’ve already said on this topic. Okay?

Pakistani TV Drama – Tanhaiyan 37 of 45  –   http://bit.ly/a78CQC

ramlahkhan says:

I can’t understand the whole thing, but it’s something like, “Respected lady, with your sudden and unexpected illness, we feel very sad and the whole world seems colorless. We request that you get well soon so we are delighted and thankful for your well being.

lol.. it was real good urdu

=============================

then there is the following:
 http://geoblog.in/usa-and-innocent-peopl…

picked up via a well camouflaged blogger - http://twitter.com/account/profile_image…

PLEASE SEE:  .eco

It is easy to sum up the situation in regard to Muslims being believed that they intend to lead a healing attempt while creating a furor that can only result in a new heating up of deep sentiments. If the intent was by some to build a Mosque at the place of victory over the infidel, but the Muslim majority was – or was not – part of that intent – is now irrelevant. The way out can be by moving the new Islamic Center to some place – “in eye contact” – across the water – Brooklyn, Staten Island, New Jersey – and dedicate it as originally stated  to a CORDOBA HOUSE – rather then the limping  Park 51 Project.

We want also to point at the clearly sluggish pace of donations to Pakistan as another outcome from this last stand taken by Muslims in America – and the threat hanging over America’s head that 100 million young Pakistani Muslims, helped by extremists at their moment of physical constraints, rather then by their own government, nor by the Western cultures, as nothing less then the evolution of Bin Laden because of his fight against the America propped up Saudi regime.

The reality is that internal disagreements in the Islamic world are being projected against US Administrations that support out of convenience the existing regimes in these Islamic countries, and the extremists stood up in efforts to oppose their own leaders, and only secondly, took upon themselves to fight the protectors of the hated regimes.

The US people are not supposed to understand all of that when faced with a 9/11 and are not to be stepped upon even in a case where the superficial right as well as the deep meaning of American Democracy is on their side. Clever Arab States will try – like the Obama Administration is trying – to build bridges rather then burrowing in the trenches of the small print. Go ahead and show magnanimity.

By the way, could little Kuwait that offered $5 million to Pakistan, without ever having been involved in the dismantling of that country, or the UAE at $1.5 million, tell the much larger Saudi Arabia, that shipped its own Jihadists to Pakistan being part of the internal fracas there, that according to UN listings offered now peanuts to Pakistan – could they do some more when compared with the US offer of $150 million. Actually – just remember those two planes of Bin Laden family being shipped out from a US under air embargo by the Bush family, those days immediately following 9/11. There are very good reasons for Americans to be mad and for Arabs to take the low road that we suggest can be in this case the real high road.

———————

From all that sea of articles in the press of today – I pick the following as it is the easiest – it is from aol:

NATION
Construction Workers Oppose Mosque Near Ground Zero

by Hugh Collins, Contributor to aol News.

NEW YORK (Aug. 20) — The proposed Islamic center near ground zero is facing stiff opposition from a group that will be vital if the plan is to be realized: the New York City building industry.

Construction worker Andy Sullivan has set up a “Hard Hat Pledge” on his website, calling on construction workers to vow not to do work on the Park51 community center and mosque, the New York Daily News said.

Diane Bondareff, MCT
Mosque opponent Andy Sullivan stands outside the site of the proposed mosque and Islamic center on Park Place near lower Manhattan’s ground zero on Thursday.

Sullivan is not alone. Several New York construction workers interviewed by AOL News declared their opposition to the project.

“It doesn’t make any sense to be there,” said Eduard Nika, a marble worker. “The mentality these people have, it’s not anything to do with religion.”

The planned mosque and community center two blocks from the site of the 9/11 terrorist attacks that killed 3,000 people has spiraled from a local zoning issue into a national political debate.

Public figures such as Sarah Palin and Newt Gingrich have blasted the plan, saying it is an insult to the families of the victims. The Anti-Defamation League, whose mission statement says it exists to fight “all forms of bigotry,” has said the center should be built at another location.

Others, such as Mayor Michael Bloomberg and President Barack Obama, have said that while they understand the strong resentment the project arouses, any effort to block the Islamic center would infringe on American values of freedom.

Handyman Frank Rivera, who said three of his relatives were in the World Trade Center at the time of the attack but survived, believes the project would be bad for New York City and an insult to the families of victims.

“It shouldn’t be there. It’s a slap in the face,” Rivera said.

Like Nika, he said he would sooner quit his job than work on the project.

But not everyone is opposed to the Islamic center. Mike Bakovic, who works in interior construction and painting, said he’d work on the project — even if he didn’t get paid.

“Muslim people have the freedom or religion, same as everyone else, the Jew, the Catholic, everyone else,” Bakovic said. “Islam is peaceable, like every other religion. “

Louis Coletti, president of the Building Trades Employers Association, told the Daily News that labor unions had not taken a “formal position” on the plan. Still, he said it was ” a very difficult dilemma for the contractors and organized labor force.”

Let us remember, back in 1945 in San Francisco, at the founding of the UN, Brazil was considered the leading State outside the five WWII powers that became the Veto wielding P5. Brazil has had its ups and downs since then – quite a few downs – but now it is on a high up – clearly strongest and leading nation on the Southern half of the Western hemisphere.

——————————

Expanding Alliances in the 21st Century: The U.S. and Brazil Unite to Address Matters of National Security

The recent signing of a new defense agreement between the Western hemisphere’s two dominant powers, Brazil and the United States, has brought about an important change to Latin America’s relations with the U.S. On April 12, 2010, Brazil took another step to enhance its geopolitical influence by signing the U.S.-Brazil Defense Cooperation Agreement (DCA). The treaty will allow U.S. military cooperation on a Brazilian base with the aim of defending the hemisphere from illicit drug trafficking and to protect both countries’ national interests. As Brazil continues to be a linchpin of economic stability in Latin America and is increasingly viewed as being on its way to becoming a global superpower, the Brazilian government is realizing that its power comes with a price. The cost of such a position carries a price tag in terms of its security costs. Brazil has achieved a sufficiently high profile that it must significantly increase its defense so as to protect its population.

An Uneasy Past

Military relations between the two nations date back to World War II when Brazil participated in the Allied effort by providing troops to fight in the 1942 Italian Campaign. The first defense treaty between the two nations was created in 1952, with the signing of the Brazilian Military Assistance Agreement. The accord enabled the provisional exchange of major weapons and training by the United States to its Brazilian counterpart, as the countries proceeded to form a tenuous alliance that governed their bilateral ties during the Cold War1. However, this alliance was short-lived and suffered multiple blowouts. After Brazil’s 1964 military coup, the U.S. continued to provide military aid in the form of training and supplies in order to support the pro-U.S. governments that were in power. Nonetheless, the U.S. began to limit its assistance during this time.

For full article click here

This analysis was prepared by COHA Research Associate Juan Pablo Pitarque

The UN SAYS – “NEW UN ONLINE TOOL DETECTS GLOBAL FIRE HOTSPOTS IN REAL TIME.”

The United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) today unveiled a new online portal to help countries monitor fires and protect property with data from satellites operated by the United States space agency NASA.

The new Global Fire Information Management System (GFIMS) shows fire hotspots almost in real time, with a lag of 2.5 hours between when satellites pass over fires to when information is available.

Developed with the University of Maryland, it also allows users to receive email alerts, allowing them to react quickly.

The launch of GFIMS comes at a time when the incidence of megafires is on the rise, according to Pieter van Lierop, an FAO Forestry Officer responsible for the agency’s activities in fire management.

“The control of these fires has become an issue of high importance, not only because of the increasing number of area burned but also because of the relations with issues of global interest, like climate change,” he stressed.

The unprecedented heat wave in Russia, which saw temperatures soar to 40 degrees Celsius and winds of up to 20 metres per second, have caused more than 14 million acres to burn. Forest fires have already claimed more than 50 lives this summer in Russia.

Globally, vegetation fires affect some 350 million hectares of land annually, with half or more of this area situated in Europe.

Until recently, people managing natural resources faced hurdles in obtaining timely and satellite-driven information on vegetation fires.

“The information was very fragmented because it was gathered from various sources making it unsuitable for precise analysis and identifying trends,” said John Latham, Senior Environment Office in FAO’s Natural Resources Management and Environment Department.

GFIMS, he said, delivers essential data to its users while fires are still burning.

————————

FAO launches NASA-developed fire monitoring system.	11-08-2010
Will help countries to detect fire hotspots in real time
GFIMS will help countries to detect fire hotspots in near real time. 11 August 2010, Rome – FAO today has launched a new online portal on fire information and real time monitoring to help countries to control fire effectively and protect property and natural resources. The new Global Fire Information Management System (GFIMS) detects fire hotspots from satellites operated by the U.S. National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). Developed in collaboration with the University of Maryland, GFIMS has an online mapping interface for displaying fire hotspots in “near real” time meaning that there is a lag of approximately 2.5 hours between satellite overpass and the data being available. The new system also allows users to receive email alerts on specific areas of interest, enabling subscribers to react quickly. “The GFIMS has been launched at a time when the incidence of megafires tends to increase,” said Pieter van Lierop, FAO Forestry Officer, who is responsible for the agency’s activities in fire management. “The control of these fires has become an issue of high importance, not only because of the increasing number of casualties and the huge amounts of area burned but also because of the relations with issues of global interest, like climate change.” In Russia alone this year due to the unprecedented heat wave with temperatures soaring to up to 40ºC and winds of up to 20 metres per second the total area burned has reached more than 14 million hectares, according to the data provided by the Sukachev Institute for Forests, based in Krasnoyarsk. Forest fires in Russia have already killed more than 50 people this summer. Globally, vegetation fires affect an estimated 350 million ha of land each year- about half or more of this area is burnt in Africa. In the Mediterranean, between 700 000 and one million hectares are damaged by vegetation fires every year. Easy to use Until recently, natural resource managers have faced considerable challenges in obtaining timely satellite-derived information on vegetation fires. “The information was very fragmented because it was gathered from various sources making it unsuitable for precise analysis and identifying trends,” – said John Latham, FAO Senior Environment Officer in the Natural Resources Management and Environment Department. – “GFIMS is an integrated fire information system which delivers the essential data to its users while the fires are still burning.” GFIMS allows users to download fire information in minimal file sizes and in easy-to-use formats, including text files, ESRI shapefiles, Web Map Services, Google Earth/KML files, and a plug-in for NASA World Wind. “GFIMS has also provoked strong research interest,” added Latham. “Linking the system to land cover shows us what is burning. GFIMS now provides analysis on trends of prevalence of fire by year and month, and will include information on the size of burnt area by land cover type in the future. It will result in improving analytical data and timely response.” The system could be used by forest managers and fire fighters, as well as agencies involved in agricultural and natural resources monitoring. The subscription is free of charge. The system only requires a functioning email address. Initially GFIMS has been launched in three languages – English, French and Spanish. The monitoring system is hosted at the FAO’s Natural Resources Management and Environment Department. —————————– Image of smoke over Western Russia taken from NASA’s Terra satellite. Contact Irina Utkina Media Relations (Rome) (+39) 06 570 52542 irina.utkina@fao.org —————————–  http://rapidfire.sci.gsfc.nasa.gov/ Global 10-day fire maps are generated using the MODIS Rapid Response fire locations to represent the current fire activity across the world. + Read more + Fire location data Mission MODIS Image of the Day The MODIS Rapid Response System was developed to provide daily satellite images of the Earth’s landmasses in near real time. True-color, photo-like imagery and false-color imagery are available within a few hours of being collected, making the system a valuable resource for organizations like the U.S. Forest Service and the international fire monitoring community, who use the images to track fires; the United States Department of Agriculture Foreign Agricultural Service, who monitors crops and growing conditions; and the United States Environmental Protection Agency and the United States Air Force Weather Agency, who track dust and ash in the atmosphere. The science community also uses the system in projects like the Aerosol Robotic Network (AERONET), which studies particles like smoke, pollution, or dust in the atmosphere. More information about science and application partners, including links, is provided on our applications page. Captioned interpreted images for educators, the media, and the public are available through the Earth Observatory. The system is freely available to everyone–scientists, operational users, educators, and the general public. Please see our Usage Guidelines. The Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) flies onboard NASA’s Aqua and Terra satellites as part of the NASA-centered international Earth Observing System. Both satellites orbit the Earth from pole to pole, seeing most of the globe every day. Onboard Terra, MODIS sees the Earth during the morning, while Aqua MODIS orbits the Earth in the afternoon. : Tropical Storm Dianmu (05W) approaching Korea Near-Real-Time MODIS Data MODIS level 2 clouds, aerosols, snow, sea ice, fire, land surface temperature, and land surface reflectance products are available within 2.5 hours of observation at LANCE-MODIS.

Aid only trickles to Pakistan’s monsoon disaster.

August 18, 2010

Islamabad, Pakistan (CNN) — Pakistan is reeling from a natural disaster affecting 20 million people but relief groups say donors have been painfully slow in helping.

When a magnitude 7.0 earthquake hit Haiti in January, donors responded with $13 billion in aid. Within 24 hours Hollywood mega-stars like George Clooney, Madonna, Tom Cruise and Beyonce had signed up for a telethon to raise money for Haiti’s quake victims.

By contrast nearly three weeks after flood waters inundated one-fifth of Pakistan, the United Nations has collected roughly half of the $460 million it has called for to meet the immediate needs of 20 million flood victims.

This week Oscar winner and U.N. goodwill ambassador Angelina Jolie made a high-profile plea to ask the international community to give more aid to Pakistan.

Pakistan’s flood-affected areas

Pakistan flood: Before and after

“Hopefully there are a lot of people ready to give money,” Jolie told British television network ITN.

Aid workers and analysts say there are several possibilities why governments, individual donors and celebrities are not giving to Pakistan the way they’ve done with other disasters. None, they add, is a good excuse.

The relatively low death toll — roughly 1,500 killed — may have created the impression that Pakistan’s floods are not as severe as the Haiti quake and the Indian Ocean Tsunami where tens of thousands were instantly killed.

U.N. officials say the death toll in Pakistan’s floods belies the desperate and often life-threatening conditions of the 20 million victims. Many of them have lost their homes, their belongings and their sources of income.

Analysts say governments may also be suffering from “donor fatigue” with Pakistan. For years now Pakistan has been on a seemingly constant round of donor needs — money to revive its feeble economy, fight the Taliban, recover from the 2005 Kashmir earthquake, the 2009 refugee crisis and now these floods.

“A donor never gets fatigued,” Islamabad-based political analyst Mosharraf Zaidi told CNN.

“A donor, just as an idea, is not about ‘I’m fresh so I’ll give.’ You don’t give because you’re fresh. You give because of humanity.”

There’s also the perception that Pakistan is run by corrupt politicians and the aid won’t get to those who need it.

This week Pakistani Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani insisted all aid would be transparent. Aid professionals say if you don’t trust the Pakistani government, then give to an international aid group you do trust.

“There are so many ways people can give that doesn’t have to be rooted in the government if that was a concern,” said OXFAM’s country director in Pakistan, Neva Khan.

Aid groups and analysts say the worst excuse not to give is the perception among many in the west that Pakistan is just not a good place, a country full of militants. It’s an image reinforced by the media’s obsession with extremism in Pakistan, says Mosharraf Zaidi.

“I think that coverage is fundamentally one of great reasons why it’s been hard for people to reach into their wallet.”

The cooling global economy may also have governments and individuals reluctant to give but analysts say the consequences of not giving to Pakistan could be costly.

In the short run people will go hungry, suffer from disease, and lose their fight to survive. In the long run a nation that’s critical in the fight against extremism may face a political crisis that could further destabilize the region.

————————

Except for Kuwait  and the UAE – the Islamic States are not on the donor list – Why? Is this not Ramadan time – if nothing else?

Seemingly, it is all coming from the US, UK, EU, Japan, Australia, Denmark, Switzerland. We  find China at less the $2 million – and we learned that Pakistan refused $5 million from India. At the pledging we learned that Georgia is contributing $1oo,ooo and there are small amounts from around the world.

All of the above seems strange but clear to us. It is the US that fights to keep Pakistan in one piece as it did in Iraq. Can Pakistan hold when the real enemy is climate change?

These tough days for the US economy – a stand out – New Hampshire Job Growth in Recession.

• New Hampshire outpaced every other state except Kentucky in job growth over the last year, according to information released by the U.S. Department of Labor.
• According to preliminary figures, the Granite State experienced job growth of

1.43 % between June 2009 and June 2010, which resulted new 8,900 jobs.

———————————

From the New Hampshire Overview Prepared by:

Michael Bergeron, NH Business Development ManagerNew Hampshire Division of Economic Development, August 9, 2010603-271-2591 mbergeron@dred.state.nh.us

for:

———————————-

•“The magic of New Hampshire: Big enoughto get things done, small enough to reallystand out” Dean Kaman— DEKA R & D

Dean Kamen’s DEKA—Manchester, New Hampshire.

{ We wrote about the visit at his place in Manchester when we reviewed FIRST and Senator Shaheen’s visit there.
 http://www.sustainabilitank.info/categor… }

New Hampshire cuts through state government red tape so that businesses don’t have to spend time fighting a slow bureaucracy.

The contention of New Hampshire business is – Our office provides:

• Excellent customer service
• Facilitate state permits
• Help when needed but otherwise, stays out of your way

So, What makes New Hampshire
different than other states?

New Hampshire’s state motto:

LIVE FREE OR DIE

New Hampshire

• Control state spending
• Lower tax burden
• Individual freedom
• Individual responsibility
• Success based on merit
• Land ownership rights
• Right to bear arms for selfdefense
• Citizens Legislature

————-

They contend that there are – Two different fundamental government approaches:

1. Give us more of your money and if you fall into a certain class and/or location, we may reimburse or credit you for a period of time, and then we will impose a tax on you so we can offer credits and grants to someone else.

or -

2. You keep more of you money and we keep taxes lower—but that means you also don’t receive a long list of special credits, exemptions, and subsidies—this is what New Hampshire does.

——————————————————————————–

Foundational differences:

New Hampshire has a Citizens’ legislature

New Hampshire does not support professional politicians

New Hampshire has 400 Representatives and 24 Senators all of whom get only $100 per year.

*No broad base personal income tax *No sales tax *No use tax *No inventory tax *No capital gains tax *No professional service tax *Corp tax: 8.5% of net business income

State of New Hampshire Net Income
Fiscal Year 2008 $1.247 Billion

New Hampshire Tax Details – 8.5% of net business income.

Business Profits Tax:

• • 1.The tax is imposed at the rate of 8.5% on the taxablebusiness profits of every business organization (RSA Sec.77-A:2).
  • Business Enterprise Tax
• 2. A business enterprise tax is imposed at the rate of 0.75%of the taxable enterprise value tax base of every businessenterprise (RSA Sec. 77-E:2). This is a dollar for dollar credit against the business profits tax.
• “Enterprise value tax base” means the sum of all compensation paid or accrued, interest paid or accrued, and dividends paid by the business enterprise, before special adjustments or apportionment (RSA Sec. 77-E:1).

————————————————————-

THEY OFFER AN -

•Economic Revitalization Tax Credit

$200,000 cap over 5 years, 40K per year cap

•R & D Tax Credit

$50,000 cap each year, 5 year maximum

•Job Training Program

50/50 cash match, customized training, no cap

New Hampshire ERZ: Economic Revitalization Zone

———————————————————–

What is the amount of the tax credit?

*$40,000 cap per year,

* Capped at $200,000 over five years, with carry over up to 10 years.

*Credit against Business Profits or
Enterprise Tax (BPT or BET).

R & D Tax Credit

• 10% of the business organization’s qualified manufacturing research and development expenditures (salaries related to new research) up $50,000 tax credit per year.

State of New Hampshire
Business Energy Efficiency

Audit Program

• No cost energy efficiency assessment & comprehensive energy audit program available through the NH Business Resource Center.
• All business sectors eligible (commercial, retail, hospitality, healthcare, arts, etc) -special emphasis on manufacturing.
• Eligible businesses must agree to try to implement at least some of the suggested measures if at all possible.
• Help with exploring various financing options.

————————————————————–

NH Job Training Grant Program

*

Customized group training

*

Cash grant–up to 50/50 match with state

*

No cap

• Training can be done at the company or other location.

Example of national rankings

New Hampshire:

6th highest per capita income in the U.S.-U.S. Census 09 “Most Livable State” in U.S., Morgan Quitno 2003-2008 (4^th in 2010) “4nd Healthiest State”, United Health Foundation 09 3^nd Lowest crime rate in U.S., Morgan Quitno 09

New Hampshire is the Most Business Friendly State in the Northeast

A new paper released by the Canadian International Council asserts that while Canada may need to wait for the United States before deciding on a carbon pricing system, that should not stop it from exploring other initiatives to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Climate Change and Foreign Policy in Canada: Intersection and Influence, written by John Drexhage and Deborah Murphy of the International Institute for Sustainable Development’s climate change and energy program, argues that the Copenhagen Accord has the potential to develop a solid foundation and framework to help countries begin to respond effectively to climate change.

The Canadian government must determine what it wants in terms of a climate and energy regulatory regime; work with the provinces and stakeholders to identify the best way of going forward in Canada; and ensure that this plan would complement US actions and legislation.

The authors recommend the following actions to strengthen Canadian climate change policy:

• A First Ministers’ Meeting to address Canadian energy and climate change policy, and Canada’s profile in the North American energy picture.

• The federal government should develop a credible and comprehensive plan that lays out how Canada intends to meet its target of a 17-percent emissions reduction below 2005 levels by 2020.

• Canada’s $400-million contribution under the Copenhagen Accord should create opportunities for bilateral project assistance, including “signature” projects that can be identified with Canada and led by Canadians.

Climate Change and Foreign Policy in Canada: Intersection and Influence can be accessed online at http://www.onlinecic.org/ .