i have no respect for them,hope they all rot in hell.

---

Is that where your family is imbecile

Nemesis,
According to Dimitri, you have released the evils upon the material world. Onto other matters...I think it's very difficult to predict correlations within the political imagery which is broadcast on the media and the governmental hand which frequently manipulates it. I respect the fact that you detect political activity upon examining the consistency (or lack of) in relation to previous broadcasts. I'm not certain of the political motivation involved, but I know that the United States uses the traditional PR tactic of manipulating the imagery of foreign leaders for whom it wishes to ally or oppose. This could prove to be one such instance where the US and UK both are attempting to portray a harmless Putin. Regardless of this, I still believe that the collective consciousness of the country continues to view Russia as an enemy. Perhaps the media is countering these collective notions by stepping back?

according to Dimitri, Kim is not honest enough to be respected..by Dimitri.

Recently Murad Hoffman, former German ambassador to Morocco and now a Muslim reiterated the theme put forward by Bernard Shaw in early 20th century.


Read What George Bernard Shaw Said About
Prophet Muhammad

---

"“ I have always held the religion of Muhammad in high estimation because of its wonderful vitality. It is the only religion which appears to me to possess that assimilating capability to the changing phases of existence which can make itself appeal to everyone. I have prophesied about the faith of Muhammad that it would be acceptable to the Europe of today. The medieval ecclesiastics either through ignorance or bigotry painted Islam in the darkest colours. They were, in fact, trained to hate the man Muhammad and his religion. To them, Muhammad was antichrist. I have studied him-the wonderful man, and in my opinion, far from being an anti-Christ, he must be called the saviour of humanity of humanity. I believe that if a man like him were to assume dictatorship of the modern world, he would succeed in solving its problems in a way that would bring it the much needed peace and nineteenth century that honest thinkers like Carlyle, Gibbon and Goethe perceived intrinsic worth in the religion of Muhammad – already, even, at the present time many of our people have gone to his faith, and Islamistan of Europe may be said to have begun.” "

---

George Bernard Shaw (1856-1950) was a playwright, essayist, political activist, lecturer, novelist, philosopher, revolutionary evolutionist, and the most prolific letter writer in literary history. His plays include Pygmalion, Caesar and Cleopatra, Arms and the Man, Man and Superman, Candida, Heartbreak House, Major Barbara, and Back to Methuselah.

yawn

Putin Courts Select Members of G-8
2230 GMT, 000411

Russian President-elect Vladimir Putin, setting out for London on April 16, plans to engage in several high-level international meetings. After meeting with British Prime Minister Tony Blair, Putin plans to meet with new Japanese Prime Minister Yoshiro Mori in St. Petersburg, and the Kremlin staff has already begun plans for a summit in Berlin. The strategy linking these meetings is a plan to tackle both short-term economic obstacles and long-term strategic issues by confronting several key states individually, prior to the July Group of Eight (G-8) summit in Okinawa.

Beyond Russia’s immediate, urgent need for foreign investment lies a long-term Russian strategy to create a multi-polar world. Putin, by meeting individually with the leaders of these states, plans to take advantage of the weaknesses of Western alliances such as NATO and the European Union (EU).

Putin is turning to Britain for new investment in Russia. As a representative of the EU and a close partner with the United States and Canada, Britain has the power to set a precedent if it becomes the first Western state to entrust its money in Russia since the power shift in the Kremlin. Currently, the British investment in Russia amounts to only about $3.5 billion, according to Interfax. After Blair and Putin’s last meeting in March, they announced a proposal that would bring another $2 billion into Russia from 31 British companies.

Russia is turning to Japan as the nearest source of hard currency, as well as the host of the G-8 meeting. Japan’s primary strategic task is to secure more reliable – and local – energy supplies, and Russia’s wealth of gas and oil can meet that need in exchange for cash. Second, Japan has the primary responsibility of agenda setting for the G-8 summit, and a relationship between Russia’s new president and Japan’s new prime minister could lead to an agenda which heavily reflects Moscow’s interests.

A meeting with German leaders in Berlin will give Putin the chance to lobby Germany for debt write-off. Germany, as a member of the Paris Club, is among 19 states that lend money directly to other governments, and Berlin – as the single largest creditor – stands to lose the most to a Russian default. Thus, Germany has been the most reluctant to consider restructuring Russia’s debt. However, several Paris Club countries have already independently agreed to write-off Russian debt, and Putin seems to be betting that a one-on-one meeting with German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder may soften the official Berlin line.

Putin can point out that if the entire Western world turns against Moscow, Russia will be forced into a hostile position; states like Britain, Germany and Japan could get caught in the middle of a new confrontation between Russia and the United States. Germany and the United Kingdom, the countries most independent of NATO and the EU, are in the best position to be swayed by Russia’s advances. Germany is the most reluctant member of NATO, as of late, having only the minimum amount of internal support for the bombing campaign in Kosovo. Britain rarely prioritizes EU initiatives above its domestic agenda, for instance London does not plan to adopt the Euro. If Putin can use a relationship with Germany and Britain to tug a little more at the tenuous bonds connecting NATO and the EU, he will not only earn renewed economic partners for Russia, but he will prevent the Western alliances from maturing into viable world powers.

Putin’s plan will first be tested at the G-8 summit. The finance ministers from all of the G-8 states except Russia are due to meet April 15 to consider placing tougher requirements on Russia to receive financial aid. In the time between those talks and the actual G-8 meeting in July, Putin will try to pull Japan, Britain and probably Germany away from the group, prove Russia worthy of investment and try to convince them to avoid approving confrontational sanctions against Moscow. Through these three, Putin may also be able to influence the United States, with whom each has strong ties.

Japan, which has virtually begged for Russian attention in the past weeks, is sure to support Putin. Britain, already considering heightened investment in Russia, will try to take the investment opportunity while appearing to be tough on Putin about the Chechen war, a favorite crusade of the Western powers. Germany, however, is seriously challenged to forget about Russian debt and will need more than one diplomatic visit to be won over. Overall, Putin’s plan to play up the fractures within Western organizations will probably work well enough to give Russia some breathing room.
What do you guys think of that?

http://www.stratfor.com/SERVICES/giu2000/040700.ASP

http://www.stratfor.com/world/Commentaries/0003020245.htm Follow up to German positions in regard to Russia.

List of articles in archives---- http://www.stratfor.com/SERVICES/GIU/REGION/EUROPE/index.asp

---

Good source ,they e-mail stories .Free subscription.

European Security Futures
24 March 2000

Summary

All mainstream German political parties except one favor significant cuts in the size of the German Armed Forces. Even the conservative Christian Democrats, in a position paper released March 21 on the future of the German Armed Forces, favors cutting its overall size. Reduced German military effectiveness will have significant implications for the future of NATO, its ability to defend new and potential members in the east, as well as the proposed European Defense and Security Identity.

Analysis

Fears that a resurgent Germany will become a dominant military force in Europe are misplaced. It is more likely Germany’s military will shrink relative to its population and GDP. A position paper on the future of the German Armed Forces, the Bundeswehr, authored by the conservative Christian Democrats (CDU), favored cutting the overall size of the force to 300,000 from its current level of almost 340,000. Support for the German military continues to wane among the German population as cuts in social spending are matched – or even exceeded – by cuts in military spending.

Germany is now set on a course where its defensively organized forces will rapidly lose military effectiveness and the capability for forward deployments. This will have serious implications for both NATO and any planned European Defense and Security Identity (EDSI). Most of all, it will complicate the security picture for Germany’s eastern neighbors – particularly Poland and the Baltics – which are counting on the ability of the Bundeswehr to defend them from potential Russian threats.

Germany’s politicians are having a tough time convincing voters to continue spending billions to modernize the German military while they make cuts in social benefits. The CDU leadership’s proposal favoring military reduction reflects this popular sentiment. Now, all mainstream German political parties except the Christian Social Union (CSU) favor significant cuts in the size of the Bundeswehr. The Greens’ recommendation is the most severe, calling for German armed forces of between 200,000 and 240,000 and an end to compulsory military service.

Since the end of the Cold War, it has become extremely difficult for Germany to justify defense outlays against obvious Russian weakness. Instead, Germans continued to emphasize commercial opportunities in Russia and the rest of Eastern Europe. This policy was even more eagerly embraced with the decreased Russian threat after the fall of the Berlin Wall.

To reassure the Russians and other neighbors after German reunification, German armed forces were cut to 350,000. In 1992, France – with two-thirds of Germany’s GDP – surpassed Germany in defense spending. In 1999, France spent $15.8 billion more than Germany on its military.

The Social Democrat (SPD) and Green government that came into power in 1998 continued to focus on Germany’s trade relations with the East. The Greens, many of whom led 1980s anti-NATO protests, are pacifist in nature and have always opposed the military. And while the SPD leadership is generally more hawkish, strong pacifist elements exist within the party ranks.

Current government plans call for a reduction in defense spending from its 1999 level of $23.5 billion to $21.5 billion by 2003. Even before this reduction, Germany spends – as a percentage of GDP – less on its military than Hungary, Poland or the Czech Republic. While the opposition CDU proposal does envision higher defense spending – at $24.8 billion – than current government levels, it is still significantly lower than Germany’s 1998 defense spending of $28.8 billion and half of what Germany spent as recently at 1992.

U.S. Secretary of Defense William Cohen, in January 2000, strongly criticized Germany for reducing its military forces. He said Germany set a bad example for new NATO members. In response, German Defense Minister Rudolf Scharping said it was difficult to spare defense spending while Germany’s government was cutting programs across the board. In Germany, the Finance Ministry and not the Defense Ministry is dictating defense outlays – cuts that Scharping has been powerless to resist.

But Germany’s eastern neighbors – particularly new NATO member Poland and NATO aspirants in the Baltic states – are looking to Germany to provide much of their defense capability. The loss of which leaves these countries in an uncomfortable position vis-à-vis the Russians. An improperly equipped 225,000-man German armed force will be hard-pressed to face a resurgent Russian threat – even if the political will could be summoned to forward-deploy German forces.

Poland and the Baltic states are left with two uncomfortable options: a rapid military build-up or a moderation of their policies toward Russia. Increasing their military forces is economically unviable and will certainly antagonize the Russians. A more conciliatory stance toward Russia will be needed until either Germany re-evaluates its military situation – a long-term hope – or it receives a major commitment from the United States – an unlikely event.

Countries hoping that Germany will take a military leadership role, particularly in Eastern Europe, will be disappointed. Instead, Germany will continue to pursue its policy of conciliation with Russia and will resist moves within Europe that may antagonize Moscow. In addition, Germany will have trouble meeting its obligations to any new European Security Force, whose leadership will then fall to the French or the British. While the French will be attracted to a militarily weak Germany, the additional military burden being placed on their own armed forces could be severe and this – more than any political considerations – could spell real trouble for the future of EDSI.
[Sign up to receive free issues by e-mail...]

SOUNDS LIKE LITTLE CRACKS IN THE ARMOR???????

Russia and Yugoslavia Prepare to Test NATO
4 January 2000

SUMMARY

Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic is once again reviving nationalism in order to divert attention away from Yugoslavia’s domestic woes. This time the focus is on the continuing problems that NATO faces in maintaining order in Kosovo. It appears that Russia and Yugoslavia are teaming up to put NATO in an impossible corner. They plan to make NATO live by the very agreement it forced on Yugoslavia at the end of last year’s war, which would allow Yugoslav troops to return to Kosovo – causing immediate chaos from Kosovar Albanians. Or, they plan to make NATO violate the agreement by refusing Yugoslavia's return, thus painting NATO and its members as hypocrites when they speak of the international rule of law.


ANALYSIS

Yugoslavia’s official Tanjug news agency announced Dec. 28 that Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic had promoted a number of officers, raising some to the rank of general, reshuffled a number of senior commands and decorated military units and individuals. The announcement came just four days after Yugoslavia's parliament adopted its 2000 budget. The parliament had allocated 73 percent of the $1.94 billion total to finance the Yugoslav army. A week earlier, the Serbian assembly had adopted the republic's 2000 budget of $2.49 billion, of which nearly 25 percent was earmarked for the Milosevic-controlled police force.

Two days after the announcement about the military, on Dec. 30, Milosevic said that Yugoslavia was determined to hold onto Kosovo. In an interview with the Politka daily, as reported by Tanjug, Milosevic said that the presence of NATO troops in the Serbian province was "temporary." Reviving his nationalistic rhetoric, he said, "We must put up with it and show great patience.” He added, "no one can take Kosovo from us."

Milosevic's comments reiterated those of Gen. Nebojsa Pavkovic, head of Yugoslavia's Third Army, who said two weeks ago that his troops would go back into Kosovo, probably in June, as authorized by a NATO agreement with Yugoslavia reached at the conclusion of last year’s war.

Playing into Milosevic’s hand, U.S. Gen. Wesley Clark, supreme commander of NATO forces in Europe, immediately ruled out any return of the Yugoslav army to Kosovo, in an interview released the same day. Clark told the Montenegrin weekly newspaper Monitor that "the Yugoslav Army will not be authorized to return to Kosovo." He said, "If by chance it tries, it will be prevented."

Nevertheless, under the June 9, 1999, military technical agreement between NATO and Belgrade, and the subsequent Annex 2 of U.N. resolution 1244, a small, lightly armed contingent of Yugoslav soldiers and police is authorized to return to Kosovo to guard cultural sites and Yugoslavia's borders as well as aid in the clearing of minefields.

In making these aggressive statements, Milosevic is invoking a familiar strategy of generating nationalistic fervor to detract attention from serious domestic problems, such as the reconstruction of critical infrastructure and the revitalization of the economy. Milosevic has consistently attempted to provoke the United States into a diplomatic confrontation in order to maintain his position of power. To this point, he has succeeded in turning the sanctions, the possible secession of Montenegro and the continued violence in Kosovo to his favor. When a crisis isn’t pressing, Milosevic raises the public’s awareness of the NATO intervention by holding awards ceremonies and having the Yugoslav army hold special operations and army training exercises, some near the Kosovo border.

However, this new round of confrontation with the West is different due to the re-emergence of Russia in Yugoslav diplomacy. On Dec. 22, four days after Duma elections, in a key victory for interim Russian President Vladimir Putin and the nationalist centrist movement in Russia, Russian policy toward Kosovo began to shift.

ITAR-Tass news agency reported Dec 22 that the head of the Defense Ministry's Main Directorate for International Military Cooperation, Col. Gen. Leonid Ivashov, said that Russia “will revise the forms and degree of its participation,” if NATO does not comply with its obligations. However, he added, "Russia is not considering any ways of its withdrawal and exit from Kosovo.”

NATO's agreement in Kosovo was to let the Yugoslav army eventually return. Ivashov made it clear that if NATO doesn’t live up to its agreement, Russia would not withdraw troops but may "stop cooperating.”

Not coincidentally, the next day Russian Defense Minister Igor Sergeyev, at the head of a delegation of Russian officers, arrived in Belgrade for talks with Milosevic focused on bilateral relations, Kosovo and other issues affecting southeastern Europe. At a military reception in Beli Dvor following talks, Milosevic decorated prominent Russian officers for their contribution to the development of relations between the armed forces of the two countries. Milosevic also awarded Sergeyev and Gen. Anatoly Kvashnin the Yugoslav Star Order of the First Degree.

On Dec. 24, Sergeyev met with Gen. Klaus Reinhardt, the commander of NATO's KFOR peacekeeping troops, in Kosovo’s capital of Pristina. He reiterated the clause in the military-technical agreement, allowing the Yugoslav army and police to return to Kosovo. As well, on Dec. 30 – the same day Milosevic vowed to re-enter Kosovo and Clark vowed to stop him if he tried – Yugoslav Defense Minister Pavle Bulatovic said that Yugoslavia would seek greater military cooperation with Russia to boost its capability. The Belgrade daily Vecernje Novosti also reported that same day that Sergeyev had discussed the possible shipment of modern Russian anti-aircraft missiles and Sukhoi-27 and MiG-29 combat planes during his recent visit to Yugoslavia.

To a lesser degree, these developments point to a small domestic victory for Milosevic by detracting attention away from Yugoslavia’s economic woes. It is also a victory for Russian nationalists disenchanted by Yeltsin's capitulation to the West over Kosovo. Also, it puts the Russians in a strong position in Yugoslavia through threats to pullout of the international peacekeeping force. It provides them with a lever to use against NATO and especially the United States. But most importantly, for both Russia and Yugoslavia, these moves put the United States and the rest of NATO in an awkward position, forcing NATO to choose between adhering to or breaking the military technical agreement.
Kosovo homepage

Igor

You'll suffer for your insolence, goy. You are nothing but a mere beast that grazes (in the russian case BEGS) from others.

Nobody, I mean nobody insults the Sephardic and gets away with it. Your time has come...

Nemesis,

Where are you? I know you are lurking out there somewhere.

What's the weather like in Geneva today?

"WHAT'S THE WEATHER LIKE IN GENEVA?" Really, like you care, or even know where it is for that matter. Trying to get on my good side by buttering up my dear friend Kissie?

Go clean the back seat of your pink taxi, turn your underwear inside out and head off to pick up one of your towel-headed faggot fairies.

Did you miss me? HE HE HE HE

AllAmerican & Bernstein were riding in the pink taxi. They were heading down the road when they saw a sheep with it's head stuck in a fence. They stop to look at it.

A minute latter, Bernstein yells "I can't take it any more!" So he jumps out of the taxi, runs over to the sheep, pulls down his pants and starts but-slamming the trapped sheep.

Bernstein walks back to the pink taxi when he's done and says to AllAmerican, "You want some of that?"

AllAmerican smiles and says "Allright!" So AllAmerican then runs up to the fence, pulls down his pants and sticks his head in the fence.

I'm back with avengence...cracking myself up...HA HA HA HA