A long-term truce between the Palestinian militant group Hamas and Israel may be announced within days, Hamas officials said in Cairo.
Moussa Abu Marzouk, a deputy leader of Hamas, said the truce would be announced within 48 hours.
“We have agreed to the truce with the Israeli side for one year and a half [in return] for the opening of all six passages between the Gaza Strip and Israel, and the halting of all military activity and aggression,” he was quoted as saying by the Egyptian state news agency Mena.
Hamas, he added, would first have to consult with other Palestinian factions.
Taher al-Nono, a member of Hamas’s negotiating team in Cairo, was earlier quoted by Reuters as saying that the deal would be announced within three days.
“Most of the obstacles that prevented us from reaching an agreement were resolved,” he said.
A step in the right direction…now if the two sides can just keep their fingers off the triggers then there could be a chance of real progress for a lasting peace…..we can only hope.
OMG! This has turned into a daily occurrence, someone , somewhere has just got to be an ass and say something anal.
Today’s entry is from the new campaign by PETA, the Give Peas A Chance,
“Every time that we eat, we can choose not to participate in violence,” PETA President Ingrid E. Newkirk wrote Wednesday in a letter. “While choosing a falafel sandwich over a lamb kebab doesn’t create instant peace, it reduces the sum total of violence and suffering in the world.”
This is a two part anal-ocity and another great statement from the whackos at PETA. At the Westminster Kennel Club show. PETA contends that the American Kennel Club promotes pure-breeding of dogs that is harmful to their health.
the AKC is trying to create a “master race”! said PETA spokesman Michael McGraw.
A master race? I am at a loss for words….WTF?
If I eat chick peas I am promoting peace in the Middle East, is that about it? I am sorry but if this is any indication of the thought process when veggies are eaten I will stick to being a meat eater…at least I have rational thought…..something PETA lost years ago.
Regardless what you want to call it. The point is these guys will ALWAYS get their pound of flesh.
The soon-to-be-merged financial giants — Morgan Stanley and Citigroup’s Smith Barney — announced the payments during an internal conference call last week, but warned advisers against describing them in terms that would cause PR headaches
“There will be a retention award. Please do not call it a bonus,” said James Gorman, co-president of Morgan Stanley. “It is not a bonus. It is an award. And it recognizes the importance of keeping our team in place as we go through this integration.”
“They are putting lipstick on a pig,” said Peter Morici, a professor at the University of Maryland School of Business and former Chief Economist at the U.S. International Trade Commission. “Very often, retention bonuses are paid to undeserving executives who helped drive their enterprises into the ground. This is like people who hold up banks getting paid to stop holding up banks. It isn’t good policy. It’s not always the case, but on Wall Street, people were vastly overpaid for the value that they created.”
Just another attempt to conceal the fact that they are still getting all their blood money from the companies. They will make sure that they get theirs and the taxpayer gets theirs (screwed that is).
I will give props where props are due…and Pres, Obama gets some for his first trips thruough the country. Our last president , when visiting with the people would talk before a select group of hand picked people as to not have to face any opposition.
Obama went to Elkhart, Ind first…a hot bed of republican voters…next he went to Ft. Myers, Fla. yet another hot bed of Republican voters…but both sites were feeling the crunch of the economy more so than the rest of the country.
Both cases he was greeted with enthusiasm.
The nation’s top bankers came to account for themselves Wednesday to a wary public, displaying a blend of financial might and humility as they pledged to build public trust with greater lending and fewer perks.
Eight chief executives sat at a witness table for more than six hours Wednesday assuring lawmakers that an infusion last fall of $165 billion in taxpayer money to their banks was good for consumers. The money was part of a $700 billion financial rescue approved by Congress in October.
And while some lawmakers said they hoped that by their testimony the bankers could gain some credibility, some of their inquisitors weren’t convinced.
“America doesn’t trust you anymore,” declared Rep. Michael Capuano, D-Mass.
Added committee Chairman Barney Frank, D-Mass: “There has to be a sense of the American people that you understand their anger.”
In that lies the key to it all. The bankers know the public is angry but they do not understand why. They do not understand that the people’s money has been handed to these guys and they have done little to help the common man out.
They just do not get it! The people see them as “robber barons”. They have shown no remorse for the situation they have put the country in. They show NO gratitude for the taxpayers help. The worst part of it is that they cannot answer the question, how did the best financial minds in the country not see this economic crisis coming?
I can answer it for them….GREED! They were making millions upon millions and did not think that they would be held responsible for anything because they all were doing it. Arrogance has clouded their greedy judgement…they just do not get it……….buit in the meantime they make sure that they keep giving it to the public while retaining as much of the ill gotten gains as they can……renaming their bonuses is the first plan of action.
This from an article written by Robert Higgs of the Independent Institute:
As we wait to see how the politicians in Washington will alter the National Endowment for the Arts, Amtrak, and child care? Is it big enough to get the economy moving again? Does it spend money fast enough? Hardly anyone, however, is asking the most important question: Should the federal government be doing any of this?the Obama administration is pushing, many questions are being raised about the measure’s contents and efficacy. Should it include money for the
In raising this question, one risks immediate dismissal as someone hopelessly out of touch with the modern realities of economics and government. Yet the United States managed to navigate the first century and a half of its past – a time of phenomenal growth – without any substantialto moderate economic booms and busts.
Federal intervention rests on the presumption that officials know how to manage the economy and will use this knowledge effectively. This presumption always had a shaky foundation, and we have recently witnessed even more compelling evidence that the government simply does not know what it’s doing. The big bailout bill enacted last October; the ‘s massive, frantic lending for many different purposes; and now the huge stimulus package all look like wild flailing – doing something mainly for the sake of being seen to be doing something – and, of course, enriching politically connected interests in the process.
Our greatest need at present is for the government to go in the opposite direction, to do much less, rather than much more. As recently as the major recession of 1920-21, the government took a hands-off position, and the downturn, though sharp, quickly reversed itself into full recovery. In contrast, Hoover responded to the downturn of 1929 by raising tariffs, propping up wage rates, bailing out farmers, banks, and other businesses, and financing state relief efforts. Roosevelt moved even more vigorously in the same activist direction, and the outcome was a protracted period of depression (and wartime privation) from which complete recovery did not come until 1946.
The US government has shown repeatedly that as an economic manager it is not to be trusted. What we need most are authorities wise enough to follow the dictum, “First, do no harm.” The stimulus package will do enormous harm. The huge debt burden it entails, by itself, ought to condemn the measure. America is already drowning in debt. But the measure will also wreak harm in countless other directions by effectively reallocating resources on a grand scale according to political priorities, rather than according to individual preferences and economic rationality. As our history shows, the economy can recover strongly on its own, if only the politicians will stay out of the way.