IMF throws Ukraine a $1.4bn lifeline..the ownage is complete..”Russia has launched a great war”

•September 3, 2014 • Leave a Comment


The International Monetary Fund has given a green light for Ukraine to receive the second tranche of financial assistance totalling $1.39 billion, meaning more austerity measures for the already struggling economy.

“The Executive Board of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) today completed the first review of Ukraine’s performance under an economic program supported by a Stand-By Arrangement (SBA),” the organization said in a statement.

“The completion of this review enables the disbursement of SDR 914.67 million (about US$1.39 billion), which would bring total disbursements under the arrangement to SDR 2.97 billion (about US$4.51 billion),”the statement reads.

The international body also approved Ukraine’s request to merge the third and fourth instalments of its financial assistance. Ukraine’s weak economy may now be eligible for a $2.3 billion bailout if another review is passed by the end of 2014.

At the same time the IMF noted its decision was based on the “assumption” that the conflict in the east of Ukraine will subside in the coming months.

“The conflict in the eastern part of the country is taking its toll on the economy and society, and compensatory measures will be critical to achieve key program targets agreed for 2014 and beyond,” the statement reads.

Ukrainian Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk emphasized on his Facebook page that the IMF voted“unanimously” to allocate another instalment.

Following the Executive Board discussion, IMF Managing Director Christine Lagarde said the escalating conflict in the east is causing a “deeper recession and deviations from program targets in the short term.”In particular, Legarde singled Naftogaz deficits and the central bank’s net international reserves.

“Kiev authorities have to take steps to accumulate international reserves, tighten the fiscal stance in 2015–2016 relative to the initial program targets, and step up efforts to put Naftogaz on a sound financial footing,” according to Lagarde. “Downside risks to the program remain very high,” she added.

It is ordinary Ukrainians who will suffer the most under the new austerity measures as the floating national currency is likely to push up inflation, while a spike in domestic gas prices will impact every household. Under the IMF conditions Kiev has to cut the budget deficit, increase retail energy tariffs, and shift to a flexible exchange rate. For simple people that means raised taxes, energy bill costs, and freezing of wages and pensions. It also includes smashing tax benefits for agriculture and allows banks to repossess property.

All this, as the IMF says Ukraine’s GDP will contract by 6.5 percent this year, while the hryvnia has fallen over 60 percent against the dollar this year.

“Under the IMF’s articles of agreement, it [IMF] is not allowed to lend money to a country that is unable to pay,” Michael Hudson, Wall Street analyst told RT. “The repayment of these demands is going to cause the Ukrainian currency to fall way down…the economy will be killed under the condition of this loan.”

To receive the IMF funds, Kiev opted for severe austerity program that includes getting rid of 24,000 government jobs, withdrawing subsidies on natural gas, raising taxes, and selling off state assets.

Ukraine received the first IMF loan of $3.16 billion in May after the IMF approved a $17 billion package in the form of a two-year stabilization program.

Ukraine’s defence minister has accused Russia of launching a “great war” that could claim tens of thousands of lives.

Russia dismissed the comments, saying they only pulled the Ukrainian people further into a bloody civil conflict.

The comments came after Ukrainian troops were forced to flee Luhansk airport in the east of the country amid an offensive by pro-Russian rebels.

Meanwhile, crisis talks between Ukraine officials, rebels and Russian envoys have broken up without agreement.

“A great war has arrived at our doorstep – the likes of which Europe has not seen since World War Two,” Ukrainian Defence Minister Valeriy Heletey wrote on Facebook on Monday.

“Unfortunately, the losses in such a war will be measured not in the hundreds but thousands and tens of thousands,” he added.


if you continue to kill civilians in towns that are predominantly russian then i guess sooner or later somebody will come to protect them..thats how wars occur..

the people of ukraine are about to understand the meaning of wanted are going to get it!


Kurdish “ghost” oil tanker reemerges near Texas with $100mn cargo

•September 3, 2014 • Leave a Comment

A “ghost ship” oil tanker carrying approximately $100 million of disputed Iraqi Kurdish crude oil has reappeared on satellite imagery near the US coast Monday, after disappearing for several days. The tanker seems not to have offloaded its oil.

According to the US Coast Guard and Reuters, the tanker, United Kalavrvta, is still 95 percent full and has not yet unloaded its cargo. The vessel was anchored Monday in the Galveston Offshore Lightering Area, close to its previously known position.

The Iraqi government has deemed this shipment of Kurdish crude oil illegal. Baghdad filed a lawsuit in the US in June, preventing any purchaser from unloading the Kurdish shipment.

When Iraq’s government initially filed the law suit, US District Judge Nancy K. Johnson ordered the seizure of the tanker’s $100 million payload, but only if the tanker entered the territorial waters of the US.

This isn’t the first time Kurdish oil tankers have switched off their electronic transponders to avoid detection – essentially making their movements impossible to track.

Approximately a week ago, a Kurdish tanker carrying crude disappeared from satellite tracking north of Egypt’s Sinai, only to reappear empty two days later near Israel.

As recently as June, Iraq’s central government made an attempt at illegalizing Kurdish oil sales but it was ultimately rejected by Iraq’s Supreme Court.

Kurds have argued that the sale of their crude is essential to their dreams of an independent Kurdistan – while the US State Department has publicly backed Baghdad’s stance.

Given the recent violence and uncertainty in Iraq, this makes for a hard decision for both the stranded tanker and its would-be US buyer.


amid all the carnage and chaos in iraq and kurdistan the oil still manages to get out..and illegally..but thats why the kurds are now loved by everyone in the west..they have the oil..and israel is in it up to their eyeballs..look at the sentence i highlighted..


Pakistan in turmoil..unleashing the mob

•September 3, 2014 • Leave a Comment



BACK in the days before social media, mobile phones and private television, the surest way of signalling that you had seized political power was to take control of the state broadcaster. That is what the army did in October 1999, when it forced out an elected government led by Nawaz Sharif. Almost 15 years later, on September 1st protesters in Islamabad, Pakistan’s capital, have done just the same thing: storming the offices of Pakistan Television (PTV) and taking it off the air for 45 minutes before army rangers reasserted control. The thuggish attack, apparently by supporters of a rabble-rousing, pro-army cleric, Tahir ul Qadri, followed a weekend of mayhem in the capital.

For days it has looked as if Pakistan were teetering on the verge of something like another coup, or at least the explicit reassertion of military control over civilian rulers. Unrest persists in Islamabad where for weeks protesters have gathered and demanded the resignation of Nawaz Sharif, the prime minister who was most recently elected with a large mandate, in a free election, last year. Along with Mr Qadri is a former playboy cricketer-turned-politician, Imran Khan, who came third in last year’s elections. He claims, with evidence that is somewhere between flimsy and non-existent, that polls were rigged to favour the then-opposition leader, Mr Sharif; Mr Khan wants them all re-run.

He and Mr Qadri called on their respective supporters, many armed with long sticks—and, according to some reports, also knives, axes and other weapons—to storm the prime minister’s home late on August 30th. That was a deeply cynical act on several scores. The two demagogues must have known that violence would follow, and almost certainly deaths too, but they must have calculated that by inflaming matters further they might provoke the fall of Mr Sharif. In fact several dozen people were badly injured and at least two died in clashes with the (civilian-led) police. Despite pledging to lead the mob, both leaders melted away. They must be betting that the longer they press for rule at the behest of a tiny minority—their noisy tens of thousands of protesters, of a population of some 180m Pakistani citizens—on the street, the greater the sway that the army will gain over elected politicians. Late in the afternoon of September 1st charges of terrorism were lodged against both populist leaders, according to Dawn newspaper.

It has become hard to imagine that Mr Khan and Mr Qadri have any other intention than to strengthen the hand of the army over the civilians. Mr Khan has set up a series of stunts to provoke an outright crisis: he ordered his party’s MPs to resign from parliament in August (though he did not think it worthwhile to remove his party from Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province, where they hold a majority). He has failed to make a convincing case either that Mr Sharif is so corrupt, or that somehow he came to office by illegitimate means, that a frenzied attack by thousands of street protesters could serve as a legitimate substitute for lawful, constitutional change. And it is close to certain that he—and Mr Qadri—have the backing of Pakistan’s army. Mass protests, and the attacks on state television, would be impossible to sustain if the army came out clearly against them.

One theory doing the rounds since late last week is that Mr Sharif has already agreed with army chiefs that he will cede control of foreign and security policy to them, in order to remain in office. Many well-informed Pakistani observers are already saying that Mr Sharif has already, in effect, lost power. It is unclear, however, if that is true. Mr Sharif is a defiant leader who has been the victim of a coup before, when Pervez Musharraf overthrew him in 1999 and became the most recent in a long line of military dictators to rule Pakistan. Mr Sharif may determine that he would be better off to be blatantly turfed from office again, rather than forced into some sort of power-sharing deal. An outright coup would—rightly—provoke international condemnation, and cut off American and European military aid, among other funds. It would also make clear, again, that sustained civilian rule has never been tolerated by Pakistan’s power-hungry army. With bitter irony, the reminder comes barely a year after general celebrations over the fact that Pakistan had for the first time achieved the transfer of power between two civilian, elected, administrations.


imrans boys are stirring the pot..things are getting wobbly..and they arent going away..

“And it is close to certain that he—and Mr Qadri—have the backing of Pakistan’s army.”

im sure he does..hes one of “them”..


EU banks to get stress tests a month early

•September 3, 2014 • Leave a Comment


Banks will get preliminary information on how they have fared in the European Central Bank’s landmark assessment of the sector a month early, so they can prepare a “market response”, according to reports.

Investors are keenly awaiting the results of the ECB’s unprecedented review, which will force lenders to come to terms with any lingering weaknesses, adjust capital buffers and write off soured loans to regain the trust of investors.

The health checks started about six months ago and banks have so far been given little information about the outcome to prevent the chance of market sensitive information leaking out.

According to the ECB presentation given to senior bank executives in Frankfurt last week, banks will be get partial, preliminary results to “allow them to prepare market response”.

This means banks will have about a month to get plans in place for any measures they will need to take when the final results are published.

By classifying the results as preliminary, and not giving the full picture, the ECB ensures banks will not be obliged to disclose any shortfalls to markets under stock exchange rules – mirroring a tactic used in previous national stress tests.

After the preliminary readouts, banks have 48 hours to submit written questions to the ECB or national regulators and can air issues at a series of two to three-hour meetings with banks, national regulators and ECB experts, bankers were told.

“[The] focus will be on the aspects of the Comprehensive Assessment that act as the key drivers to any capital shortfall,” the presentation said.

“The ECB will take into account comments at its own discretion,” it added, hinting that banks could influence the outcome of the review about a month before the results are due.

The ECB is open to receiving comments because it wants to avoid possible mistakes, which could undermine the credibility of the tests.

The ECB declined to comment to Reuters.


“will get preliminary information on how they have fared in the European Central Bank’s landmark assessment of the sector a month early, so they can prepare a “market response”

what the fuck is that? they can protect their reputations? if you are a zombie you are a zombie..dont hide or cover it up so the public are wonder the ECB declined to comment..


Obama will try to use dictator laws to ensure a legally binding climate change treaty..aka Global Carbon Tax

•September 3, 2014 • Leave a Comment


The Obama administration is working to forge a sweeping international climate change agreement to compel nations to cut their planet-warming fossil fuel emissions, but without ratification from Congress.

In preparation for this agreement, to be signed at a United Nations summit meeting in 2015 in Paris, the negotiators are meeting with diplomats from other countries to broker a deal to commit some of the world’s largest economies to enact laws to reduce their carbon pollution. But under the Constitution, a president may enter into a legally binding treaty only if it is approved by a two-thirds majority of the Senate.

To sidestep that requirement, President Obama’s climate negotiators are devising what they call a “politically binding” deal that would “name and shame” countries into cutting their emissions. The deal is likely to face strong objections from Republicans on Capitol Hill and from poor countries around the world, but negotiators say it may be the only realistic path.

“If you want a deal that includes all the major emitters, including the U.S., you cannot realistically pursue a legally binding treaty at this time,” said Paul Bledsoe, a top climate change official in the Clinton administration who works closely with the Obama White House on international climate change policy.

Lawmakers in both parties on Capitol Hill say there is no chance that the currently gridlocked Senate will ratify a climate change treaty in the near future, especially in a political environment where many Republican lawmakers remain skeptical of the established science of human-caused global warming.

“There’s a strong understanding of the difficulties of the U.S. situation, and a willingness to work with the U.S. to get out of this impasse,” said Laurence Tubiana, the French ambassador for climate change to the United Nations. “There is an implicit understanding that this not require ratification by the Senate.”

American negotiators are instead homing in on a hybrid agreement — a proposal to blend legally binding conditions from an existing 1992 treaty with new voluntary pledges. The mix would create a deal that would update the treaty, and thus, negotiators say, not require a new vote of ratification.

Countries would be legally required to enact domestic climate change policies — but would voluntarily pledge to specific levels of emissions cuts and to channel money to poor countries to help them adapt to climate change. Countries might then be legally obligated to report their progress toward meeting those pledges at meetings held to identify those nations that did not meet their cuts.

“There’s some legal and political magic to this,” said Jake Schmidt, an expert in global climate negotiations with the Natural Resources Defense Council, an advocacy group. “They’re trying to move this as far as possible without having to reach the 67-vote threshold” in the Senate.

In seeking to go around Congress to push his international climate change agenda, Mr. Obama is echoing his domestic climate strategy. In June, he bypassed Congress and used his executive authority to order a far-reaching regulation forcing American coal-fired power plants to curb their carbon emissions. That regulation, which would not be not final until next year, already faces legal challenges, including a lawsuit filed on behalf of a dozen states.

But unilateral action by the world’s largest economy will not be enough to curb the rise of carbon pollution across the globe. That will be possible only if the world’s largest economies, including India and China, agree to enact similar cuts.

The Obama administration’s international climate strategy is likely to infuriate Republican lawmakers who already say the president is abusing his executive authority by pushing through major policies without congressional approval.

“Unfortunately, this would be just another of many examples of the Obama administration’s tendency to abide by laws that it likes and to disregard laws it doesn’t like — and to ignore the elected representatives of the people when they don’t agree,” Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Senate Republican leader, said in a statement.

“Without an international agreement that binds us, it’s impossible for us to address the threats of climate change,” said Richard Muyungi, a climate negotiator for Tanzania. “We are not as capable as the U.S. of facing this problem, and historically we don’t have as much responsibility. What we need is just one thing: Let the U.S. ratify the agreement. If they ratify the agreement, it will trigger action across the world.”

Observers of United Nations climate negotiations, which have gone on for more than two decades without achieving a global deal to legally bind the world’s biggest polluters to carbon cuts, say that if written carefully such an agreement could be a creative and pragmatic way to at least level off the world’s rapidly rising levels of greenhouse gas emissions.


“Unfortunately, this would be just another of many examples of the Obama administration’s tendency to abide by laws that it likes and to disregard laws it doesn’t like.”

hes like nero..the UN wants a legally binding agreement next year in paris and they will do ANYTHNG to get it..we are going to see a massive ramping up of alarmism starting at the end of september in new york..just watch..

“broker a deal to commit some of the world’s largest economies to enact laws to reduce their carbon pollution.”

thats the carbon tax..


“If the future of the Internet is to be Google that should be of serious concern to people all over the world”

•September 3, 2014 • Leave a Comment

OR Book Going Rouge


In June 2011, Julian Assange received an unusual visitor: the chairman of Google, Eric Schmidt, arrived from America at Ellingham Hall, the country residence in Norfolk, England where Assange was living under house arrest.

For several hours the besieged leader of the world’s most famous insurgent publishing organization and the billionaire head of the world’s largest information empire locked horns. The two men debated the political problems faced by society, and the technological solutions engendered by the global network—from the Arab Spring to Bitcoin. They outlined radically opposing perspectives: for Assange, the liberating power of the Internet is based on its freedom and statelessness. For Schmidt, emancipation is at one with US foreign policy objectives and is driven by connecting non-Western countries to American companies and markets. These differences embodied a tug-of-war over the Internet’s future that has only gathered force subsequently.

When Google Met WikiLeaks presents the story of Assange and Schmidt’s encounter. Both fascinating and alarming, it contains an edited transcript of their conversation and extensive, new material, written by Assange specifically for this book, providing the best available summary of his vision for the future of the Internet.


anything to do with schmidt and google needs to be watched and scrutinised for assange..not as much..


Lusail..the 2022 Qatar World Cup city that doesn’t exist

•September 2, 2014 • Leave a Comment



WITH insanely hot temperatures and alleged human rights violations, practically every objective view of the 2022 World Cup is against it being held in Qatar.

It seems as if the only reason the nation’s been awarded the tournament is that it has cash in excess.

The rich oil state has so much cash, in fact, that it can build cities completely from scratch in a desert.

One of these planned cities is Lusail. It will be a 72-square-kilometre city built on a coastal desert along the Persian Gulf, located 24km north of Doha’s city centre.

The project of Lusail costs $45 billion.

The city will be highlighted by Marina Mall, which will be a super retail centre linked by five interconnected pods, spanning 56,000 square metres.

Lusail will feature four islands, two marinas and a lagoon.


follow the money eh? who gets the contracts?

keep this in mind..qatar will build a new modern city for AUD$45bn..the NBN being installed for australia will cost much more than that!



Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 920 other followers

%d bloggers like this: