Newsvine
  • Welcome
  • Help
  • Report Bug
  • Conversation Tracker
  • Your Column
  • Replies
  • Friends
Type Comments Since You Last CheckedArticle Source Last Checked Stop Tracking All Clear Tracking All
Advertise | AdChoices
Log In | Register
Close the Login Panel
Existing users log in below. New users please register for a free account.

New Users:

Existing Users:

E-Mail:
Password:
Forgot Password?
Please enter the e-mail address or domain name you registered with:
E-Mail/Domain:
Back to Login
Log Out
  • Top News
  • Local News
  • World
  • U.S.
  • Sports
  • Politics
  • Tech
  • Entertainment
  • Science
  • Business
  • Health
  • Odd News
  • More
    • Arts
    • Education
    • Environment
    • Fashion
    • History
    • Home & Garden
    • Not News
    • Religion
    • Travel
What is Newsvine?

Updated continuously by citizens like you, Newsvine is an instant reflection of what the world is talking about at any given moment.

Get a Free Account
Help
Fun Stuff
  • Your Clippings
  • Leaderboard
  • E-Mail Alerts
  • Top of the Vine
  • Newsvine Live
  • Newsvine Archives
  • The Greenhouse
  • Recommended Articles
  • Wall of Vineness
Put a Seed Newsvine link on your own site

US warship carries aid to Georgian port of Poti

Fri Sep 5, 2008 7:16 AM EDT
world-news, russia, georgia, navy-mediterranean
Steve Gutterman, Assocaited Press Writer

The flagship of the U.S. 6th Fleet in the Mediterranean, the USS Mount Whitney, arriving to the Georgian port Poti, with more aid for Georgia, Friday, Sept. 5, 2008. (AP Photo/Efrem Lukatsky)

Advertise | AdChoices

— The flagship of the U.S. Navy's Mediterranean fleet anchored outside the key Georgian port of Poti on Friday, bringing in tons of humanitarian aid to a port still partially occupied by hundreds of Russian troops.

Although Russia has watched the arrival of the USS Mount Whitney and other U.S. ships in recent weeks with deep suspicion, a Foreign Ministry official said Russia does not plan any military action to the U.S. naval presence in the Black Sea.

The Whitney was the first Navy ship to travel to Poti since Georgia fought a short war with Russia last month. The ship anchored just offshore from the port, according to harbor master Vakhtang Tavberidze.

Two U.S. ships have already come and gone from Georgia carrying humanitarian aid in recent weeks, but they anchored at a smaller port, Batumi, to the south.

U.S. military officials have said the Mount Whitney, like the other ships, was bringing humanitarian aid for Georgians, including blankets, powdered milk and sanitizing equipment.

Russia had signaled to U.S. officials that it would not impede the ship's movement. But, contrary to earlier reports, Lt. Col. John Dorrian, a spokesman for the US European Command, said Friday there were no plans to allow the Russians to inspect the cargo.

"That will not be allowed," Dorrian said. "The port of Poti is Georgian sovereign territory."

Asked why the ship traveled to Poti and not Batumi, he said "That is where they requested we deliver this humanitarian aid and that's where we're going."

Russia is extremely wary about the presence of U.S. and NATO ships in the Black Sea region and Prime Minister Vladimir Putin earlier this week promised an unspecified response to U.S. and NATO actions.

On Friday, Russian Foreign Ministry official Andrei Nesterenko offered a measured response.

"There is no talk of military action," he said after a reporter's question about what Russia's reaction will be. But he again questioned why the United States was using warships.

"It is unlikely that warships of this class can deliver humanitarian aid in great quantities," Nesterenko said.

"Certainly, there are holds on these ships, but normally they contain provisions for the crew only, apart from essential items that might be needed during the journey," he said. "How can large amounts of humanitarian aid be delivered by such a ship?"

Russian forces bombed Poti, which has a sizable oil shipment facility, during the war with Georgia over its separatist regions. Several Georgian ships were sunk in its harbor.

Russian forces occupied some of the port in recent weeks and Russian peacekeeping troops are stationed at least two locations outside the city, alongside major roads. Traffic flowed freely past two positions Friday but the only visible military activity was a Russian jeep headed toward the city.

Two U.S. ships have already come and gone from Georgia carrying humanitarian aid in recent weeks, but they anchored at a smaller port, Batumi, to the south.

U.S. military officials have said the Mount Whitney, like the other ships, was bringing humanitarian aid for Georgians, including blankets, powdered milk and sanitizing equipment.

Adjacent to the commercial port where the aid will be delivered stands the badly damaged military port, the main base of Georgia's destroyed navy.

Eight military ships including the flagship for Georgia's small maritime force were sunk by Russian forces during the hostilities. The missile cruiser Dioskuira stood with its hull under water and badly damaged communications masts protruding from the water.

In Portugal, U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Russia is "deepening its isolation" by not honoring commitments it has made regarding Georgia.

The West's response to the Georgia conflict has thwarted Russia from achieving the "strategic objectives" it had when Moscow's recent, brief war with Georgia began, she said at a news conference in Portugal's capital before heading to Libya.

Vice President Dick Cheney met with top Ukrainian leaders Friday, calling their country's relationship with the United States "very important" as Washington sought to reassure its allies in former Soviet states.

Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko emphasized that he shared the United States' critical view of Russian military intervention in Georgia.

"We value our strategic bilateral relationship highly," Yushchenko said. "On the majority of the issues, including Georgia, we have an understanding with the United States."

Yushchenko has pushed strongly for closer ties with the European Union and NATO. He has also objected to Russia using its ships stationed in Ukraine in the war, thus dragging Ukraine into the conflict, and condemned Russia's decision to recognize Georgia's separatist areas as independent states.

Cheney also met separately with Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko, discussing regional security and efforts to diversify energy supplies.

Cheney's visit came during a political crisis pitting Yushchenko and Tymoshenko, coalition partners, against one another, setting Ukraine's government teetering on the verge of collapse.

Before Ukraine, Cheney visited oil-rich Azerbaijan and then Georgia, where Russia has recognized the independence of two breakaway regions: South Ossetia and Abkhazia.

Washington announced US$1 billion in U.S. economic aid for Georgia earlier this week.

© 2008 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
  • Enjoy this article? Help vote it up the 'Vine.

Back To Top | Front Page

Published to:

  • Steve Gutterman's Column, All of Newsvine
  • Groups: none
  • Regions: Ukraine, United States , Russia , Portugal , Libya , Azerbaijan
  • Public Discussion (111)
Maxwell Despard

We're all gonna die. Awesome.

    Reply#1 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 8:24 AM EDT
    jazzman646

    We're all gonna die. Awesome.

    Yeah, eventually we all are.

    But I doubt it will have anything to do with the Mount Whitney delivering beans to Georgia.

    • 4 votes
    #1.1 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 10:16 AM EDT
    arcanebliss

    To me, this read as "US warship carries aid to Georgian Port-A-Potty"

    • 3 votes
    #1.2 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 11:50 AM EDT
    -dmitry-

    17 tons of humanitarian aid (if it was in fact aid) could easily, and more cheaply, be airlifted. Just sayin'.

      #1.3 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 1:01 PM EDT
      Maxwell Despard

      It's a political move. We're taking sides with Georgia, in the name of "democracy," despite the fact that they sent troops into South Ossetia to quash the almost unanimous separatist agenda. The democratic thing to do would be to allow South Ossetia to have autonomy.

      In other words, we don't care about democracy, or the people. We care about sticking it to Russia, and control over the oil pipelines and installing a missile defense system. I don't completely buy the claims regarding the ship's contents, nor do I think providing humanitarian assistance to @!$%#s in such a manner that will further anger a nation that has made it abundantly clear that they'll react militarily.

      Combine that fact with the recent actions against Iran, which is Russia's ally...

      It's not about this ship itself, but the context in which it has been sent.

      • 2 votes
      #1.4 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 1:48 PM EDT
      Reply
      Ratatosk

      "there were no plans to allow the Russians to inspect the cargo."

      i guess it would be embarrassing having to explaining how all those stinger missiles got in to the sacks of rice....

      • 2 votes
      #2 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 8:33 AM EDT
      KaiserFranz

      Oh Shove it -- Russia has no right to inspect anything delivered to Sovereign Georgia Territory.

      • 5 votes
      #2.1 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 10:10 AM EDT
      MRZK.COM

      You're either with us or against us, Cowboy.

        #2.2 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 10:15 AM EDT
        jazzman646

        Oh Shove it -- Russia has no right to inspect anything delivered to Sovereign Georgia Territory.

        Totally correct, especially on a US Navy ship.

        • 2 votes
        #2.3 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 10:18 AM EDT
        Ratatosk

        KaiserFranz -> bend over and grab your ankles! ... and i warn you, it's gonna hurt!

        • 1 vote
        #2.4 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 10:47 AM EDT
        Ratatosk

        Remember the state/bush run tv station fox-noise interview of amanda kokoeva, the 12 year old american girl who was visiting relatives and according to the the anchor "was able to flee to russia" ?
        During the interview she stated "I was running from Georgian troops, I want to thank the Russian troops"

        humanitarian supplies, please save that trash for sunday school where they're not allowed to ask questions or make comments. that crap don't fly here.

        and if you don't like what i say, feel free to leave !

        • 3 votes
        #2.5 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 10:53 AM EDT
        alkimija

        The "humanitarian" claim to placing a warship where it can only aggravate Russia and increase chances of a conflict is laughably unbelievable.

        • 2 votes
        #2.6 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 11:07 AM EDT
        KaiserFranz

        Ratatosk

        You honestly believe that the "I was running from Georgian troops, I want to thank the Russian troops" statement wasn't propaganda ?? -- Could you possible be any more naive ?

        I really don't care what you have to say Ratatosk -- it's "defeatist" talk anyway.

        I'm not in favor of starting a war -- but I have no intention of waltzing around the school yard bully -- who is occupying territory that he should not be occupying. I would challenge that bully at every opportunity till he came to his senses and conducted himself in an acceptable manner -- That's all the rest of the world is asking of Russia!

        No one is condemning Russia for the war -- except for some remarks about excessive response -- but EVERYONE is condemning them for not honoring their word about withdrawal! -- So yes -- damned straight -- I'd challenge them at every turn!

        • 2 votes
        #2.7 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 11:18 AM EDT
        Ratatosk

        MRZK.COM ->

        "You're either with us or against us, Cowboy." ?

        i can assure you, i'm not on the side of bush and his war criminals!

        arrest, hang, and impeach... in that order!

        • 2 votes
        #2.8 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 11:21 AM EDT
        Ratatosk

        heir KaiserFranz

        You honestly believe that the "I was running from Georgian troops, I want to thank the Russian troops" statement wasn't propaganda ??

        so, what your saying is every thing the American girl said was a lie ?

        I really don't care what you have to say Ratatosk -- it's "defeatist" talk anyway.

        defeatist ? elaborate, please ... never mind, again filing it out as trash.

        I'm not in favor of starting a war -- but I have no intention of waltzing around the school yard bully -- who is occupying territory that he should not be occupying.

        do you mean George w(rong again ) bush and is war mongering regime ?

        "conducted himself in an acceptable manner"

        your saying they should start torturing ? like bush ?

        remember when we Americans were selling tons of grain to russia in the 70's ? when they rejected it because the shipments where loaded down with rocks ?

        when the leaders of this country start acting like something other then animals and criminals, i'll start cheering usa again... until then arrest, hang, and impeach!

        i'd love to stay and chat but bush just released the 12'th stright month of rising jobless figues.... 5 year high!

        • 1 vote
        #2.9 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 11:39 AM EDT
        KaiserFranz

        Ratatosk

        What I said -- is what I said -- I don't need you to try to "reword it" for me.

        • 2 votes
        #2.10 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 11:50 AM EDT
        Ryan-339660

        Rataosk,

        The US has no place for roll over wimps like you.

        Russia has no right to inspect anything we do, when they hold to an agreement then we will hold to an agreement. That's how things are done.

        Also, are you one of the people who look to Clinton as a hero and Bush as a war criminal?

          #2.11 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 11:53 AM EDT
          Ratatosk

          chart nasdq -> right before the graph goes limp after bush takes office, you'll notice what i call the clinton erection. and it was a big!

          • 1 vote
          #2.12 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 11:57 AM EDT
          Ryan-339660

          Ratatosk, when was the last time a president or politician gave anyone a job?

            #2.13 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 12:00 PM EDT
            Ratatosk

            "Ratatosk, when was the last time a president or politician gave anyone a job? "

            the convict scooter libby comes to mind...

            let me know if you need more names...

            • 1 vote
            #2.14 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 12:08 PM EDT
            Ryan-339660

            Ratatock, I forgot it was pointless to talk to a liberal.

              #2.15 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 12:35 PM EDT
              Ratatosk

              the truth does hurt.. but your pain should be short lived.

              try to remember, we're not as gullible as the conservatives and you better get in touch with rush 'oxycotton' limbaugh, the way things are looking, your going to need something strong for your november election pains.

              good talking to ya..
              ttfn

              • 1 vote
              #2.16 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 1:24 PM EDT
              Maxwell Despard

              What's with you guys? Chill with the ad hominem. If you can't back up what you have to say with reason and evidence, keep your damned mouths shut.

              • 1 vote
              #2.17 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 1:50 PM EDT
              Ratatosk

              what ? Ryan-339660 asked me for someone whom a politician gave a job to...

              i gave him libby's name.

              is it my fault that ryan obviously needs anger management counseling ?

              just trying to help someone out and ya get bite...

              • 1 vote
              #2.18 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 2:16 PM EDT
              Reply
              SthPacific

              AP never tires of telling bold face lies to the US public. I can see a number of deliberate lies in this article. Thanks Steve Gutterman, Associated Press Writer for making Pravda look good.

              • 4 votes
              #3 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 9:04 AM EDT
              Matt Kennedy

              You saw a number of boldface lies, and yet... you didn't mention them.

              Well, that makes you about as useful as AP doesn't it?

              • 3 votes
              #3.1 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 9:07 AM EDT
              SthPacific

              Sorry Matt Kennedy I keep forgetting there are still people around who actually regard AP as a credible source. My bad.

              Georgia fought a short war with Russia last month.

              In Portugal, U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Russia is "deepening its isolation" by not honoring commitments it has made regarding Georgia. No Disclaimer
              The West's response to the Georgia conflict has thwarted Russia from achieving the "strategic objectives" it had when Moscow's recent, brief war with Georgia began, she said at a news conference in Portugal's capital before heading to Libya.Deliberate disinformation

              They then follow with deliberate spin, ignoring Cheney's talks about the Nabucco pipeline. This is the critical issue here and they have not included a response from Ilkham Aliyev, because they want to protect you Matt Kennedy from something you might not want to hear. Isn't that nice of them.

              They then avoided the issue of The US violation of the Montreaux Convention, which expressly forbids the US to take such warships past the Dardanelles

              In Short this article is highly deceptive. Pure spin designed to keep you in the dark Matt Kennedy. AP continuously produce these flakey pieces of non journalism, noise without substance. .

              What they left out was the European and Azerbaijani energy and gas processing companies are alarmed at the prospect of the pipe being controlled by such an unbalanced politician as Saakashvili, and have decided to use Russian transport routes. Even after Cheney threatened them. Now Cheney is trying to make curry with the Ukraine, to block bluestream and revive the Nabacco line. This would mean the Ukraine would have to cancel an agreement with Russia over the Ukraine, that is valid until 2017.

              Russia controls the Little gas princess Yulia Tymoshenko, who has just spit the Ukraine Parliament by dissolving the coalition with Yushchenko. So neither of them are in a position to make any deals with dirty Dick.

              • 5 votes
              #3.2 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 9:45 AM EDT
              Pamela Drew

              The US violation of the Montreaux Convention, which expressly forbids the US to take such warships past the Dardanelles

              That's new to me thank you, but once you blow off the Geneva Conventions what's a few more?

              • 5 votes
              #3.3 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 10:19 AM EDT
              KaiserFranz

              The Montreux Convention was not violated - The USS Mt. Whitney is 18,400 tons -- the convention allows for 45,000 tons or smaller to be exempt.

              Check your information - then talk about it.

              None of this would be a problem if the Russians would simply honor the cease fire they signed and get their fat a**es out of Georgia.

              This really is getting disgusting -- how can Russia be the only one interpreting the cease fire documents as allowing them to stay in Georgia ?? Even the French -- who wrote the blasted thing -- say there is no provision for Russia to remain in Georgia.

              All of this would calm down and REAL diplomacy could begin -- if the Russians would just go the hell HOME!

              • 5 votes
              #3.4 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 10:30 AM EDT
              KaiserFranz

              Pamela

              Again -- the Geneva Convention applies to duly constituted armed forces of waring nations.

              TERRORISTS do not qualify -- nor should they! If we have to "violate" their precious rights to prevent another 9 / 11 from occurring -- I for one am all for it!

              • 4 votes
              #3.5 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 10:36 AM EDT
              jazzman646

              That's new to me thank you, but once you blow off the Geneva Conventions what's a few more?

              Pamela,

              KaiserFranz corrected the misinformation on the Montreux Convention.

              Now I'll correct yours on the Geneva Convention. The US hasn't committed any violation of the Geneva Convention. No charges of that nature have been filed in any world court that I know of, which are currently under review.

              If you know of any, please provide a source of that knowledge.

              • 3 votes
              #3.6 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 10:45 AM EDT
              SthPacific

              The Montreux Convention was not violated - The USS Mt. Whitney is 18,400 tons -- the convention allows for 45,000 tons or smaller to be exempt.

              Nice try Franz, the convention forbids the transit of non-Black Sea nations' warships with guns of a calibre larger than eight inches (203 mm) Non-Turkish warships in the Straits must be under 15,000 tons. No more than nine non-Turkish warships, with a total aggregate tonnage of no more than 30,000 tons, may pass at any one time, and they are permitted to stay in the Black Sea for no longer than three weeks. Turkey's long-standing refusal to sign the LOS Convention has meant that Montreux remains in force without further amendments.

              Even the French -- who wrote the blasted thing -- say there is no provision for Russia to remain in Georgia.

              Because the treaty was altered. They added things to it after Russia signed.

              All of this would calm down and REAL diplomacy could begin -- if the Russians would just go the hell HOME!

              Um What is Cheney doing there Franz.? Oh ofcourse, he is lighting the fires of war.

              So if the US can move ships into the Black Sea then you should not have a problem with Russia basing a few aircraft carriers and missile cruisers in Syria then Franz

              Well you better get used to it Franz, because the Russians are never going to leave Abkazia.

              @ Pamela Drew. "once you blow off the Geneva Conventions what's a few more?" exactly, It is rather academic. but if you want Russia to respect these treaties, NATO has to do the same, and that means the US will need to ratify the ICC. Which will mean a lot of US politicians could end up in the dock in Brussels. I dont think that will get signed in our lifetime now will it Pamela Drew *rolls*

              • 3 votes
              #3.7 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 11:07 AM EDT
              jazzman646

              Um What is Cheney doing there Franz.? Oh ofcourse, he is lighting the fires of war.

              Great!!!

              If Bush can fight and win a war against Russia in the 4 remaining months he has in office...more power to him (he says very sarcastically).

              • 2 votes
              #3.8 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 11:25 AM EDT
              KaiserFranz

              SthPacific

              Part of what you said is correct -- here is the rest of the story:)

              The Russian deputy Chief of General Staff General Anatoliy Alekseyevich Nogovitsyn reminisced that the maximal permitted volume of the vessels of external countries is 45 000 tonnes and NATO cannot augment its naval forces incessantly. On 27 August 2008 there were 10 NATO vessels and according to the Russian military there were due 8 more.[20] He stated that it is already getting too tight for the naval forces in the Black Sea.[21]

              Russia's Ambassador to Ankara's remarks came after the United States demanded to use straits to send two hospital ships carrying aid to Georgia in an apparent move that would violate the Convention.

              Turkey did not allow the passage of another two United States naval vessels, which exceeded the weight limit defined in the convention, instead allowing three lighter warships to pass through the straits.

              ARE you getting the picture here ?? They prevent Hospital Ships to provide aid from entering -- but allow War Ships to pass through -- hmm -- are we the ones trying to be confrontational -- or were we given no option other than to deliver aid with smaller warships ??

              Regarding Syria -- I have no problem with Russia placing ships in Syrian Waters -- that is between Syria and Russia and I have nothing to say about it.

              You should begin to see that I am not a WAR MONGER -- but I firmly believe in every countries RIGHTS -- Russia has rights -- Syria has rights - Georgia has rights and so does the United States. If any country is allowed to step on the rights of another -- as Russia is doing right now to Georgia by continuing to occupy Georgian territory -- then there must be a hue and cry raised by all the countries of this earth!

              • 5 votes
              #3.9 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 11:29 AM EDT
              SthPacific

              @jazzman646 George H.W. Bush (Sr.) George H.W. Bush is charged of initiating a war of aggression against Panama in 1989, in breach of international law and the UN Charter, constituting a crime against the peace, and of ordering the kidnapping of Panama's President Noriega in violation of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Crimes Against Internationally Protected Persons. George H.W. Bush is furthermore charged for his command responsibility for the multiple war crimes committed by US forces in the Gulf War in 1991, including the policy of deliberately bombing civilian targets and the massacre of soldiers hors combat. His command responsibility for these crimes is equivalent to those of other heads of states who have been charged, indicted and convicted for international crimes, including torture, war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide. George H.W. Bush is also charged for inducing an uprising of Kurds and Shi'ites in Iraq during the Gulf War and then ordering US forces to withhold aid from those who risked the uprising, thus leaving unarmed uprising masses unprotected against Saddam Hussein's brutal forces. By such policies, he knowingly facilitated the commission of crimes against humanity by Saddam Hussein. He is finally accused for conspiring in imposing deadly economic sanctions against the people of Iraq, with the intent to harm the well-being, health and lives of the Iraqi civilian population, with foreknowledge of the likely consequences and with the subsequent knowledge of the sanctions' devastating consequences. Such conduct is considered to be a crime against humanity under international customary law. About one million persons are believed dead as a result of the economic sanctions, thereof half a million children below five years of age.

              • 3 votes
              #3.10 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 11:33 AM EDT
              Samantha Gluck

              in breach of international law and the UN Charter,

              IMHO, the UN should be dismantled. They do nothing but cause more problems. The US should restore her sovereignty. NATO is enough.

              • 3 votes
              #3.11 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 11:39 AM EDT
              KaiserFranz

              SthPacific

              LOL -- as one sided a dissertation as I've seen in a while -- there are usually at least two sides to every scenario -- and the one you posted above has many more than that.. and there is a great deal that was left unsaid and much more that would require lengthy response -- I don't have time.

              "thus leaving unarmed uprising masses unprotected against Saddam Hussein's brutal forces" -- I wonder if Saddam might have been responsible ?? -- probably not ;)

              Anyone can see what side of the bed you get up on every morning -- and I mean that as a joke - not an attack - so don't get all bent out of shape.

              • 2 votes
              #3.12 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 11:45 AM EDT
              SthPacific

              KaiserFranz You know I really enjoy this Franz, It is extremly rare that I find someone who actually has the slightest clue about the Caucasus. :)

              Ok the 45t limit is for Merchant shipping. the 15t/30t limit is for Warships.

              And Thank you for finally mentioning Turkey, a major player here. Turkey has been playing both sides of the fence, as you do when you are Turkey. If it wasn't so serious it would be funny.

              As for the breach of this convention, well lets just say they are violating a treaty that should have been dissolved with LOS. But Turkey clings to this little bit of imperial power that they have acquired. If Turkey has any say in the matter, the US ships will have to leave in a couple weeks.

              or were we given no option other than to deliver aid with smaller warships ??

              "The fact that there are nine Western warships in the Black Sea but the one of concern is
              "On Sunday, the US guided missile destroyer USS McFaul arrived with aid including camp beds, bedding, tents and mobile kitchen units, the US Defence Department spokesman Bryan. Whitman said."
              So about 50 Tomahawk missiles that are outfitted with nuclear warheads and are meant to hit ground targets. , are needed for humanitarian aid. No I dont think so.

              DEBKAfile, August 25, 2008, 11:00 PM (GMT+02:00)

              Russian Navy chief Adm. Vladimir Vysotsky confers with Chief of Staff Gen. Nikolay Makarov
              The Russian Navy chief, Adm. Vladimir Vysotsky announced Sunday, Aug. 24, that its warships in the Mediterranean region have been placed under the command of Russia's Black Sea Fleet.

              At the same time, the American aircraft carrier, the Iwo Jima Expeditionary Strike Group heading a six-vessel contingent set sail this week for the Mediterranean and Persian Gulf, with 6,000 sailors and marines aboard.

              Then on Monday, the Russian general staff took the further step of announcing regular searches of all cargoes transiting the Georgian port of Poti.

              DEBKAfile's military sources report extreme concern in Israel's military and navy. Washington and Jerusalem both regard the link-up of Russian naval operations in the two waters a further aggressive Russian step in the Cold War spreading out of Georgia to the Black Sea, the Ukraine, and other parts of the Caucasian region.

              Moscow's Black Sea Fleet headquarters at the Ukrainian port of Sevastopol will henceforth be in command of the flotilla to be deployed at the Syrian port of Tartus.

              The Black Sea's flagship, the Moskva missile cruiser, was accordingly detached Saturday, Aug. 23, from the Russian naval contingent heading for Syria and recalled to Sevastopol. Henceforth, the Moska will act as joint flagship for the Black Sea and Mediterranean fleets, linking to two under a single command.

              Moscow's announcement Monday that Russian forces would search cargoes transiting Poti underscored its determination to retain its grip on the strategic Black Sea port.

              At the opposite end of the new Russian maritime chain, US and Israeli satellites have recently observed large dredgers operating at the Syrian port of Tartus. They are believed to be preparing the small Mediterranean port to serve as permanent base for large Russian naval vessels, such as the Admiral Kuznetsov – right opposite the US Sixth Fleet and in close proximity to Israeli waters and shores.

              It is Israel's job to provide security for the BTC, in return, the US has guaranteed Israel's oil supply. This is funded by the US tax payer. So even if you dont have gasoline, Israel will, unless ofcourse they can not meet the terms of the agreement.

              So I have to wonder, If there are no weapons on board these aid ships, then why is the US and Israel so opposed to having them searched? Israel has seen a number of its plans thwarted recently. The re-opening of the old Kirkuk Haifa pipeline, The skirmish between Turkey and the Kurds ended that, and now their BTC pipe dreams of Oil (Azerbaijan) Water (Turkey Tigris Euphrates river) and Fibre optic cable via Cyprus avoiding Lebanon are dashed. It was a stupid plan anyway.

              • 3 votes
              #3.13 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 12:25 PM EDT
              SthPacific

              @Samantha Gluck Yes those Nuremberg trials were a travesty of Justice, I am sure you sympathise with those poor Nazi's who had suffered so much at those trials.

              @Franz I was answering a question there for jazzman646 on behalf of Pamela Drew. .

              If you know of any, please provide a source of that knowledge.

              That I did. The main thing holding back more of these trials, and particularly against Rumsfeld, is the USA's rejection of international justice and refusal to sign the ICC. Cheney and Kissenger are also war criminals for there actions in Chile.

              The Idea of giving a broad spray of charges in this court has a purpose. Check other trials like Milosovic to see why. But no matter what you think, HW Bush would be convicted of Kidnapping Noriega. So dont make the mistake of focusing on the fluff charges in these cases, he will still get 20 years for kidnapping if he sets foot in the wrong country, Sadly, we can not extradite him from the US because the criminal US government wont sign the ICC.

              • 3 votes
              #3.14 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 12:39 PM EDT
              Samantha Gluck

              @Samantha Gluck Yes those Nuremberg trials were a travesty of Justice, I am sure you sympathise with those poor Nazi's who had suffered so much at those trials.

              Excuse me? Some of my husband's family members were victims of Holocaust. I'll thank you to watch your mouth and not spew personal attacks when you disagree with someone.

              Take a moment and a breath before you attack people trying to have a discourse and discussion with those who think differently.

              • 2 votes
              #3.15 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 12:45 PM EDT
              Mac-295039

              @SthPacific:
              There are several recent books published about the failed UN Oil for Food scam that allowed Saddam during post-GULF WAR period to purchase high tech weapons, artillery, small arms, and lavish additional palaces while the bulk of his people suffered from lack of proper medical supplies and support. It was not found that their main problem was based on US imposed sanctions but the lack of official over-sight at the mass corruption of 3rd world countries allowing Saddam to sell crude oil for cash. Even UN Sec. General Kofi Annan's own son who was a senior chairman for the program was found to have "questionable ties" with Iraqi counter-parts as an untold amount of incoming wealth. A lot of people within the UN made money from black market oil sales. Billions of dollars were taken and used for Saddam's personal means. The United States as well as the United Kingdom voiced concern as well as protest.

              • 1 vote
              #3.16 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 1:06 PM EDT
              Samantha Gluck

              Mac, can you send me links or titles for those book? Thanks.

              • 1 vote
              #3.17 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 1:08 PM EDT
              Mac-295039

              Samantha:
              I had three of the books at my house but I loaned two of them to friends of mine. I can give you the title later tonight of at least one of the books dealing with the real UN.

              • 1 vote
              #3.18 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 2:07 PM EDT
              Samantha Gluck

              Thanks mac

              • 1 vote
              #3.19 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 2:46 PM EDT
              Mac-295039

              Samantha:
              Ill drop a list of decent books to read if you are interested in that category.

              • 1 vote
              #3.20 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 3:10 PM EDT
              Samantha Gluck

              That would be great!

              • 1 vote
              #3.21 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 3:53 PM EDT
              Mac-295039

              The discussion previously on Carter's administration and the OPEC & Iran Hostage ordeal, an excellent book:

              "Guest of the Ayatollah" by Mark Bowden (the same author who wrote 'Black Hawk Down')

              The book gives the detail account from both the American administration as well as members of the Iranian Islamic Revolution and para-military members who stormed the US Embassy as well as the hostages themselves.

              • 1 vote
              #3.22 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 3:58 PM EDT
              SthPacific

              @Mac-295039 Really! Say it aint so, corruption in the highest political circles. Some of the things I could reveal about UN contractors would make your eyes roll too, from personal experience. But guess what, Its not "The UN" its the countries, psuedo-religious institutions and private corporations that win the tenders for the various contracts. The US regularly threatens the UN with cutting off the money supply (not that it actually ever hands over the cash they promise) if they dont get there own way with who will get these contracts. UNTAC was a classic USA scams the UN deal. Pakistan is another great scammer of the UN. The UN should scrutinize these contracts more rigorously, but all attempts to set up an independent body to do such a thing have been blocked. Whenever I hear these attacks on the UN 90% of them come from the US and Israel. This is mostly because of the delusion, that, the UN is some kind of sovereign state, that it administers all its own programs, and a serious lack of economic, geopolitical and logistical understanding by the critic.

              failed UN Oil for Food scam

              I can assure you it was no failure. Just ask Monsanto they made millions out of it. and I would love to provide you with the details, but not here. But to give one example, Australia had always sold high grade wheat to Iraq. The the US muscled in under the guise of Food for Oil took those contracts and tossed them out and replaced high grade Australian wheat with second rate GMO American wheat mixed with chaff, which the Iraqis did not want. So they did a back room deal. That is just one example.

              The No.1 problem with the UN is the Veto powers bestowed on certain countries. Notably the US and its support for Israel by VETOing so many decisions has left the UN ham strung and toothless.

              As for Samantha Gluck I could tell from the way you worded that comment you were an Israeli sympathiser. Your attack on the UN is an attack on Nuremberg. So typical of your kind to want to cherry pick, Such hypocrisy defending Nuremberg, while attacking the UN.

              • 4 votes
              #3.23 - Sat Sep 6, 2008 9:25 AM EDT
              Mac-295039

              @SthPacific:
              I can also say without a doubt that the vast number of heavy cargo trucks provided to the Iraqi government by the UN to haul supplies and medical support was used to haul ammunition, missile systems, and carry anti-aircraft weapon platforms. I inspected several heavy trucks with the "UN" markings on it's side with paperwork going back to UN purchasing agents. I was in Kuwait before the actual work-up for invasion and then moved into Iraq one week after the operations began. The amount of arms provided to the Iraqi government was so immense and so new that some markings had a shipping date of a week prior to the actual kick-off to conflict. Even though there was an arms embargo accepted by UN Security Council countries like China, Russia, etc (of course there were brand new anti-tank missiles from Russia, heavy artillery shells made in China, small arms from Germany, and air radar relay systems made in France all shipped in 2003?)

                #3.24 - Sat Sep 6, 2008 10:25 AM EDT
                Mac-295039

                @Samantha:

                Here are a few books to look at if you have some down time.

                "The UN Exposed" (How the United Nations Sabotages America's Security) by Eric Shawn

                "Princes of Darkness" (The Saudi Assault on the West) by Laurent Murawiec

                "What Went Wrong" (Islam vs The West) by Bernard Lewis

                • 2 votes
                #3.25 - Sat Sep 6, 2008 4:57 PM EDT
                Mac-295039

                @Samantha:

                A few others...

                "The Great War for Civilisation" (The Conquest of the Middle East) by Robert Fisk

                "Revolt in the Desert" by T.E. Lawrence

                "The End of the Barbary Terror" (America's 1815 War Against the Pirates of North Africa) by Frederick C. Leiner

                "The Savage Wars of Peace" (Small Wars and the Rise of American Power) by Max Booth

                • 2 votes
                #3.26 - Sat Sep 6, 2008 5:08 PM EDT
                SthPacific

                I inspected several heavy trucks with the "UN" markings on it's side with paperwork going back to UN purchasing agents.

                Yes I have seen this before, Containers with tickets from pseudo religious organizations full of boxes marked canned soup that were actually full of Bourbon and Cigarettes. I can tell you a lot of stories too, but ofcourse we wont. We both know where those weapons really came from, who transported them and most likely who paid for them. However this is different, this is US warships, transporting weapons and engineers + equipment to a US puppet directly. Lets wait and see how this plays out before we throw any stones. I'll look out for your comments on this issue.

                The books you have recommend in your last two comments I also recommend highly. Especially the first three in the second comment. these are essential reading.

                "The Great War for Civilisation" (The Conquest of the Middle East) by Robert Fisk

                "Revolt in the Desert" by T.E. Lawrence

                "The End of the Barbary Terror" (America's 1815 War Against the Pirates of North Africa) by Frederick C. Leiner

                • 3 votes
                #3.27 - Sun Sep 7, 2008 6:48 AM EDT
                Samantha Gluck

                Mac: Thank you. On SO many levels, thank you from me and my family. I'll get those books -- probably two or three at a time (expensive books are), but I'll read them and let you know what I think about them. :)

                • 1 vote
                #3.28 - Sun Sep 7, 2008 10:00 PM EDT
                Matt Kennedy

                In Short this article is highly deceptive. Pure spin designed to keep you in the dark Matt Kennedy. AP continuously produce these flakey pieces of non journalism, noise without substance. .

                Well I'm sure glad we have people like you to keep us in the know.

                • 2 votes
                #3.29 - Mon Sep 8, 2008 9:32 AM EDT
                Reply
                Pamela DrewRestored

                bringing in tons of humanitarian aid

                Another boon for Monsanto as USAID is a primary conduit to delivers gmo seed as aid to countries who refuse to plant the stuff. Since the Russians and former Soviet states have all refused gmo crops, we can feel assured it's coming in the form of USAID. Nothing nicer than corporatism wrapped in benevolence.

                • 3 votes
                Reply#4 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 9:40 AM EDT
                SthPacific

                Hey Pamela, in the comment above yet another Monsanto UN aid scam *wink*

                • 3 votes
                #4.1 - Sat Sep 6, 2008 9:26 AM EDT
                Mac-295039

                @SthPacific:
                I am sure you have incidents or stories that you could share on this site. But is there a current arms embargo with Georgia and the United States? Even if a US Naval Warship was off-loading heavy equipment, arms, ammunition, and armor, what would it matter? Russia did this during the Vietnam War. It did this prior the invasion of Iraq. Russia went into Georgia to destroy the ability of that country's military capabilities. Looking at this from a military perspective, the Russians did what a invading force does when it wants to make a point. Destroy infrastructure, destroy military bases, logistical sites, fuel points, etc. The Russians moved past the Southern Ossetian line and went further inland destroying military checkpoints, smaller posts, and other positions. If Russia really wanted to make a point they would have made a complete stop at the line of Georgia and Southern Ossetian.

                Putin secured the port as a means to stick it to the Georgian government and as a act of defiance against the US and the West. Russians still operating in the port as a "security detachment" is still foreign troops in Georgia that the Georgian people nor their government wants in there.

                I have a little insight to that situation as well. Southern Ossetians were not considered "blood brothers" of the Russian people. In fact the Russians didn't think much of that entire area, except Putin. Putin understands that you need a catalyst to create a situation and the placement of several thousand troops and hundreds or artillery and armor units is a logistical piece that takes several weeks as well as pre-planned coordination. Putin needed a reason and he got it with Georgia attempted to quell paramilitary units operating within Georgia countryside. Armed, trained, equipped, by the Russian military.

                Have we seen any bulk US military equipment unloaded on the shore-line?

                I am glad that you approved a few of those books.

                • 2 votes
                #4.2 - Sun Sep 7, 2008 9:22 AM EDT
                SthPacific

                I think the way we should look at this is, this conflict has history, Lots of it, in fact hundreds of years worth, but in a modern context definatly before WW2.

                The Georgians flattened Tskhinvali, they are the bad guys. Russia does have a mandate to occupy buffer zones. The recent deal brokered by France is still non-binding. The other conflict, involves Abkazia. The Ajaran conflict was settled, As for Russian troops in Poti, well that has to do with Abkazia, Turkey backs Abkazia, please dont forget that. Very important.

                Now Georgia has lost this war it started, and it lost it badly, the Abkazians are not going to give back that coast line, Russia supports this, as they dont want an unstable American puppet that close to Sochi,

                Georgia has lost much of it coast line here and its most valuable asset not including pipelinistan, (which isnt theirs anyway it belongs to BP) and we will just have to get used to it, Azerbaijan is now going to send its oil via the Bluestream network, because they dont want to deal with an unstable loony like Saakashvili, and the Nabacco Shah Deniz project will not happen. Not only that but Russia also successfully gave TNK BP the boot, So shipping arms to Georgia will not only inflame this situation, but it could cause Russia to exert even more influence around the region and the US and France want to be very careful if they dont want to see Russian Peace keepers invited into Al Anbar province in Iraq, to keep the peace for LukOil.

                Using the term Russian troops here v's Georgia, is not appropriate. Georgia is the west, especially Israel and the US. The conflict between Georgia and Ossetia, is an old one.

                I have recent pics of Chechen troops fighting with Russian troops. If you do know about this region then you will understand how dangerous this is particularly for any western nation. This could significantly widen the "war on terror" if its OK to use that silly term.

                Two things have happened because of this. firstly, NATO already had 9 war ships in the Black Sea, so sending in US ships of any kind, is not a good move. The Black Sea is shallow and tight, There are just to many boats in there now. The second problem, is that Russia has now combined the Med fleet with the Black Sea fleet, and is moving into Syria as we type, covering the Sixth fleet and very close to Israel. This is a very significant event. Now if we look at the big picture here, Israel is the biggest loser. First they lost their deal to have the old Haifa Kirkuk line re-opened (Turks v's Kurds) then their hopelessly ambitious plan to have an Oil Water and Fibre optic line from Turkey via Cyprus, is now never going to happen, they will probably lose there deal with the US now to provide Israel with energy security, unless they can keep the BTC open, it's still burning and they have the Russian fleet on their doorstep. They are still harbouring Boris in Haifa, who is wanted by Interpol, but they did recently give up Yair Klein to the Russians, very strange trial that. Handing over Israel's own Victor Bout to the Russians where he faced a Kangaroo court. So this might be a sign of things to come, some shifting of geo-political power, now the jig is up for the US.

                Judging by your comments you would be aware of the situation in Southern Iraq, (Shat Al Arab) and the number of Russian observers that were present during Operation Iraqi Freedom. So this is no little regional conflict in the Caucasus, Georgia is just a convenient flash point, and we all knew it would be.

                • 2 votes
                #4.3 - Mon Sep 8, 2008 6:32 AM EDT
                Mac-295039

                SthPacific:
                The US did not voice concern over Russian's military actions against Chechen terrorist sections and paramilitary organizations. If anything, the majority of Americans were sided with Putin in his actions dealing with Chechen terrorists. But the entire region has been a flash-point before WW1.

                I do have some insight as to your comment on Kurdish-Turkey relations and actions. I did several detailed assessments before, during, and post Operation Iraqi Freedom operation. I have spent some time near Kirkuk as well as Mosul and Al Sulmaniyah near the Iranian border. The Turkish-Kurd issue is a touchy one with just as many variables and flash-points as Eastern Europe. if you take in accounts the issue of Kurdish, Turkomen, Shi'a, Sh'ite, Sunni, etc with a large amount of un-tapped oil resources, then you are going to have conflict. More to discuss later on that subject.

                I will concur with some of your assessment on Russia vs Georgia. Clearly you have an immense understanding of the situation. Through history, that region has had problems and will continue to have problems much like Bosnia-Serbia-Kosovo. But my "gut feeling is that Russia is flexing it's ability and reminding the world that Russia is back and has the capabilities to promote it's own foreign policies. Whether this is an old problem or something recently created, the fact is that the people of Georgia (besides the ones who were stuck in Southern Ossetian) really don't like the idea of Russian troops in their country.

                • 1 vote
                #4.4 - Mon Sep 8, 2008 11:31 AM EDT
                SthPacific

                The US did not voice concern over Russian's military actions against Chechen terrorist sections

                Ah! so you are not aware of the Chechen's secret weapon, the blood feud. A truly terrifying weapon. If the US gets caught up in that the war on teror will never end. But I wont digress,

                the fact is that the people of Georgia (besides the ones who were stuck in Southern Ossetian) really don't like the idea of Russian troops in their country.

                I think that the Ossetian Militia's have expelled all the Georgians now, as for having Russians in there country, we will have to wait and see. Saakashvili has shown his true colours to his people, that being, he is an unstable loony. Whether or not the Georgians like the US or not, and all bets are off there now, US interest in Georgia will only be maintained if Azerbaijan, (BP SOCAR) continue to use the BTC.

                Ukraine's Black Sea remains one of the world's last great untapped offshore hydrocarbon provinces. Its geology and energy potential are believed to be similar to the Caspian Sea and Its geography is conveniently located at Europe's eastern doorstep. Author: Dr Jim Bown is the Chief Executive of Vanco Pechersk
                8 September 2008 -

                "Jesus Christ would not win in a Pechersk court" :)

                As for Kosovo, I think you should read this, China The Russians did not control Kosovo, they wanted to, as far as I know the Albanian Mafia, still run the show there, but I'm sure you were curious as to why the US accidentally bombed the Chinese embassy there.

                But my "gut feeling is that Russia is flexing it's ability and reminding the world that Russia is back and has the capabilities to promote it's own foreign policies.

                and you are probably right, but I would not call this a mere flexing, it's more like an "Energy full court press" and if that was the intention, then it has been a success. Europe has now dropped its hostile rhetoric, as we knew it would as soon as the first leaves of Autumn began to change colour, At the talks today, it sure looks like Russia has got its own way here, They have now applied the condition that Europe will have to put at least 200 monitors on the ground before Russia is willing to pull out, so that leaves Europe in a bit of a spot. Any trouble and it will be there fault. Abkhazi and Sth Ossetia will remain under Russian influence. There are also more Sth Ossetians on the other side of the BTC and some Greek orthodox enclaves extending from Armenia. This is what Saakashvilki means when he says cutting Georgia in half. There are also other area's of concern such as Karachay Cherkess and Kabardino Balkaria, to mention two, that would also like to start trouble with Georgia. Caucasian conflicts are sooooo complicated. :rolls:

                • 2 votes
                #4.5 - Tue Sep 9, 2008 9:07 AM EDT
                Mac-295039

                Like I said before, you have some insight that the normal press does not focus attention on or really cares to give the full story. But bombs do go astray. Contrary to popular belief that all rounds will hit the intended target, you do have from time to time, bombs that hit the wrong target.

                Russia is flexing more than it's energy arm, it is also reminding the rest of the world to stay out of it's business and stay clear from it's borders. Russia has been looked upon as a "has been power-house". So Putin is bringing the idea of nationalism back to the Russian people. Bring back the power days of the former USSR but without the long lines for shoes and toliet paper. Now that he has majority of control over natural resources within the Russian Federation he can control export levels and gain additional profit.

                With winter just around the corner, you don't see many European nations besides the UK standing up shouting at the Russians and making harsh comments. They need cheap oil and natural gas and Russia has the ability to pull the strings. Whether the people of Georgia accept or remove the current administration, I would find it hard to believe that they are all happy go lucky with Russian troops roaming free within their country.

                But you have much more information dealing with the subject matter concerning Eastern Europe. I retire from the field and revert back to my SME (subject matter expert) on Middle Eastern affairs.

                • 2 votes
                #4.6 - Tue Sep 9, 2008 10:07 AM EDT
                Reply
                KaiserFranz

                Pamela
                And Genetically Modified Organisms is mentioned WHERE in all of this ?? Or did you just pull that tid bit of "fact" out of your - umm -- well wherever! (too much information)

                • 2 votes
                Reply#5 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 10:16 AM EDT
                Pamela DrewRestored

                Pamela And Genetically Modified Organisms is mentioned WHERE in all of this ??

                It is the bulk of America's commodity crops and no one in the media dares whisper the words, so there's no chance that talk of food would inspire an additional note of what type of food it is!! It was the unreported element, in the part that I quoted. It should say tons of gmo subsidy crops.

                bringing in tons of humanitarian aid

                No act of human kindness goes unrewarded and in America the rewards always cycle to someone in the Rockefeller network. Every giift from the American people is a chance to fill the same contractor pockets and since the AP and MSM omit some details, I'm here to try to fill the coverage gaps. :~)

                • 3 votes
                #5.1 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 10:24 AM EDT
                KaiserFranz

                Are you talking about the Archer Daniels Midland stuff ? The same stuff we all eat every day - ?

                  #5.2 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 10:40 AM EDT
                  Pamela Drew

                  Why are my comments deleted? Apparently talking about the contents of USAID is banned now!!

                  • 4 votes
                  #5.3 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 11:06 AM EDT
                  Ratatosk

                  Pamela Drew -> apparently, dub'ya's working today.... you could probable could find a reason in his patriot act

                  • 3 votes
                  #5.4 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 11:13 AM EDT
                  QACoach

                  I was wondering the same thing myself, Pamela. Isn't it only mods who can delete comments from an AP thread unless "collapsed by community"?

                  • 3 votes
                  #5.5 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 11:21 AM EDT
                  jazzman646

                  Why are my comments deleted? Apparently talking about the contents of USAID is banned now!!

                  I was wondering about that myself. Is NV staff doing it? That's weird.

                  • 2 votes
                  #5.6 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 11:30 AM EDT
                  Pamela Drew

                  My special thanks to Calvin for the lightening fast reaction on the wrongful deletes!! Sweet fennel, sometimes it is nice to catch folks doing the good things too.

                  • 4 votes
                  #5.7 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 11:47 AM EDT
                  jazzman646

                  Pamela,

                  Any explanation of why it happened?

                  • 2 votes
                  #5.8 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 12:30 PM EDT
                  jazzman646

                  @jazzman646 George H.W. Bush (Sr.) George H.W. Bush is charged of

                  Charged by who exactly...?

                  other than you in the court of world opinion

                    #5.9 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 12:39 PM EDT
                    SthPacific

                    jazzman646 Read the answer, dont ask dumb questions when the answer is right in front of you.

                    • 2 votes
                    #5.10 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 12:43 PM EDT
                    jazzman646

                    jazzman646 Read the answer, dont ask dumb questions when the answer is right in front of you.

                    Ok I missed your link the first time.

                    But have there been any charges filed other than in the kangeroo courts you cited?

                    • 2 votes
                    #5.11 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 12:55 PM EDT
                    Pamela Drew

                    Any explanation of why it happened?

                    Nope, just a reply from Calvin saying it was fixed!

                    • 2 votes
                    #5.12 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 11:51 PM EDT
                    SthPacific

                    Well I would not call the ICC a Kangaroo court. But no, prosecutors have requested that no new charges should be filed until the trial of Radovan Karadzic is heard. This is because of the debacle with the Slobodan Milošević case. The court has only heard two cases so far, and hopefully it will get it right this time. There is also a case against Ahmed Haroun This is one to watch. The US is very upset about this, and I know why ;) If they catch him alive, there will be a lot of embarrassing questions for the Bush Administration and possibly further charges.

                    • 2 votes
                    #5.13 - Sun Sep 7, 2008 7:01 AM EDT
                    Reply
                    Mike V.

                    Port 0' Potty?

                    • 3 votes
                    Reply#6 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 10:20 AM EDT
                    MRZK.COM

                    Oil again? Hmmmm, guess those silly old conservatives should have listened to Jimmy Carter after all.

                    Carter's April 18, 1977 speech. "We simply must balance our demand for energy with our rapidly shrinking resources. By acting now, we can control our future instead of letting the future control us." "Further delay can affect our strength and our power as a nation." "[My energy proposal] is the moral equivalent of war' -- except that we will be uniting our efforts to build [our economy] and not destroy [it]."

                    He got virtually NO support from the opposition. Reagan took the Solar Panels off the White House, Bush offered tax breaks for Hummer-buyers and we have fought half a dozen wars over oil since. Carter was lacking in many areas, but he was right on this subject. In fact McCain made some of his same points last night (30 years later).

                    • 2 votes
                    Reply#7 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 10:26 AM EDT
                    KaiserFranz

                    Couldn't agree more ! Very well said.

                    • 2 votes
                    #7.1 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 10:33 AM EDT
                    jazzman646

                    Carter learned his lesson the hard way. I was one of those who idled in the gas lines of 1979, which along with the Iranian hostage crises cost him the election against Reagan.

                    T Boone Pickens is right, we need to end our dependence on foreign oil, its a national security issue, as demonstrated by Europe's weak response in opposition to the Russian invasion and occupation of Georgia, due to their dependence on Russian oil, and Russia's use of the oil cut off threat against them.

                    I hope who ever the next President is will finally make ending our dependence on foreign oil a top priority.

                    • 2 votes
                    #7.2 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 10:58 AM EDT
                    Max 3PO

                    President Carter was shafted by the American Oil Company's. People just don't get the Republican Oil Machine and how they control it. Dance little monkeys, we'll take care of you.

                    • 2 votes
                    #7.3 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 11:10 AM EDT
                    jazzman646

                    President Carter was shafted by the American Oil Company's

                    No I think that was

                    Iran

                    .

                    • 2 votes
                    #7.4 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 11:17 AM EDT
                    Samantha Gluck

                    T Boone Pickens is right, we need to end our dependence on foreign oil, its a national security issue, as demonstrated by Europe's weak response in opposition to the Russian invasion and occupation of Georgia, due to their dependence on Russian oil, and Russia's use of the oil cut off threat against them.

                    So true, Jazzman646!

                    • 2 votes
                    #7.5 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 11:20 AM EDT
                    KaiserFranz

                    Max 3PO --

                    I'm an independent -- not republican or democrat -- but I can tell you this -- if it were not for "BUSINESS" -- Oil Company, Auto Manufacturer's - Big Business of any nature -- who would be providing jobs? Should we all open a vegetable stand to sell stuff we can grow in our gardens ?

                    • 3 votes
                    #7.6 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 11:37 AM EDT
                    MRZK.COM

                    Beats the hell out of being poisoned by Mexico / China / ADM etc...

                    Just wait until they start licensing seeds for a season at a time and you will wish you HAD a vegetable stand.

                      #7.7 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 11:57 AM EDT
                      Reply
                      GuyOnTheCouch

                      Yes!! Can we please antagonize Russia so that they will attack us!! I am so excited about where our country is going. How can anyone vote for someone that agrees with 95% of Bush's policies? Oh well, thats why it is the American People's fault this is happening. They were too stupid to realize Bush (and the Republican Party for that matter) were going to F everything up.

                      • 2 votes
                      Reply#8 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 10:35 AM EDT
                      KaiserFranz

                      If you mean that our ships delivering humanitarian supplies - "antagonizes Russia" then, by all means, let's do exactly that. Russians don't belong in Poti - once they leave the tensions will subside - as long as they stay things will continue to escalate>

                      • 3 votes
                      #8.1 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 10:39 AM EDT
                      jazzman646

                      Yes!! Can we please antagonize Russia so that they will attack us!!

                      Russia is not going to risk going to war with the US over Georgia.

                      In this case they are the antagonists.

                      • 3 votes
                      #8.2 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 11:14 AM EDT
                      MRZK.COM

                      Hmmm, warships delivering who knows what to a country that borders a superpower and that superpower standing still for it, hmmmm....anyone remember Cuba?

                      Having said that, it IS possible that they are only delivering humanitarian supplies, ships can be stocked by other supply ships and the time frame is about right for having done that. To difuse this, I would offer to have neutral oversight, unless I had something to hide.

                      I believe in drawing lines, but you have to pick your fights.

                      • 1 vote
                      #8.3 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 11:59 AM EDT
                      KaiserFranz

                      Cuba was an issue due to "Missiles" - conventional weapons were not the target -- it's a different issue.

                      Either way though -- we can't allow anyone to search our ships - neutral or otherwise -- not now - not till Russia is out of Georgia! -- we can't show that kind of weakness. We can't let them think we are seeking their approval of anything we deliver to Georgia - NO WAY!

                      The moment Russia pulls out of Georgia -- then everything should be wide open to neutral inspection - but not till Russia honors the withdrawal agreement is signed.

                      • 3 votes
                      #8.4 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 12:13 PM EDT
                      Mac-295039

                      Russian troops have shifted from armed combat troops to now "peace keepers. Why not move back into beloved Southern Osseitan? Georgian troops can pose no threat to the vast amount of newly acquired Russian citizens with new passports. So why still have troops posted further inland and into the Georgian country? Russia is requesting a buffer zone to prevent further Georgia military intrusions? regardless of the whole Bush crew, the idea that we have no right to say anything based on our on-going operations in Iraq is stupid. Russia is seeking to regain lost control after the Soviet melt-down. We have a right to say we disapprove or distrust the Russians like anyone else. Russia was going belly-up from economic reforms, but the US and Europe paid billions in debt relief and then forgave the Russians in paying it back during the late 1990s up to the recent present. We were stupid in thinking that a former KGB agent now leader of Russia was for democratic ideals.

                      Russia demanding to inspect a US Naval Warship is a joke. It would be another attempt by Putin (the real leader of the Russian Federation) to see how far the US and the West will bend.

                      • 2 votes
                      #8.5 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 2:34 PM EDT
                      GuyOnTheCouch

                      Oh I have no doubt that they are delivering humanitarian supplies, I mean come on, in the last few years violence has definately been our LAST option.... HA that made me laugh. But seriously, its not about what the ship is carrying, its about how we are (FOR NO REASON) separating ourselves even more from Russia so that we can so easily slip right back into a cold war. I mean didnt we all have a great time the first time around? Where would World War I be without World War II? Where would Gulf War I be withouth Gulf War II? And now, where would Cold War I be without Cold War II?

                        #8.6 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 3:01 PM EDT
                        Maxwell Despard

                        *cough*OctoberSurprise*cough*

                          #8.7 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 3:07 PM EDT
                          GuyOnTheCouch

                          My fears exactly. And the best part is, now Bush will get to postpone the elections and be our great president for even longer! Woohoo!

                            #8.8 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 3:30 PM EDT
                            Mac-295039

                            So in other words we should immediately ask the Russian Federation for forgiveness on our part for even questioning their operations in Georgia? We should also tell Poland and the rest of the former Warsaw Pact countries that they "are on their own". So this entire situation is made up of the vast Cheney-Bush conspiracy to ensure GOP foreign policy as well as the need for potential confrontation between the West and Russia?

                            Regardless who wins the next Presidential elections, they will not be able to "wish" this situation away. Russia is extending it's muscle in it's backyard. Now flushed with billions in oil sells and the confiscation of the bulk of foreign owned oil production facilities, is it any wonder that Putin is now pressing Europe as well as the United States on it's new era of Russian Foreign Policy?

                            The Russians acted too soon destroying all those huge pictures, statues, and markers of Stalin and Lenin. They should have left them and added a Mao like portrait of Putin as well.

                            • 3 votes
                            #8.9 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 3:41 PM EDT
                            Samantha Gluck

                            The Russians acted too soon destroying all those huge pictures, statues, and markers of Stalin and Lenin. They should have left them and added a Mao like portrait of Putin as well.

                            For real, mac. Well said.

                            • 3 votes
                            #8.10 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 3:53 PM EDT
                            Mac-295039

                            During the Clinton era as well as Bush jr. the United States was paying a considerable amount of money to the Russian government. For several reasons, one major issue was to establish nuclear/biological/chemical weapons sites to destroy older model Soviet warheads. It was also a means to ensure that an Al Qadia operative could not walk into a Russian Arms Depot and walk out with a smaller warhead from a ICBM cone. One of our biggest fears was some Russian official or military member could be bribed due to the pay shortages to the Russian Armed Forces by a known terrorist agent.

                            Russia sold a considerable amount of weapons to China. China with a booming economy and money to burn, spent billions in up-grading it's Pacific and India naval fleets with specific interest in attack submarines as well as fast attack vessels. Artillery, rocket artillery, armor, and assistance in their aircraft production capabilities. Russia made money with the West and the US paying the bills and Russia making serious profit with expansions in oil productions locations. Putin waited until the right time and made his move. He is surrounded by former Communist party members and anyone with potential political rivals are taken out, placed in jail, or caused to flee out of the country.

                            If those here think that the only reason the Russian federation is acting like it is due to US involvement in Eastern Europe then you really need to re-look the situation. There have been small tactical nuclear weapons placed in Germany since the mid-1980s. Who has 90% of their offensive tactical and strategic weapons pointed at the US? Russia. Nothing has changed. Russia may say they are "Democratic" but really it is total Putin control. many Russians like it. Their pay is going up and they like to instill the old Russian Bear back in action with visions of those large May Day parades. Putin is pushing a wedge between Russia and the West. Putin is the one making threats to "punish" any European country that allows US missile defense systems or any US military assistance near it's borders. Putin has begun to send Russian TU-24 (BEAR) bombers skirting near the Alaskan airspace. Let's not start making claims that the only reason for this ordeal in Georgia is all based on President Bush.

                            • 3 votes
                            #8.11 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 4:11 PM EDT
                            GuyOnTheCouch

                            Its actually enjoyable to read your comments as they only reinforce what I was saying earlier. So Russia has their nuclear warheads pointed at us? Thats cool, lets try to piss them off as much as we can, that way they will be sure to fire them. Remember what happened during the Cuban (Russian) Missle Crisis? Oh yes, we were able to diplomatically resolve the situation, where as now we just go around telling people that they cant police the world, and if they do there will be severe consequences. I think we are just jealous that there is another police squad out there now, pretty much like Super Troopers. Too stupid ass forces angry at each other which ends in disaster for one of them (the corrupted one). Gee I wonder which represents which. Thanks again for proving my point bud.

                              #8.12 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 5:55 PM EDT
                              Mac-295039

                              I am glad that you enjoy reading my comments. But to make my point, I will say that both the Russian Federation as well as the United States understand the potential risks when one side begins to rumble. Both have nuclear weapons at the ready and the Russians are fully aware that if the Russians began launching nuclear ICBMs the US would make a full counter-strike which would leave both countries as much as the rest of the world a heap of glowing ruins. That is the idea of mutual assured destruction. You throw one my way I am going to commit full strike package back at you. Russia knows this. The idea that there is another "world police force" on the block is a incorrect assessment. Putin is not looking to become the peace-keeper of Eastern Europe. He is attempting to establish a power-base with former Communist Party members in the Russian Government and restore some old Soviet style honor among the Russian people. So Putin hand-picked his replacement and then forwarded the majority of power back into Putin's control. So Putin runs the show. He is playing "good cop bad cop" right now allowing the Russian President to speak tough while taking all cues from Putin.

                              I do not think that it would be wise to just sit back on the couch and go back to an isolationist mode of thinking. To allow Europe to be "punished" by Russia for allowing or requesting US military assistance is wrong. Putin has control over a major oil pipeline towards Europe. It is going into the winter season and Putin knows the price of oil and heating oil will go up with the drop in the temperatures.

                              Putting our heads into the sand and wishing for all of this to go away will not solve anything. Russia actually needs to trade with Europe as well as the US. Russia has cash but it still needs a place to spend it. They are not that self-sufficent.

                              • 1 vote
                              #8.13 - Sat Sep 6, 2008 4:54 PM EDT
                              Reply
                              Cody Lee

                              What really burns my b u t t is that our boys and girls in Washington will stop at nothing to help another country with zillions of our tax dollars but where the hell were they when Katrina destroyed part of our country? Something is really wrong about that.

                              • 1 vote
                              Reply#9 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 12:49 PM EDT
                              rapax

                              Russia will pull out of Georgia as soon as U.S. pulls out of... o i dunno.. Iraq... Afghanistan... Teroorismland? right terror is a country? and drugs are some island in the arctic or is it war on drugstores...

                              • 1 vote
                              Reply#10 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 1:06 PM EDT
                              KaiserFranz

                              The document Russia signed - that requires them to pull out of Georgia and return to the positions they held prior to Aug 7th made no mention and therefore imposed no requirement for the US to pull out of anywhere as a precondition to Russian withdrawal.

                              It really doesn't matter how you try to couch it -- Russia is wrong by not withdrawing -- no matter how RIGHT their part of the war may or may not have been -- that issue is closed -- the issue now is withdrawal in accordance with the agreement they signed.

                              This really is not hard to understand :)

                              • 2 votes
                              #10.1 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 2:28 PM EDT
                              Reply
                              KyleN

                              Perhaps if a merchant ship was sent Russia would seize it and thus require a response by NATO leading to war. If a warship is sent Russia can only attack it not seize it leading to a standoff and avoiding a larger conflict. It's a game of chicken in which we (public) haven't the information to understand the import of various actions on either side.

                                Reply#11 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 1:36 PM EDT
                                KaiserFranz

                                I'm very glad to see that not EVERYONE on this site wants to bend over and grease it up for Uncle Russia to take a poke!

                                Everyone with an IQ above room temperature knows that the Russians don't need a "Buffer Zone" in Georgia -- after all - they already stole every gun, tv, car and truck they could find -- whats left to fight with ??

                                If they are so insecure that they just have to have a buffer zone - then set it up inside South Ossetia - move those folks back and let the Georgians return to their homes -- that might be more in compliance with the cease fire and withdrawal documents they signed -- just a shot in the dark --- duh ??

                                The point is -- they don't need a buffer zone -- they just feel the need to "Tweak the West's Nose" -- that's what this is all about -- showing what "tough guys" they are -- Ho Hum *sigh*

                                • 2 votes
                                Reply#12 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 4:34 PM EDT
                                Ratatosk

                                Hello KaiserFranz,

                                If dumb-ya didn't have every troop tied down in iraq, we might be in a better position to show some mussel, but since the "I'm the decider" guy decided to fabricate another war...

                                I'm sure even you recall that in the later parts of 2004, while still suffering from sharp criticism by leading republican senators of Bush's management of the war, here comes Paul Bremer, Chief Administrator for Iraq at the time, with remarks that the Bush administration "never had enough troops on the ground". Bremer's widely publicized statements in the media that he had "often raised the issue of too few troops with the White House".

                                Of course I have say in Bush's defense he was probable too preoccupied to realize what was being said to him due to Donald Rumsfeld's statements to the Council of Foreign Relations, on October 4, 2004, where he stated that there was no "strong, hard evidence" of a link between al Qaeda terrorists and Saddam Hussein while he ruled Iraq.

                                Even Sen. John McCain was pleading with the Bush administration for more troops. Written statements like "To enhance our chances of success with this strategy, and enable our forces to hold as much territory as possible, we need more troops." had been directly address to the president by the Republican senator.

                                It's clear that if he wasn't so hell bent to do it 'his' way and wait four year to finally put a reasonable number of troops on the ground, we might have been able to draw down enough troops out of iraq by now to do something about it...

                                but no, he's the decider...

                                well, come november, me and a whole lot of other folks that are sick and tried for his sh^t, become the deciders!

                                and as always, it was nice chatting to you again.

                                • 2 votes
                                #12.1 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 5:01 PM EDT
                                KaiserFranz

                                Ratatosk

                                A well thought out and cogent post -- We will not always agree - but in this rare instance LOL -- I do agree with everything you said.

                                Congratulations LOL -- I look forward to our next opportunity for ummmm "discussion" :)

                                • 3 votes
                                #12.2 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 5:18 PM EDT
                                Ratatosk

                                Young man,

                                Your kind words are very much appreciated and as Dick Nixon once said, au revoir, we'll meet again.

                                Your humble student,
                                Ratatosk

                                • 3 votes
                                #12.3 - Fri Sep 5, 2008 5:28 PM EDT
                                Reply
                                KaiserFranz

                                Ratatosk

                                Good morning -- it's a lovely day in the USA

                                I hope, when you say:

                                "well, come november, me and a whole lot of other folks that are sick and tried for his sh^t, become the deciders! "

                                That your decision will be based upon someones ability to actually LEAD this country rather than implement some elusive claim to "change" -- I really would hate to see Barak Hussain as president -- We are faced with a political dilemma - neither candidate really moves me to strong feelings *sigh*

                                It's coming down to a "lesser of two undesirables" - one is a charismatic speaker with no clue -- and the other is potentially more of the same that we've had for 8 years -- this sucks!

                                • 1 vote
                                Reply#13 - Sat Sep 6, 2008 12:00 PM EDT
                                Ratatosk

                                Greetings,

                                i admit, sometimes the little hamster falls asleep in the wheel but its still smart enough not to fall for mc'sames elusive claim to "change" or do you think after decades of being a maverick, he's finally going to stop bucking his own party ? putting and end to lobbyist ? bla, bla, bla ?

                                i am confused to who your referring to when you to state "one is a charismatic speaker with no clue"...palins not running for president and obama, as i understand it, while at harvard, was president of the harvard law review. i know its run by the students, but still, it' one of the most cited law reviews in the united states and considered by many to be the most prestigious. the reviews alumni includes supreme court justices edward sanford, felix frankfurter, ruth ginsburg, antonin scalia, stephen breyer and chief justice john roberts jr, and michael chertoff, i believe, was a member too. obama also taught constitutional law for over a decade. so it a wild guess here on my part that obama actually knows something about the law and does, in fact, have a clue.

                                and with binden to compliment obama, i got to respectfully disagree with you, this is great!

                                • 1 vote
                                #13.1 - Sun Sep 7, 2008 3:45 AM EDT
                                KaiserFranz

                                Ratatosk

                                There is no question that Obama is very clever - the question is more in line with "Who is right for the country" ? -- At the moment, my conclusion is that neither candidate fills the bill.

                                You are obviously for Obama so I'll address my concerns with his candidacy.

                                Teaching Law and the Harvard Law Review are both very impressive credentials - if you are applying for a job with a Law Firm - or even if you are wanting to be elected as a Judge - they do not qualify you to lead our country through very troubled waters and precarious times.

                                Obama has no Executive experience. Such experience is gained by actually being in charge of something and also being responsible for the results of executive decisions you make. Community Organizing doesn't count for that sort of experience. Even being a Senator for about 2 years doesn't help. Serving several 6 year terms as a Senator helps a bit because of the exposure you have to issues and the results of your votes -- gained over time, this experience is very beneficial. Contacts are made and relationships are formed -foreign as well as domestic - again, over time, that will enable you to work with people, everywhere, to advance your ideas.

                                He voted over 130 times as "present" instead of "yes" or "no" in the Illinois senate - this leads me to believe that he has a hard time making firm decisions. We call voting "present" a "cop out" - or "sitting on the fence". I want a President that can make up his mind and help this country -- not one that has shown that he likes to sit back and see which way the wind blows before he takes a position on an issue.

                                Obama's attitude toward our flag and all it stands for troubles me - no lapel pin - failure to render a respectful salute when the flag is passed by -- this is a problem for me.

                                Having never even been a Boy Scout, much less in the military - even if only the National Guard -- certainly doesn't qualify Obama to be Commander in Chief or our Military.

                                I can go on and on but I won't - -- I can do the same for McCain as well -- this is really intended to be a "non-partisan" review of qualifications.

                                Who is best equipped to deal with the current Russia - Georgia crisis ? I ask because it will still be with us when next year rolls around -- unless we are all standing around glowing in the dark by then.

                                • 1 vote
                                #13.2 - Sun Sep 7, 2008 9:23 AM EDT
                                Ratatosk

                                you bring up some valid points...

                                grated our laws don't have a lot to do with dealing with folks from different countries and cultures like Iran's president aja-mad-in-the-head but they do come in handy when dealing with domestic issues.

                                in ref. to obama has no executive experience. and mccain has how much executive experience ? serving several 6 year terms as a Senator just shows he popular at home with his local voters and obama did run a pretty good campaign against the clinton mechain.

                                your concerns about patriotism and lapel pins, visit "www_uniteddemocraticnations_org/images/BushInChina_jpg"... you'll need to change the "_" to "." and let me know if you can find dub-ya's lapel pin.

                                millitary service ? could it be for other then united states military like geroge washington ? by the way, any chance that you would know the ranks of john adams, thomas jefferson, john quincy adams, martin van buren, millard fillmore, grover cleveland, william howard taft, woodrow wilson, warren g. harding, calvin coolidge, herbert hoover, franklin d. doosevelt, or bill clinton at the time of their discharged from service ? you just have to give me one if it's easier one you.

                                i see you have a sense of humor but you don't think we have a better chance of "glowing in the dark" if bomb-bomb-mccains elected verses obama ? don't forget mccain spent most of his time in vietnam sitting out the war as a pow in hanoi.

                                i can appreciate your position and i'm not going to try, probable because i know i wouldn't have a chance, to sway you one way or the other...i don't feel it's my position to and more important, it's your vote, please do with it as you see fit.

                                • 1 vote
                                #13.3 - Sun Sep 7, 2008 1:38 PM EDT
                                Reply
                                KaiserFranz

                                Today the Russian "check point" just outside of Poti, Georgia refused passage to four United Nations trucks carrying humanitarian aid. No weapons -- just aid. I suppose they just wanted to show the world they could do that -- brave soldiers that they are -- oh -- by the way -- the UN convoy was completely unarmed.

                                This the sort of action that starts wars between larger powers -- do the Russians really want to make it necessary for a military escort to be required for aid to get through ?? How so very foolish this is becoming.

                                • 1 vote
                                Reply#14 - Mon Sep 8, 2008 3:00 PM EDT
                                Leave a Comment:
                                You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead.
                                You're in XHTML Mode. If you prefer, you can use Easy Mode instead.
                                (XHTML tags allowed - a,b,blockquote,br,code,dd,dl,dt,del,em,h2,h3,h4,i,ins,li,ol,p,pre,q,strong,ul)
                                Newsvine Privacy Statement
                                As a new user, you may notice a few temporary content restrictions. Click here for more info.
                                FUN STUFF:
                                • Leaderboard |
                                • E-Mail Alerts |
                                • Top of the Vine |
                                • Newsvine Live |
                                • Newsvine Archives |
                                • The Greenhouse
                                COMPANY STUFF:
                                • Code of Honor |
                                • Company Info |
                                • Contact Us |
                                • Jobs |
                                • User Agreement |
                                • Privacy Policy |
                                • About our ads
                                LEGAL STUFF:
                                • © 2005-2012 Newsvine, Inc. |
                                • Newsvine® is a registered trademark of Newsvine, Inc. |
                                • Newsvine is a property of msnbc.com