U.S. is deliberately creating opportunities for terrorism inside Pakistan. The objective is to create a situation where a U.S. political and military intervention in Pakistan becomes inevitable. Segments of the Pakistani ‘leadership’ are part of this agenda, since it cannot be completed without inside help. Pakistani Pashtuns, the most loyal citizens of Pakistan, are being turned into rebels. If the present trend continues, we may eventually confront a civil war across the country. This is exactly the situation the U.S. is seeking so that it can intervene and establish a puppet regime in Islamabad. Is anyone In Islamabad or Rawalpindi paying attention?

By SHIREEN M. MAZARI

Wednesday, 9 October 2008.

WWW.AHMEDQURAISHI.COM

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan—The big picture for Pakistan should be more visible now in terms of what the U.S. agenda is for this country. But that agenda has been carefully operationalized since the opportunity presented itself to the U.S. in the form of the terrorist attacks of 9/11 – in which, by the way, no Pakistani was involved. Some of us have been highlighting that agenda for some years since, and also pointing out how complicity of our leadership was a requirement for that agenda to continue moving ahead. And what is that agenda?

Clearly, it involves the U.S. creating space within the tribal areas to move in militarily and eventually restructure the whole Muslim nuclear entity of Pakistan. Attacking civilians and thereby creating chaos and panic which would inevitably lead to a mass displacement and add to the pressure on the central government in Islamabad. Also, knowing full well – after all if we can conclude that such killings will create more space for extremists and terrorists, one can assume the U.S. analysts and advisers must have done the same – that by unleashing a war against our tribals and abusing our sovereignty they will create more space for the terrorists; and thereby more reasons to further destabilize us from outside while we face increasing attacks from our home-grown terrorists. Let us not fool ourselves – the U.S. is no friend but a powerful enemy and its ultimate aim is to defang us in terms of our nuclear assets. Already the statements have become more honed in terms of our nuclear assets – both directly, in terms of a bizarre fear that our nukes will fall into "terrorist" hands even though it is the U.S. that seems to have a problem of loose nukes (remember the U.S. planes flying with such weapons only last year?); and, indirectly, by having their politicians and some international agencies build up a crescendo of Pakistan being the most dangerous country in the world and a new "war zone".

That was the first phase of the plan for Pakistan. As the U.S. war on terror has unfolded in our part of the world, we have suddenly seen the emergence of a Tehrik-i-Taliban, Pakistan and countless other militant groups – some of whom were raised and funded by the CIA in earlier years and may well have sustained that linkage. The most aggressively loyal Pakistanis of the tribal belt have now been turned into challengers of the writ of the Pakistani state. Is it not worth understanding why and how? We are being forced into accepting the U.S. war now as "our war" although in reality while we are facing a severe threat from extremists and home grown terrorists, our fight against these forces has to be different from the U.S. war on terror. That is still not our war but is in fact fuelling and aggravating our terrorist problems.

Now the U.S. has moved to phase two where it is actually seeking direct intervention on the ground before it finally puts international pressure on us to hand over our nuclear assets – showing the world how Pakistan has indeed become a "war zone" in which the international community must intervene to take charge of the nuclear assets. Of course, the U.S. would then offer to head such a mission. Seems far fetched? Then recheck what has been happening in terms of U.S. policy vis a vis Pakistan since 9/11 and the statements emanating from the U.S. at the official and media levels.

As for us Pakistanis, we are being confronted with a two-front war: against a qualitatively new terrorist threat in terms of suicide bombings and the growth of a violent extremism; and, against an indirect war being conducted by the U.S. against our long term survival as an independent nuclear state. But, as I stated at the beginning, none of the U.S. agenda would be feasible without the support of the Pakistani rulers. Unfortunately this support has been there from the start but now it has reached new proportions.

During the Musharraf government we were given many briefings to the effect that the U.S. and NATO/ISAF could only intrude aerially into our space with our permission. As a perturbed pilot informed me the other day, he was shocked to learnt that apart from the UAVs flying into Pakistani air space, NATO and ISAF aircraft are flying round the clock tactical missions in Pakistan. Apparently, they have been cleared by our controllers' to fly tactical in FATA, "Pukhtunkhwa" and Balochistan. The Musharraf government had also given unprecedented access to the U.S. in terms of bases and intelligence. But our democratic leadership has gone even further in affecting unilateral compromises, including it now appears permission to hit and kill our own people, which impact our very survival as an independent nuclear entity.

Regardless of how our own Goebbels tries to explain away the Zardari interview to the Wall Street Journal, the quotes speak for themselves and nor has a correction been sought or offered on either side. First there is the absurd style of reference President Zardari uses when talking of Pakistan and its institutions as his personal fiefdom, "my F-16s", "my security personnel" (that is the military) "my war" and so on. And of course he wants the world to "give me" $ 100 billion!

More damaging though is his declaration that not only is he "an American friend" but that the U.S. is carrying out Predator missile strikes on Pakistani soil with his government's consent. His logic for insisting the U.S. support his government also undermines Pakistan because he seeks to show that if he falls our nukes will fall into terrorist hands. Is this how he protects our national interests? Now if his wish of accessing our strategic institutions with his cronies and the like is fulfilled, we may as well hand over all our assets to the U.S. – and now, by default, given the Indo-U.S. strategic partnership, to India.

But then, they say a little knowledge is a dangerous thing and it seems our president has no understanding of our history since he declares grandly, "India has never been a threat to Pakistan". Please, Ms Rehman, at least teach him some basic history and you do not have to use Pakistani sources either! As for his comment on the Indo-U.S. nuclear deal – which even more rational U.S. analysts have decried as a factor in upping the nuclear arms' levels in South Asia, our ignorant President sees it merely as the "largest democracy" in the world "getting friendly" with the "oldest democracy" in the world!

In fact, he sees his own country simply as a backyard to serve Indian development. As for the poor Kashmiris, they have been labeled "terrorists" for seeking liberation from Indian occupation! To our shame, a Pakistani ruler's effigy was burnt for the first time since 1979, in Baramulla town in Occupied Kashmir with 400 Kashmiris defying curfew to express their anger at the Zardari labeling of the Kashmiri freedom fighters as "terrorists". So far, Zardari has certainly been good news only for the U.S. and India!

If Musharraf was forced to compromise with the U.S. – although now his compromises appear miniscule when compared to what the present government is giving to the U.S. – to ostensibly sustain himself in power then what is our present leadership so worried about in terms of the U.S.? Are there still some dangerous skeletons despite the NRO that the U.S. can utilize to keep the democratic dispensation in line with its eventual goal of ending the nuclear Pakistani state as we know it?

If the present trends continue we may well eventually confront a civil war across the country. This is exactly the situation the U.S. is seeking to come in fully and set up its own quisling set up. As we and the U.S. know, there have always been many in our leadership only too willing to play that role. As for the present leaders, their embarking on the road to power may well have been prepared in Washington, but it is Pakistan's realities that will ensure their stay in or removal from power. Can they manage to get out of the U.S. embrace to see their own realities?

The writer is a defense analyst. She can be reached at callstr@hotmail.com

The BBC, though, is not bound by such a ruling and continues to pump out the untruths that have been so thoroughly discredited. Now climate change propaganda has found its way into history articles. Not content with governments and the media disseminating propaganda to manipulate and control the future, we have to suffer the distortion of the past as well. In this month's BBC History magazine there is an article about 'the scientists who predicted climate change'. This is a very topical issue, and could have been a very interesting article had it not come off the rails and become a train wreck in the first few lines.

We are to understand that the article was penned by Dr Paul Parsons,

a former editor of award-winning science and technology magazine Focus. His latest bookThe Science of Doctor Who, was long-listed for the 2007 Royal Society Prize for Science Books

We're not told that Parsons is a BBC journalist, or that the magazine Focus, of which he was editor, is a BBC publication that heavily promoted his book in 2006, and no doubt made him plenty of dosh into the bargain. Parsons has a DPhil in cosmology, and is the author of the BBC book 'The Big Bang: The Birth of our Universe'. That great bastion of bigoted atheism, the Royal Society, describes Parsons as 'a lifelong worshipper of Doctor Who', and he is hailed by the BBC as an 'expert' on Doctor Who (a science fiction television programme). In my judgment, he's too far into the fiction to be able to determine what is truth from a scientific perspective.

In his article in the BBC History magazine, he has barely got started when he comes out with this howler:

Climatologists now warn that extreme weather events...are set to get ever more common as we start to feel the effects of global climate change.

There are other signs too...Malaria has been reported in Nairobi, Kenya, as the city's high altitude becomes warm enough for mosquitoes carrying the disease to survive there.

It seems that Parsons has lifted this straight out of Gore's An Inconvenient Truth, a piece of propaganda worthy of the Third Reich. Don't tell a fib, because no-one will believe you. Tell a whopper because no-one would believe that anyone would lie to that extent, so the lie will prevail. Such was Goebbels' doctrine.

Anyone reading this text by Parsons would (because they are being told this by a scientist) be expected to believe that 1) malaria was not known in Nairobi before, 2) Nairobi's climate is warming, 3) malaria is related to warm climate, and 4) this is a sign of climate change.

All four propositions are false. No true scientist could possibly believe this rubbish, but as the Nazi propagandist wrote,

It is not propaganda's task to be intelligent, its task is to lead to success.

Yet even in 2001, that political body, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), stated

there are insufficient historical data on malaria distribution and activity to determine the role of warming, if any, in the recent resurgence of malaria in the highlands of Kenya... (emphasis mine)

Perhaps the most detailed relevant study was by Small, Goetz and Hay published in 2003 in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Climatic suitability for malaria transmission in Africa, 1911-1995, which stated

The majority of areas with variable transmission potential showed no evidence of trends in climatic suitability...Climate warming, expressed as a systematic temperature increase over the 85-year period, does not appear to be responsible for an increase in malaria suitability over any region of Africa...These results suggest research on the links between climate change and the recent resurgence of malaria across Africa would best be served through...closer examination of the role of nonclimatic influences, such as the rise of drug resistance.

One of the world's leading experts in malaria, Paul Reiter at the Pasteur Institute, sums up the evidence against Gore's claim

Gore's claim is deceitful on four counts. Nairobi was dangerously infested when it was founded; it was founded for a railway, not for health reasons; it is now fairly clear of malaria; and it has not become warmer.

What has been seen in East Africa is a resurgence of malaria. Under British colonial rule, action was taken against malaria - draining swamps, destroying breeding grounds and spraying with pyrethrins, DDT and malathion, anti-malarial city planning etc. This is all documented in the literature:

Diary of an African Journey, 1914 by Henry Rider Haggard:

Typhoid is rife (there is no drainage in Nairobi) and notwithstanding the altitude there is a good deal of malaria...

A City of Farmers: Informal Urban Agriculture in the Open Spaces of Nairobi, Kenya by Donald B. Freeman, describing the situation in the 1920s:

Further tracts of open apace in the city were provided by the vigorous anti-malarial activities of the colonial administration. Twelve foot minimum-width way-leaves along the banks of all streams and drainage lines were left free of buildings to permit spraying of mosquito larvae and clearing of dense brush that harboured adult mosquitoes. The Nairobi swamp and other low-lying areas were drained and canalized.

Bulletin of Hygiene, 1926:

Nairobi was divided into 18 areas in each of which the breeding of mosquitoes were mapped, together with notes of the varieties taken.

Diseases of the Tropics, by George Cheever Shattuck, 1951:

Autochthonous falcaparum malaria is common in Nairobi (Kenya) where it is transmitted by A. gambiae at altitudes up to 5700 feet (1900 metres)

International Nursing Review, 1969

A little over 20 years ago plague was well-known in Nairobi, and malaria was prevalent.

Paul Reiter has an interesting note:

My colleagues have looked carefully at climate and malaria records kept by the management staff of nearby highland tea estates, and published their findings in Nature.

They found no evidence of long-term climatic change and noted that epidemics of malaria were frequent until the 1950s, when DDT appeared. Malaria's return in the past 20 years has been due to many factors - the effective ban on DDT, deforestation, migration from highly malarious areas, drug and insecticide resistance and above all, poverty.

Enough. We have demonstrated that Al Gore's assertions about malaria in An Inconvenient Truth are pure deception. But Gore is a politician and not a scientist. Shame on Paul Parsons, a scientist, who is embracing, repeating and propagating such fantasies.

In 1939, the town of Meseritz was within the Prussian province of Pomerania. Today the town bears the name Miedzyrzecz and is situated in Poland. The hospital at Obrawalde (now Obrzyce), usually referred to as Meseritz-Obrawalde, together with the institution at Tiegenhof (now Dziekanka) in the Wartheland, were probably the most notorious killing centres of "wild" euthanasia.

During the period preceding the suspension of the euthanasia programme in August 1941, large numbers of patients had been transferred from Meseritz-Obrawalde "to the East" and had, like patients from other Pomeranian institutions, simply disappeared. At the beginning of 1942, the first trains, each containing about 700 handicapped patients arrived.

They were eventually to be transported to Meseritz-Obrawalde from at least twenty-six German cities, usually in the middle of the night. At the end of the year, and especially in 1943, these trains arrived more and more frequently. All the nurses and orderlies - according to their statements - had to "unload" the patients.

The sick patients were in horrible condition: many were emaciated and they were very dirty. This condition contributed to the nursing personnel being able to distance themselves emotionally from these people. The patients were in such an undignified condition that the personnel could be convinced to kill thousands of them without compunction. The staff selected for killing those patients who were unable to work, but the process was arbitrary and those selected included "patients who caused extra work for the nurses, those who were deaf-mute, ill, obstructive, or undisciplined, and anyone else who was simply annoying" as well as patients "who had fled and were recaptured, and those engaging in undesirable sexual liaisons."

The selected handicapped victims were taken to so-called killing rooms where physicians and nurses killed them using an orally administered drug overdose or a lethal injection. The killing of was never done by only one nurse. Practical experience had shown that it was absolutely necessary for the killing to be done by at least two nurses. After the patient had been killed by the male and female nurses, a fraudulent death certificate was prepared and sent to the victim’s family. Most of the naked corpses were buried in mass graves, but some were cremated in Frankfurt an der Oder. Construction of a crematorium to handle the large number of corpses was begun, but the project was not yet completed when Soviet troops liberated the hospital on 29 January 1945. Meseritz-Obrawalde had 900 patients in 1939, but during the war the institution was filled to capacity with 2,000 patients.

Read more here: http://www.holocaustresearchproject.org/euthan/Meseritz-Obrawalde.html

The Holocaust Education & Archive Research Team

www.HolocaustResearchProject.org

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad addressed the General Assembly of the United Nations this past week and said what pretty much everyone thought he was going to say. The only two nations to stand up in protest were the United States and Israel.

So, what did he say? Eve Epstein has the following from National Review:

No, it did not. What is even more distressing is that our supposed "allies," the same nations who helped us bring down Nazi Germany, didn't make one little peep of protest. Not Great Britain, not France, no one.

And after Amadinejad finished giving the U.N. his reasons for hating the Jews, what did the U.N. do? They applauded him. Not only that, but the President of the General Assembly embraced the Iranian President after conculding the anti-Semitic remarks.

This is why we need to get the U.S. out of the U.N. and get the U.N. out of the U.S.

You can access the complete article on-line here:

Where’s The Outrage, Turtle Bay?
Eve Epstein
National Review
September 25, 2008

The scope of the festival is focused on presenting the masterpieces of instrumental and vocal-instrumental 20th century music that refers to the fundamental role of the intertwined motifs of sacrum and profanum, the geographical location is also important. The subsequent editions of the festival have focused around these axes and featured music from: Vienna, France, Russia and the USA. A trend to feature contemporary music emerged during the previous 2007 edition of the festival, devoted to American music. Works of George Gershwin, Charles Ives, Steve Reich, Eliott Carter, John Adams, Philip Glass, Jon Cage, Miles Davis, and Leonard Bernstein were featured in the outstanding festival performances.

The sixth edition of the festival will be dedicated in its entirety to the most important artists and musical trends of 20th century Germany. It is the largest event promoting contemporary German music both in Poland and in Europe, ranging from Kurt Weill, Karlheinz Stockhausen, Hans Werner Henze, Helmut Lachenmann, Heiner Goebbels, and Wolfgang Rihm, to the most prominent genres of electronic music. Festival will be a large-scale presentation of the 20th century German composers’ repertoire, exposing the pivotal moments and the debatability of terms such as “classics” and “classical music”. Using the post-industrial buildings of Nowa Huta and the historic old town as concert halls is unprecedented. It is an extensive promotion of music played in post-industrial venues: factory floors, rolling mills, galvanizing mills, or the famed Oskar Schindler Factory.

]]> http://2100century.wordpress.com/?p=3 Sun, 07 Sep 2008 19:52:24 +0000 madsholmen http://2100century.wordpress.com/2008/09/07/words/ Like a story unfolds its parts, so will this blog probably take on a life of its own. But what better than to start with a bunch of quotes... see, quotes tell you a lot of things in a very short form. Compressed, so to speak. It is most likely for that reason they cling on to our minds, provide us with inspiration, guidance and sometimes makes us sad and regretful, because we believed them to fanatically.

Because of just that, i thought the first blog post should be a true story. The quotes of my life...

"The optimist thinks this might be the best of worlds, the pessimist knows it is"

"Work hard and be nice to people"

"Rather be a pirate than join the navy"

It is more fun to talk with someone who doesn't use long, difficult words but rather short, easy words like "What about lunch?"

"I bet in heaven, all the interesting people are missing"

"Faith moves mountains, but only knowledge moves them to the right place”

"When the world zigs, take a zag!"

"Man is born equal, but practice very different"

"There are people who read history and then there is people who write it"

"Only fools clean, a true genius also master chaos"

"I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I needed to be"

"Some things simply have to be felt in the heart"

"There is no need to do things first, just do them best"

"All the world's a stage"

I know it is easy to start with other people's words. Stealing words however is not an option, they belong to all of us... For the exact same reason I have also not mentioned the people who spoke them. Words say one thing, but the person makes it a different story! We give meaning to words, not the other way around.

Enjoy finding yours... and thank you for reading this blog.

Mads

Yıldıray Oğur   31.08.2008  /  Pazar  /  Taraf

Yeni Genelkurmay Başkanımız görev teslim töreninde “hükümet programını” okurken şöyle şöyle de demiş:

“Toplumun bir kesiminde yaşam tarzının oluşumunda dinî düşüncelere büyük ağırlık verildiği düşüncesi hâkim ve bundan büyük endişe duyuluyor. Hükümetin bu endişeyi ciddiye alması toplumsal huzur için zorunluluktur.”

“Güçlenen bazı cemaatler ekonomiyi yönlendirmeye, sosyo-politik yaşamı biçimlendirmeye, dine bağlı bir yaşam tarzı olarak sosyal kimlikleri ortaya koymaya çalışmakta.”

(...)

Uzun süre yazdınız. Yaşam tarzı kaygılarına saygı diye kulak çektiniz. “Cemaatleşme sosyal devlete engel” diye yalancıktan teorize bile ettiniz. Ama bakın bunca emek boşa gitmemiş. Paşalar oturup sizi okumuşlar, arada sizden Habermas’ı bile kapmışlar.

Bu kez Türkiye muhafazakârlaşıyor tespiti “etrafta başörtülü cip sürücüsü kadınlar arttı”, “plajlardaki haşemalı kadınlar dehşet saçtı” gibi kötü niyetli gözlemlerden daha güvenilir bir kaynaktan geliyor: Memleketin en ciddi sosyolojik araştırmalarını yapan, yıllardır vatandaşlarını köşe bucak izleyip dinleyen kurumun başkanından.

Manşetler atılsın, makaleler yazılsın; Ordu ile modernist sol-liberal aydınlar uzlaştı.

Peki, kime karşı uzlaştılar? Paşanın bu mesajları kime?

Ne zaman yapıldı bu konuşma? Ramazan’a günler kala.

Ramazan ne? “Yaşam tarzında dinî düşüncelere büyük ağırlık verileceği günler.”

Yani ey normal zamanda bir ekmek almak için bin bir naz edip, Ramazan’da bir saat iftar pidesi kuyruğunda bekleyen Ahmet Bey.

Ve ey Ramazan geldiği için çorba-makarna üzerine kurduğun ucuz mutfak tezgâhını kökünden değiştirip, toprak kaplarda, kısık ateşlerde saatlerce güveç pişiren Ayşe Hanım.

Öyle hiçbir şeyden haberiniz yokmuş gibi, masum masum bakmayın yüzümüze. Neler karıştırdığınızın gayet iyi farkındayız?

Farkında mısınız? Yaşam tarzınızda Ramazan bahanesiyle aniden dinî düşüncelere büyük ağırlık vererek endişe yaratmaktasınız.

Ulusal güvenlik makinesinin pide-güveç kokularınızla burnu kırıldı, kırmızı alarmlar yanıyor.

Ne gerek var toplumsal huzuru homini gırtlaklarınız için bozmaya, üniter ulus devleti pastırmalı kurufasulyeye tercih etmeye. O üniter laik devlet olmasa o afiyetle yediğiniz pastırmalı kurufasulyenin adı risotto olmaz mıydı?

İbadeti gösterişle karıştırıp, açık açık yemeyip içmemeye ne gerek var. Hepimiz Müslümansız, orucun da evde kazası olmaz mı?

Size iyilik yapıp çay, pasta, karpuz ikram edenlere “niyetliyim, oruç tutuyorum” diye kafa tutmalarınız filan çok endişe yaratıyor. Bu ani retler toplumsal barışı zedeliyor. Bugün kestaneli, krokanlı bir dilim pastaya hayır diyen yarın ne yapmaz?

Ayrıca ikide bir herkesin içinde “iftara bekliyoruz”, “iftara davetliyim”, “akşam iftarda bir güllaç yaptım”, “sahurda temcit pilavı yiyeceğiz, elma kompostosu da yaptım tok tutar” diye Goebbels’in bile aklına gelemeyecek propagandist yöntemlerinizi bu ülkenin laik delikanlıları yer mi sandınız?

Kesif iftar sofraları donatarak toplumsal bilinçaltına yolladığınız “işte şeriat gelirse her gün böyle yiyip içeceğiz” mesajlarınız Jandarma İstihbaratı’ndan kaçar mı sandınız?

Zaten 70 milyon birbirinden değişik karakterde insanın oruç tutanları ve tutmayanları arasında akla hayale gelmeyecek 70 milyon adet farklı gerilim ihtimali ortada durmakta. Her an sigara krizine girmiş biri, yüzüne sigara üfleyen başka birine cihadı bahane edip saldırabilir. Zaten gazeteler “oruç tutmadığı için birisinin başına bir şey gelse” diye pusuya yatmış beklemekteler.

Bari bu Ramazan iki kişiden kalabalık iftar yapıp “dine bağlı bir yaşam tarzı olarak sosyal kimliklerinizi” ortaya koymayın. “Oruç tutuyorum” değil, “yemek yemek istemiyorum”, “şok diyetteyim” diyin, toplumsal barışın bir ucundan da siz tutun. Yoksa...

Bakın şimdiden Deniz Baykal’ı kesmedi bu konuşma:

“Bu güzel konuşmalar daha önce de yapıldı, ben de defalarca benzeri konuşmalar yaptım, uyarılarda bulundum. Komutanlar da benzeri konuşmalar yaptı. Sonuç ne oldu? Türkiye belli bir yola sokuldu ve öyle devam etti. İktidar bu konuşmaları, uyarıları hiç dikkate almadı. Maalesef Türkiye sokulduğu bu yolda sürükleniyor.”

SHARANYA KANVILKAR writes from Bombay: Waking up at five, switching on the computer, making myself a cup of coffee, and checking mails (and what the world has been upto) has become a daily, early-morning routine for me, before the kids wake up.

This morning, I did all that. But I also whistled silently when I came across E.R. Ramachandran's irony-filled piece on the denial of a US visa to Gujarat chief minister Narendra Modi: "Do only Gujaratis have asmita? Don't we Indians?"

Ah, an individual's travel hassles wrapped in the tricolour. Sounds suspiciously familiar, I thought to myself.

Then, as the caffeine kicked in, I pondered the irony in Mr Ramachandran's defence. The BJP has said "nobody was dying to go to the United States" and "nobody was looking for a certificate from it". So, why this spirited defence on churumuri.com?

To turn the question around, if the BJP itself doesn't have asmita about the denial of visa, why should we Indians?

But there was far greater irony in lawyer-cum-BJP spokesman Ravi Shankar Prasad's revealing defence. He says the US gives visas to dictators, fascists, murderers etc, but a "democratically elected leader of a federal state of India" was being denied the same.

Mr Prasad doesn't tell us, nor does the author, that the same Narendra Modi employed an image management firm that polishes the images of dictators, fascists, murderers etc to buff up his image for the 2007 Gujarat elections, with the express intention of gaining a US visa.

If you can put that lapse down to poor memory, what if the United States had relented and given Modi a visa? Would Prasad still be saying that thing about the United States giving visas to "dictators, fascists, murderers etc,"?

You may call it a counterfactual question; the psychologists call it a Freudian slip.

Like all things with the BJP today, the ultimate irony was the contorted bid to twist and turn the facts to paint the issue as part of some vast anti-Hindu, anti-BJP, anti-Indian conspiracy. Mr Ramachandran says it "appears" as if the Congres-led UPA government is "happy" at the visa denial.

"Appears"?

To whom?

Secondly, he claims, the government isn't asking questions?

Excuse me.

When Modi's visa was revoked in 2005, the Congress-led UPA government had "lodged a strong protest", called it "uncalled-for", and said it displayed "lack of courtesy" to an elected leader. The Congress leader of the opposition in Gujarat had termed the decision unfair.

Well, it "appears" to me that it has done so this time too, because as Mr Ramachandran points out, nobody's hands are clean and some Congress (and Shiv Sena, RJD, NCP, CPM, DMK, SP, etc) men and women with blood on their hands may have to travel abroad too.

What more should the government of the day be doing? Sit on a fast-unto-death outside the US consulate on Warden Road?

Then again, surely, the granting of a visa is a "sovereign right of any State"?

But the mother of all ironies is the sight of an ordinary citizen batting for an extraordinary leader---a 56-inch barrel chested man who thumps his "chhappan ki chaati"---when it should be the other way round.

# Hundreds of young, intelligent, ambitious, hard-working young men and women are denied a visa by the United States (and other countries) to study and work for the flimsiest of reasons.

# Hundreds of elderly men and women are denied a visa by the United States (and other countries) to join their children and kin for physical, moral and emotional support.

# Hundreds of adult men and women are denied a visa by the United States (and several other countries) despite a spotless record in life and their careers.

Where is our moral outrage at the discourtesy to our countrymen and women, all legal citizens of the "sovereign socialist secular democratic republic” of India with passports issued under the seal of the President of India?

Why, suddenly, does our heart beat for someone whose partymen (and affiliates) stopped the heartbeats in several hundred men, women and children, some unborn, because somebody, somewhere decreed that the action in Godhra deserved an equal and opposite reaction in the rest of Gujarat?

The answer is threefold:

i) We have fallen for the Goebbelsian propaganda tactics that the Hindutva Herd employs every night on TV to turn dark lies into shimmering truths.

ii) We are wallowing in majority victimhood, recently on display in various parts of the country, to show that one of our own is being needlessly victimised.

iii) We have fallen into the neocon trap of looking at elections as the ultimate certificate.

Narendra Modi may have democratically won a brute majority in 2003---the operative word being "brute". He may have democratically come back to power on a brute majority in 2007. But aside from showing up our first-past-the-post democracy for what it is, it proves nothing.

It certainly does not automatically absolve him of his role in the 2002 pogrom before the US visa officer.

The truth is that Narendra Modi has a massive image problem regardless of how many times the soundbytes  "good governance", "incorruptibility", "tough on terrorism", etc, are drummed into the skulls of people by the BJP's spokesmen and media heads. And he will have that massive image problem despite recent certificates of "statesmanship" that channels like CNN-IBN have been speedily conferring on him.

That massive image problem is his, his party's, and their ideology's.

It's not a massive image problem of the honest, hard-working citizens of this country who go through unspeakable tension and humiliation before visa officers despite spotless clean financial, educational and police records.

***

Narendra Modi may thump his chest, slap his thighs, and twirl his moustache to show his manhood. He may glower at journalists, walk out of interviews, and shut out dissident voices and show his machismo. His name, face and mask may scare victims, voters, witnesses, rivals.

Those who ask questions, point fingers, and raise doubts may be shouted down. Those who remind the world of what happened may be labelled and branded.

All that may convince the converted (pun intended), not one of whom dare reveal such naked racist hostility before visa officers when they are in the queue for their H1B and B1/B2 visas.

But Narendra Damodardas Modi has been dubbed the "Slobodan Milosevic of India", when not being dubbed a "modern-day Nero".

He has to provide convincing answers for the deaths and injuries of thousands---Muslims and Hindus---under his watch. For the chilling images of barbarism that journalists, human rights activists, police officers, and others have captured and documented. For his barely concealed contempt for the minorities, the social and economic boycotts, the subversion of justice, for the institutionalisation of hatred.

Merely pointing to his electoral victory as if a clean chit has been issued to all that happened will not do. Suddenly pretending to be victim and ascribing an "anti-Hindu" conspiracy by the Christian West will not do. And pointing to similar excesses by brutes of the Congress party in 1984, or by brutes in the United States in different parts of the world, will not do either.

Ambitious Mr Modi aims to be prime minister in the medium term. He at least aims to be home minister in the short term. But he needs to demonstrate to the world that his hands are clean. Even before that, he needs to demonstrate his nuanced understanding of Newton's third law of motion to a US consulate officer sitting behind toughened glass.

For all his machismo and media manipulation, Modi seems patently unable to get past the first post.

Like India, the United States too is not entirely populated by angels. But unlike our democracy, it still has some systems, processes, checks and balances in place. Its lawmakers still can't be bought en masse to ask questions or to vote like ours.

It's not foolproof, of course, it's not without its chinks, but it is there.

Salute it silently, while you wonder why a poor diamond worker in Surat may receive his visa-stamped passport by Speedpost™ while the all-powerful chief minister of his wondrous State can't, hasn't, won't, and shouldn't.

Photograph: Karnataka Photo News

Also read: 'Intimidation won't help restore Gujarati asmita'

'A disgraceful assault on the freedom of the media'

In prosperous Gujarat, everybody can buy the media

Anyway.  One of the streams is 'search engine terms'  - what folks googled to find a link to mine. 
And there it was:  harlem goebbels

Harlem Goebbels?

I have no idea how to feel about this.

Če samo pogledamo katerokoli otvoritveno slovesnost takoj opazimo tipično totalitaristično propagando. Veliko nastopajočih, ki delujejo skoraj popolnoma usklajeno in tako demonstrirajo disciplino, enotnost, poslušnost... in v končni fazi oprane možgane »naroda«, ki ga predstavljajo. (Narod v narekovajih, ker v ta koncept ne verjamem) Najbolj pa me razpizdi 100x ponovljena resnica: športniki promovirajo svojo državo. Ta trditev je resnična samo v Goebbelsovem koordinatnem sistemu, se pravi športniki promovirajo svojo lastno državo znotraj svoje države, kot religijo. Preko meje pa njihov sloves praviloma ne seže. Na svetu je samo ena država, ki se za svojo prepoznavnost lahko zahvali športnikom – Kenija. Torej ali si res želimo, da nas promovirajo športniki? Si res želimo biti samo številka v milijonski množici, ki strmi v mitološko osebo med izvajanjem Rittberger-ja? Namesto, da bi Rittbergerja izvajal vsak sam. Gre kdo v Kenijo na počitnice? ...

Related articles by Zemanta

• Doping in vrhunski šport [manually added]
• Not only were the Olympic Fireworks fake, so was the 7 year old singer

Jean Plantureux est un dessinateur français d'extrême droite.

Sorti diplômé de l'école des Beaux Arts de Berlin en 1936, il intègre les Hitlerjugend où il sera rapidement repéré par Goebbels. Il rejoint alors la Propagandastaffel, pour le compte de laquelle il réalise plusieurs affiches antijuives.

À la Libération, il parvient à fuir l'Europe pour la Syrie, où il réside sous la fausse identité de Plantu. Une fois ses forfaits prescrits, il revient en France où Le Monde aura la faiblesse de publier ses dessins à partir de 1972 – ce que fera également, sans rougir de honte, L'Express à partir de 1991.

Ancien homme de main du terroriste Arafat, dessinateur fétiche du Hezbollah, Plantu aurait de plus, selon les informations de mon amie Caroline, favorisé la cavale d'Oussama Ben Laden – avec l'aide de Siné.

Amorim lembrou que, em sua estratégia, Goebbels dizia que uma mentira contada muitas vezes acaba sendo aceita como verdade. Dada a sensibilidade do momento atual na economia global, em que se fala cada vez mais em protecionismo, um comentário desse tipo causou melindre àqueles que esperam qualquer desculpa para dificultar o processo de abertura.

Entenda o que é a Rodada Doha

Susan Schwab, a representante comercial dos EUA --e descendente de sobreviventes do holocausto-- foi a primeira a reagir, através de seu porta-voz Sean Spicer. Ela disse que "esse tipo de comentário maldoso não tem lugar nessas negociações". Amorim pediu desculpas ontem pela declaração. Mas o que tirou com uma mão, recolocou com outra, insistindo no conteúdo da idéia de Goebbels: "Mantenho: repetir uma distorção faz com que as pessoas acreditem que ela é a verdade".

Em um tom um pouco menos diplomático, mais crítico, Spicer disse que "no momento em que tentamos encontrar um resultado bem sucedido para as negociações, esse tipo de declaração é altamente infeliz". "Para alguém que é ministro de Relações Exteriores, ele devia estar mais atento para alguns pontos sensíveis."

Ele ainda afirmou: "[Amorim] fazer declarações desse tipo é incrivelmente errado. Elas são insultuosas."

Por mais inoportuno que tenha sido o comentário, as negociações comerciais já estavam estagnadas muito antes desse episódio. A obstrução de fato é causada pela dificuldade (ou desejo) que o governo norte-americano tem de enfrentar o lobby agrícola --um dos mais poderosos do país-- e cortar os subsídios aos produtores do país. Tanta atenção a um comentário mal colocado seria uma forma de desviar o foco do que realmente é o caso em Genebra: evitar que a rodada seja declarada oficialmente morta --como disse o prêmio Nobel de Economia de 2001, Joseph Stiglitz, em seu livro "Globalização: Como Dar Certo".

No sábado, Amorim disse que os líderes dos países ricos se baseiam em fórmulas diferentes de redução de alíquotas ao se referir às negociações, o que daria a entender que as concessões que poderão fazer em agricultura são muito maiores que as que os países em desenvolvimento estão dispostos a aceitar no capítulo industrial. "Essa é uma afirmação sob medida para aqueles que não querem fazer sua parte em agricultura", afirmou.

Ele disse ainda que é um "mito" a crença de que a questão agrícola já está fechada, e que a OMC só está à espera de que os países do Sul demonstrem sua boa vontade em relação aos produtos industrializados para que se alcance o acordo esperado. "Ainda resta muito a fazer na agricultura", ressaltou --prevendo que um fracasso da reunião ministerial iniciada hoje pode adiar a conclusão de um acordo de livre comércio em três ou quatro anos.

Repercussão

O diário americano "The Wall Street Journal" disse em um artigo que a declaração de Amorim é "absurda e realmente preocupante, vinda de um diplomata moderado".

Já o jornal americano "The New York Times" diz que a rodada está viva "através de aparelhos". O diário diz que a Índia e o Brasil "se recusam a reduzir suas tarifas devido ao medo das economias movidas a exportações, como a China".

O jornal "The New Zealand Herald" disse que a declaração de Amorim é "potencialmente um incidente diplomático". "O comentário motivou uma pronta resposta dos EUA, cuja representante comercial, Susan Schwab, é filha de sobreviventes do holocausto".

Folha online
Rizzolo: Como sublinha o jornal americano "The New York Times" a declaração de Amorim é absurda e preocupante, não é possível que um ministro mencione uma frase Joseph Goebbels, ainda insinuando que os EUA e a Europa se portam como nazi-fascistas em termos comerciais. É o cúmulo do politicamente incorreto, é lamentável. O que falta na realidade é preparo para negociar; é o tipo do comentário que qualquer empresa privada orientaria sua gestão a não fazer numa negociação internacional. Agora uma pergunta: o presidente Lula, o que acha desse comentário?

Susan Schwab en Celso Amorim tijdens een vorige ontmoeting

Zijn uitspraak schoot in het verkeerde keelgat van de Amerikaanse onderhandelaarster Susan Schwab, een dochter van een overlevende van de Holocaust. Amorim probeerde nadien zijn uitspraak af te zwakken en excuseerde zich voor het feit dat hij de naam Goebbels ter sprake had gebracht. Hij blijft wel bij zijn mening dat de rijke landen leugens vertellen tijdens de onderhandelingen. Hij bedoelt hiermee dat Brazilië niet akkoord gaat met de argumenten van de Verenigde Staten en de EU die zeggen dat "zij aanzienlijke toegevingen doen betreffende de landbouwsubsidies terwijl de ontwikkelingslanden te weinig doen om hun markten open te stellen voor hun producten".

Clara Ferreira Alves no Expresso Online.

(sem comentários...)

In the first major land battle of the Civil War, a large Union force under General Irvin McDowell is routed by a Confederate army under General Pierre G.T. Beauregard.

Three months after the Civil War erupted at Fort Sumter, Union military command still believed that the Confederacy could be crushed quickly and with little loss of life. In July, this overconfidence led to a premature offensive into northern Virginia by General McDowell. Searching out the Confederate forces, McDowell led 34,000 troops--mostly inexperienced and poorly trained militiamen--toward the railroad junction of Manassas, located just 30 miles from Washington, D.C. Alerted to the Union advance, General Beauregard massed some 20,000 troops there and was soon joined by General Joseph Johnston, who brought some 9,000 more troops by railroad.

On the morning of July 21, hearing of the proximity of the two opposing forces, hundreds of civilians--men, women, and children--turned out to watch the first major battle of the Civil War. The fighting commenced with three Union divisions crossing the Bull Run stream, and the Confederate flank was driven back to Henry House Hill. However, at this strategic location, Beauregard had fashioned a strong defensive line anchored by a brigade of Virginia infantry under General Thomas J. Jackson. Firing from a concealed slope, Jackson's men repulsed a series of Federal charges, winning Jackson his famous nickname "Stonewall."

Meanwhile, Confederate cavalry under J.E.B. Stuart captured the Union artillery, and Beauregard ordered a counterattack on the exposed Union right flank. The rebels came charging down the hill, yelling furiously, and McDowell's line was broken, forcing his troops in a hasty retreat across Bull Run. The retreat soon became an unorganized flight, and supplies littered the road back to Washington. Union forces endured a loss of 3,000 men killed, wounded, or missing in action while the Confederates suffered 2,000 casualties. The scale of this bloodshed horrified not only the frightened spectators at Bull Run but also the U.S. government in Washington, which was faced with an uncertain military strategy in quelling the "Southern insurrection."

"The First Battle of Bull Run." 2008. The History Channel website. 20 Jul 2008, 05:00 http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history.do?action=Article&id=5195.

On This Day

1733 - John Winthrop was granted the first honorary Doctor of Law Degree in the U.S. The honor was given by Harvard College in Cambridge, MA.

1873 - Jesse James and his gang pulled off the first train robbery in the U.S. They took $3,000 from the Rock Island Express at Adair, IA.

1930 - The Veterans’ Administration of the United States was established.

1940 - Lithuania, Estonia, and Latvia were annexed by the Soviet Union.

1944 - American forces landed on Guam during World War II.

1947 - Loren MacIver’s portrait of Emmett Kelly as Willie the Clown appeared on the cover of "LIFE" magazine.

1949 - The U.S. Senate ratified the North Atlantic Treaty.

1954 - The Geneva Conference partitioned Vietnam into North Vietnam and South Vietnam.

1957 - Althea Gibson became the first black woman to win a major U.S. tennis title when she won the Women’s National clay-court singles competition.

1959 - A U.S. District Court judge in New York City ruled that "Lady Chatterley’s Lover" was not a dirty book.

1980 - Draft registration began in the United States for 19 and 20-year-old men.

1997 - The U.S.S. Constitution, which defended the United States during the War of 1812, set sail under its own power for the first time in 116 years.

Monkey Trial ends

In Dayton, Tennessee, the so-called "Monkey Trial" ends with John Thomas Scopes being convicted of teaching evolution in violation of Tennessee law. Scopes was ordered to pay a fine of $100, the minimum the law allowed.

"Monkey Trial ends." 2008. The History Channel website. 20 Jul 2008, 05:01 http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history.do?action=Article&id=5196.

Hitler to Germany: "I'm still alive."

On this day in 1944, Adolf Hitler takes to the airwaves to announce that the attempt on his life has failed and that "accounts will be settled."

Hitler had survived the bomb blast that was meant to take his life. He had suffered punctured eardrums, some burns and minor wounds, but nothing that would keep him from regaining control of the government and finding the rebels. In fact, the coup d'etat that was to accompany the assassination of Hitler was put down in a mere 11 1/2 hours. In Berlin, Army Major Otto Remer, believed to be apolitical by the conspirators and willing to carry out any orders given him, was told that the Fuhrer was dead and that he, Remer, was to arrest Joseph Goebbels, Minister of Propaganda. But Goebbels had other news for Remer-Hitler was alive. And he proved it, by getting the leader on the phone (the rebels had forgotten to cut the phone lines). Hitler then gave Remer direct orders to put down any army rebellion and to follow only his orders or those of Goebbels or Himmler. Remer let Goebbels go. The SS then snapped into action, arriving in Berlin, now in chaos, just in time to convince many high German officers to remain loyal to Hitler.

Arrests, torture sessions, executions, and suicides followed. Count Claus von Stauffenberg, the man who actually planted the explosive in the room with Hitler and who had insisted to his co-conspirators that "the explosion was as if a 15-millimeter shell had hit. No one in that room can still be alive." But it was Stauffenberg who would not be alive for much longer; he was shot dead the very day of the attempt by a pro-Hitler officer. The plot was completely undone.

Now Hitler had to restore calm and confidence to the German civilian population. At 1 a.m., July 21, Hitler's voice broke through the radio airwaves: "I am unhurt and well.... A very small clique of ambitious, irresponsible...and stupid officers had concocted a plot to eliminate me.... It is a gang of criminal elements which will be destroyed without mercy. I therefore give orders now that no military authority...is to obey orders from this crew of usurpers.... This time we shall settle account with them in the manner to which we National Socialists are accustomed."

"Hitler to Germany: "I'm still alive."." 2008. The History Channel website. 20 Jul 2008, 05:10 http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history.do?action=Article&id=6526.

Eisenhower presents his "Open Skies" plan

President Dwight D. Eisenhower presents his "Open Skies" plan at the 1955 Geneva summit meeting with representatives of France, Great Britain, and the Soviet Union. The plan, though never accepted, laid the foundation for President Ronald Reagan's later policy of "trust, but verify" in relation to arms agreements with the Soviet Union.

"Eisenhower presents his "Open Skies" plan." 2008. The History Channel website. 20 Jul 2008, 05:03 http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history.do?action=Article&id=2735.

O infeliz insulto, formalizou-se para justificar o fato dos países ricos adotarem uma estratégia de desinformação similar na defesa de seus interesses. Segundo o chanceler, os países mais pobres demandam cortes nas tarifas agrícolas e nos subsídios concedidos pelos países ricos aos seus produtores, e segundo Amorim, a argumentação e a tática dos países mais ricos na manipulação das informações sobre as negociações da Rodada Doha, se assemelha as manobras nazistas.

Ora, não é possível que o chanceler não se antecedeu, ou não teve a percepção de que não seria de bom alvitre citar Goebbels na defesa de suas argumentações. Muitas vezes acredito que deve haver sim uma linguagem subliminar em declarações dessa natureza; estamos tratando de um Ministro das Relações Exteriores, que no mínimo possui toda rede de assessoria disponível no Planalto para que de boa forma e maneira, conduza as negociações sem, de forma alguma, macular a imagem do Brasil ou ferir os sentimentos de pessoas como a representante de Comércio da Casa Branca, associando tal prática a Susan Schwab, que é filha de sobreviventes do Holocausto. Isso fere não só a Susan Schwab, os países envolvidos, e o bom-senso; mas essa referência trazida para um momento atual de negociação internacional, dá margens á reboque, para um desconforto em toda a comunidade judaica dos EUA, Europa e Brasil.

O que não aconteceria em qualquer empresa privada, numa negociação internacional normal, acorreu com o Brasil na OMC. A falta de tato, de preparo do Brasil nas tratativas e abordagens internacionais, saltam aos olhos do mundo pela sua inépcia e deselegância; só não poderiamos imaginar que chegaríamos a tanto. As desculpas pelo " papelão" foram dadas como de praxe e costume, mas é bom lembrar citando Benjamin Franklin, e não Goebbels, que " Aquele que é bom para elaborar desculpas, raramente é bom em qualquer outra coisa ".

Fernando Rizzolo

"Vad kul att du håller på med KUK"

"Hej mamma, jag ska på turné med KUK"

"Sen jag hittade KUK, har mitt liv blivit så mycket bättre"

/Andreas

The "Eternal Jew"

The concept of the "Wandering Jew" is far older than National Socialism. It derives from a literary and popular legend, about a Jew who mocked or mistreated Jesus while he was on his way to the cross and who was condemned therefore to a life of wandering on earth until Judgment Day.

The story of this wanderer was first recorded in the chronicles of Roger of Wendover and Matthew of Paris during the thirteenth century. The exact nature of the wanderer's indiscretion varies in different versions of the tale, as do aspects of his character, some of the more common themes being the doom of the "Wandering Jew" to travel the world forever, forsaken by all unfortunate enough to encounter him.

Nazi Propaganda saw in this proof that the Jews have been justifiably persecuted by all racers over the millenium.
 

The Eternal Jew exhibition first opened in the Library of the German Museum in Munich on November 8, 1937, and ended on January 31, 1938. Billed as a degenerate-art exhibition, it was the largest prewar anti-Semitic exhibit thus far produced by the Nazi's. The exhibit featured photographs pointing out the typically "Jewish" features of political figures, such as Leon Trotsky, and international film star Charlie Chaplin.

The displays emphasized supposed attempts by Jews to bolshevize Germany, It did this by revealing an 'eastern' Jew - wearing a kaftan, and holding gold coins in one hand and a whip in the other. Under his arm is a map of the world, with the imprint of the hammer and sickle. The exhibition attracted 412,300 visitors, over 5,000 per day.

The exhibition moved to Vienna for August 2 through October 23, 1938, and then to Berlin from November 12, 1938 through January 31, 1939. Police reports stated there was a direct correlation rise in anti-Semitic feelings, and in some cases violence against the Jewish community in each city the exhibition was held.

Read the full article here:
http://www.holocaustresearchproject.org/holoprelude/derewigejude.html

The Holocaust Education & Archive Research Team

www.HolocaustResearchProject.org

Hitler; Himmler Shoah; Third Reich; Final Solution; Nazi; National Socialism; Jews; Judaism; The Holocaust; Auschwitz; Deathcamps; Sobibor; Belze; Treblinka; Krakow; Lublin; Action Reinhard; Wirth; Globocnik; Goering; Goebbels; Anne Frank; Propaganda; Genocide; Murder; Racism; Aryan; anti-Semitism; Israel; Torah; Talmud; Sephardic; Mengele; Euthanasia; Wannsee; World War II; Axis History; Gas Vans; Chelmno; gas chamber; Zyklon B; Buchenwald; concentration camp; Dachau; Bergen Belsen; Stuthoff; Gross Rosen; Mauthausen; Natzweiler; Survivors;

El Juzgado de Primera Instancia Número 4 de Alicante ha aplicado por primera vez la Ley sobre la Usura contra una sociedad de "Préstamos Privados".Es decir no los otorga un Banco ni una financiera regulada por el Banco de España.

Normalmente acuden a éstas empresas, personas que se encuentran en el en el Rai y/o ASNEF.

Precisamente el próximo 23 de julio esta normativa cumplirá 200 años desde su entrada en vigor.

Esta Ley, actualizada por la Ley 1/2000, de 7 de enero, de Enjuiciamiento Civil, declara que "será nulo todo contrato de préstamo en que se estipule un interés notablemente superior al normal del dinero y manifiestamente desproporcionado con las circunstancias del caso o en condiciones tales que resulte aquél leonino, habiendo motivos para estimar que ha sido aceptado por el prestatario a causa de su situación angustiosa, de su inexperiencia o de lo limitado de sus facultades mentales".

Se trata de una de las grandes preocupaciones del Ministerio de Sanidad y Consumo, que ante la necesidad de crédito que pueda producir la actual situación de recesión económica ha incluido entre sus prioridades de inspección a las empresas de intermediación financiera, y establecimientos de agrupación de créditos y efectuará controles sobre la información que se da al usuario de servicios financieros ofertados como créditos rápidos, de reunificación de deudas y otros.

Atención: La característica principal de éstos "préstamos" son:

1. cliente: incluido en el RAI y/o Asnef, existe una situación de necesidad del demandante, retrasos en pago de letras de hipotecas, préstamos etc.
2. cliente: sin medios para justificar "ingresos" como nóminas etc.,(cualquier banco o entidad financiera regulada por el Banco de España es lo primero que solicita a la hora de demandar un préstamo y/o crédito.)
3. Prestamista: Rapidez en la gestión.
4. Prestamista: no existe riesgo para el prestatario, Garantía Real, es decir una propiedad que avala al "prestamista" el préstamo acordado.
5. Alto interés ,normalmente triplican ,sí triplican la suma a devolver.
6. el plazo para devolver el dinero es excesivamente reducido; normalmente seis meses , llegado el día del vencimiento , vuelven a aplicar intereses.

Compartir: