Image by Getty Images via @daylife
Image via Wikipedia
Image via Wikipedia
Image by Getty Images via @daylife
Image by Getty Images via @daylife
Image via Wikipedia
Image via Wikipedia
Image by Getty Images via @daylife Funding shift baffles First Nations
by The Canadian Press - Story: 68648
Dec 17, 2011 / 8:39 am
Aboriginal Affairs is planning reductions in First Nations housing for the next four years, government documents tabled with the House of Commons show.
However, Canada Mortgage and Housing Corp., which runs a separate envelope of funding for reserves, is planning to gradually increase subsidies for building and renovating homes over the next few years.
The end result is a relatively stagnant and unreliable pool of funding despite mounting costs and a rapidly growing population
A time comes when silence is betrayal. Even when pressed by the demands of inner truth, men do not easily assume the task of opposing their government's policy, especially in time of war. Nor does the human spirit move without great difficulty against all the apathy of conformist thought within one's own bosom and in the surrounding world. —Martin Luther King, Jr.
Here is a water story. A very grim one, I must warn. But this is the story that's made it impossible for me to feel the anger and hatred so many Americans are now exultantly feeling: a story that leaves me sure I've no honest choice, in response to September 11, but to seek the kind of justice described not by our nation's elected or appointed leaders, but by people like Mahatma Gandhi, the Dalai Lama, and Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.:
In 1991, in the wake of Desert Storm, the United States Defense Intelligence Agency researched what the effect would be of strategically bombing the water storage systems and sewage treatment systems of Iraq until they were destroyed. An American journalist and professor, Thomas J. Nagy, has since investigated the relevant DIA documents. They were declassified in 1995. Nagy has written several articles about what he discovered. No major media or magazines have shown interest in Nagy's reports. I can see why: they're almost too shameful to be believed - like the first whispers we once heard of the massacre at Mi Lai. The article I'll be citing was in the September, 2001 issue of The Progressive. It's titled "The Secret Behind the Sanctions: How the U.S. Intentionally Destroyed Iraq's Water Supply." The documents Nagy cites are all available online. Nagy's conclusions are his own, but he is not pushy: his article tells how to access the documents, so you can read them and draw your own conclusions.
These 1991 Intelligence documents, to my amazement as a water lover, go into great technical detail about the sources and quality of Iraq's water; they note that Iraqi rivers contain biological material and pollutants which, unless treated with chlorine, cause epidemic diseases like cholera, hepatitis, and typhoid. The documents note that chlorine was embargoed by the sanctions, as were food, all other forms of drinkable liquid, and medicine. The documents predict that if Iraq's water systems are destroyed it is poor Iraqis, particularly children, who will be affected - not the likes of Saddam Hussein. Knowing this, our political and military leaders under the elder George Bush - in an act that flies in the face of the Geneva Convention rules of war, systematically destroyed the water and sewage systems of Iraq anyway. And the sanctions on chlorine and medicine remained in place.
The Defense Intelligence documents continue: they mention epidemic outbreaks of acute diarrhea, dysentery, respiratory ailments, measles, diphtheria, pertussis, meningitis, and other diseases, again and again causing problems - most notably death - for children. One DIA document describes a refugee camp in which 80% of the population has diarrhea, cholera, hepatitis B, measles, gastroenteritis... It reports that 80% of the resulting deaths are children.
When, in the mid-90s, a team of Harvard doctors witnessed the epidemics and urged that sanctions barring medicine be lifted, the Defense Intelligence Agency responded by saying that the Iraqi regime was exaggerating the incidence of disease for political purposes. The sanctions and fouled water remained in place. They remain in place to this day. The United Nations - not some Iraqi propagandist, the United Nations - now reports that five hundred thousand Iraqi children aged five and under have died as a result, and that 5000 more infants and children will continue to die each month until medicine and safe water are restored.
Secret Behind the Sanctions
The Geneva Convention is absolutely clear. In a 1979 protocol relating to the "protection of victims of international armed conflicts," Article 54, it states: "It is prohibited to attack, destroy, remove, or render useless objects indispensable to the survival of the civilian population, such as foodstuffs, crops, livestock, drinking water installations and supplies, and irrigation works, for the specific purpose of denying them for their sustenance value to the civilian population or to the adverse Party, whatever the motive, whether in order to starve out civilians, to cause them to move away, or for any other motive."
But that is precisely what the U.S. government did, with malice aforethought. It "destroyed, removed, or rendered useless" Iraq's "drinking water installations and supplies." The sanctions, imposed for a decade largely at the insistence of the United States, constitute a violation of the Geneva Convention. They amount to a systematic effort to, in the DIA’s own words, "fully degrade" Iraq's water sources.
At a House hearing on June 7, Representative Cynthia McKinney, Democrat of Georgia, referred to the document "Iraq Water Treatment Vulnerabilities" and said: "Attacking the Iraqi public drinking water supply flagrantly targets civilians and is a violation of the Geneva Convention and of the fundamental laws of civilized nations."
Over the last decade, Washington extended the toll by continuing to withhold approval for Iraq to import the few chemicals and items of equipment it needed in order to clean up its water supply.
The Problem With Sanctions
The impact of sanctions is often felt by poor, innocent civilians and not the intended government officials. A trade embargo is most likely to affect a subsistence farmer who cannot sell his crops for export or a worker in a factory that is unable to receive raw materials. In most cases, sanctions will exclude humanitarian items such as medicines. During the Saddam Hussein regime, US economic sanctions against Iraq were often criticized as hurting the people that the American Government wanted to rise up against Saddam.Famous Examples of Sanctions
The boycott and near isolation of South Africa because of its former apartheid policy separating the races is a famous example of economic sanctions. US companies divested themselves of South African assets in the 1980s. The UN Security Council has supported economic sanctions against North Korea because of its possession of nuclear weapons. Sanctions are not always economic in nature. President Carter's boycott of the Moscow Olympics in 1980 can be viewed as sanctions in protest against the Soviet Union's invasion of Afghanistan. Currently, the US Government is trying to gather worldwide support for stern economic sanctions against Iran if they fail to cooperate with international inspections of their nuclear program.Suggested Reading
- Sanctions - What is a Sanction?
- Iran Nuclear Issue--Will More Sanctions Produce Iran Nuclear Cooperation?
- Bush Drops Terror-Related Sanctions Against Libya
U.S. Economic sanctions againstCuba:objectives of an imperialist policy
The economic sanctions imposed on Cuba by the United States are unique in view of their longevity and of their complexity but they are consistent with the real objectives of the first world power. In order to show this, it is necessary to base this analysis on the following postulate: the blockade is part of a scheme designed not to promote democratic values, as the administration in Washington would have us believe, but to control the natural resources of Third World nations through subjugation. And the history of the United States characterized mainly by violent and bloody conquest of new territories proves this unequivocally.
As far back as the middle of the 19th century, U.S. expansionist William Gilpin announced: "The destiny of the American people is to subdue the continent." The primary goal of the United States is to make sure that the resources of the countries of the South remain at hand of the capital of the masters of the universe. The case of Cuba is exceptional because it is the only country that has dared to refuse to follow the orders set by their northern neighbor, designing its political, economic and social system, at once sovereign and independent, despite the unilateral constraints imposed by Washington. The enmity Cuba is a victim of reflects a historical continuity whose broad lines must be retraced. And by the way, it would be widely-known if something like a sense of respect for obvious historical truisms existed. This topic would not be controversial if the society we live in was intellectually free.
After the collapse of Napoleon's empire, the Monroe doctrine came into the world. It stipulated that the United States would on no account accept European interventions in the affairs of the American hemisphere. It would enable the northern giant to establish its power on the whole continent without hindrance, since Europe would not interfere. The theory was first motivated by Russian designs on Oregon and by the will to prevent any reconquest of the young Latin American republics by European nations. The Monroe doctrine one of the founding principles of U.S. foreign policy had imperialist and hegemonic aims. With the Roosevelt Corollary, its scope was later extended to encompass a diversity of situations. Economic factors had a primary role in the search for new markets. The birth of an industrial nation and the rapid increase in the production of goods entailed the need to conquer new territories. Because of its strategic position if the Gulf of Mexico and despite the failure of the various attempts to buy the island to Spain, Cuba was in the U.S. line of sight .
In 1890, U.S. investments in Cuba amounted to $50 million and 7% of U.S. foreign trade was with the island. Spain spent $7 million on Cuban imported goods whereas U.S. imports from the archipelago amounted to $61 million. U.S. economic interests entailed the need for the U.S. to closely control the Cuban market in order to protect U.S. investments .
The main objective of U.S. intervention in the Cuban war of independence against Spain in 1898 was to prevent Cuban revolutionaries to gain their sovereignty.
The total blockade of the island imposed on February, 7, 1962 violates international conventions and runs counter to the most basic juridical principles. Its main objective is to re-establish U.S. neo-colonial domination over Cuba, using starvation as a political weapon against the Cuban people. The arguments justifying this economic state of siege varied according to time.
Zimbabwe sanctions to remain in place
Washington has ruled out lifting sanctions on Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe and his inner circle until the regime shows a greater respect for human rights
Global Elite Designed Sanctions to Kill and Impoverish the People of ...
www.infowars.com/global-elite-designed-sanctions-to-kill-and-impo...
9 Jul 2010 – The sanctions were designed to completely destroy Iraq as a political, social, ... intentionally used sanctions to degrade Iraq's water supply). ...
Sanctions Programs and Country Information
Daily Press Guidance
Terrorism and Financial Intelligence
Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC)
The Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) of the US Department of the Treasury administers and enforces economic and trade sanctions based on US foreign policy and national security goals against targeted foreign countries and regimes, terrorists, international narcotics traffickers, those engaged in activities related to the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, and other threats to the national security, foreign policy or economy of the United States. OFAC acts under Presidential national emergency powers, as well as authority granted by specific legislation, to impose controls on transactions and freeze assets under US jurisdiction. Many of the sanctions are based on United Nations and other international mandates, are multilateral in scope, and involve close cooperation with allied governments.
Iran Sanctions
| Get e-mail updates when this information changes To whom do these sanctions regulations apply? | ||
| All U.S. persons and entities (companies, non-profit groups, government agencies, etc.) wherever located. | ||
| What laws, rules and regulations provide the legal framework for the sanctions? | ||
| Executive Orders | ||
| 13574 Authorizing the Implementation of Certain Sanctions Set Forth in the Iran Sanctions Act of 1996, as Amended (Effective Date - May 23, 2011) | ||
| 13553 Blocking Property of Certain Persons With Respect to Serious Human Rights Abuses By The Government of Iran and Taking Certain Other Actions (Effective Date - September 29, 2010) | ||
| 13059 Prohibiting Certain Transactions With Respect to Iran (Effective Date - August 20, 1997) | ||
| 12959 Prohibiting Certain Transactions With Respect to Iran (Effective Date - May 7, 1995) | ||
| 12957 Prohibiting Certain Transactions With Respect to the Development of Iranian Petroleum Resources (Effective Date - March 16, 1995) | ||
| 12613 Prohibiting Imports From Iran (Effective Date - October 29, 1987) | ||
| 12294 Suspension of Litigation Against Iran (Effective Date - February 26, 1981) | ||
| 12284 Restrictions on the Transfer of Property of the Former Shah of Iran (Effective Date - January 23, 1981) | ||
| 12283 Non-Prosecution of Claims of Hostages and for Actions at the United States Embassy and Elsewhere (Effective Date - January 23, 1981) | ||
| 12282 Revocation of Prohibitions Against Transactions Involving Iran (Effective Date - January 23, 1981) | ||
| 12281 Direction To Transfer Certain Iranian Government Assets (Effective Date - January 23, 1981) | ||
| 12280 Direction To Transfer Iranian Government Financial Assets Held By Non-Banking Institutions (Effective Date - January 23, 1981) | ||
| 12279 Direction To Transfer Iranian Govt. Assets Held By Domestic Banks (Effective Date - January 23, 1981) | ||
| 12278 Direction To Transfer Iranian Government Assets Overseas (Effective Date - January 23, 1981) | ||
| 12277 Direction To Transfer Iranian Government Assets (Effective Date - January 23, 1981) | ||
| 12276 Direction Relating to Establishment of Escrow Accounts (Effective Date - January 23, 1981) | ||
| 12211 Prohibiting Certain Transactions With Iran (Effective Date - April 17, 1980) | ||
| 12205 Prohibiting Certain Transactions With Iran (Effective Date - April 17, 1980) | ||
| 12170 Blocking Iranian Government Property (Effective Date - November 14, 1979) | ||
| Statutes | ||
| Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA), 8 U.S.C. § 1189, 18 U.S.C. § 2339B | ||
| Comprehensive Iran Sanctions, Accountability, and Divestment Act of 2010 (CISADA), PL 111-195 | ||
| International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), 50 U.S.C. §§ 1701-1706 | ||
| Iran Sanctions Act of 1996, as Amended, 50 U.S.C. § 1701 note | ||
| International Security and Development Cooperation Act of 1985 (ISDCA), 22 U.S.C. § 2349aa-9 | ||
| National Emergencies Act (NEA), 50 U.S.C. §§ 1601-1651 | ||
| Trade Sanctions Reform and Export Enhancement Act of 2000 (TSRA), 22 U.S.C. §§ 7201-7211 | ||
| Code of Federal Regulations | ||
| 31 CFR Part 535 - Iranian Assets Control Regulations | ||
| 31 CFR Part 560 - Iranian Transactions Regulations | ||
| 31 CFR Part 561 - Iranian Financial Sanctions Regulations | ||
| 31 CFR Part 562 - Iranian Human Rights Abuses Sanctions Regulations | ||
| Federal Register Notices | ||
| | | 76 FR 63197-11 - Iranian Transactions Regulations - Amendments to authorize certain consular funds transfers and the transportation of human remains |
| | | 76 FR 63191-11 - Iranian Transactions Regulations - Amendments to authorize the exportation or reexportation of food items |
| 76 FR 7695-11 - Iranian Transactions Regulations - regulations with respect to Iran to implement Executive Order 13553 | ||
| 75 FR 59611-10 - Iranian Transactions Regulations - Amendment to remove general licenses authorizing the importation of, and dealings in, certain foodstuffs and carpets of Iranian origin and related services | ||
| 75 FR 49836-10 - Iranian Financial Sanctions Regulations - New regulations to implement the Comprehensive Iran Sanctions, Accountability, and Divestment Act of 2010 | ||
| 75 FR 34630-10 - amendment to the Iranian Transactions Regulations in the Code of Federal Regulations to expand the scope of Appendix A to Part 560 to encompass any person determined by OFAC to be the Government of Iran | ||
| 74 FR 61030-09 - an interim final rule which makes technical changes to certain sections of the Sudanese Sanctions Regulations and the Iranian Transactions Regulations, 31 CFR parts 538 and 560 | ||
| 74 FR 36397-09 - allows U.S. banks to continue operating the accounts of U.S. persons who are temporarily in Iran. | ||
| 73 FR 73788-08 - Final rule amending the Iranian Transactions Regulations to expand the scope of Appendix A | ||
| 73 FR 66541-08 - Revoking an authorization previously granted to U.S. depository institutions to process ‘‘U-turn’’ transfers | ||
| 72 FR 15831-07 - Amendment to the Iranian Transactions Regulations related to the movement of specific goods via diplomatic pouch | ||
| 72 FR 12980-07 - Clarification of Policy with Respect to the Process for Issuing Certain TSRA Licenses | ||
| 71 FR 53569-06 - Treasury Cuts Iran's Bank Saderat Off From U.S. Financial System | ||
| 71 FR 48795-06 - Official Activities of Certain U.S. Organizations | ||
| 71 FR 29251-06 - Revisions to IEEPA made by the Combating Terrorism Financing Act of 2005 | ||
| 70 FR 15761-05 - Administrative Collection of Civil Penalties | ||
| 70 FR 15583-05 - Broker-dealer amendment to ITR. | ||
| 69 FR 75468-04 - General License for Publishing Activities | ||
| 68 FR 11741-03 - Authorization of Certain Humanitarian Activities by Nongovernmental Organizations in Iraq and Iran | ||
| 66 FR 38553-01 - Amendments to the Iranian Assets Control Regulations | ||
| 66 FR 36683-01 - Exports of Agricultural Products, Medicines, and Medical Devices to Cuba, Sudan, Libya, and Iran; Cuba Travel-Related Transactions | ||
| United Nations Security Council Resolutions | ||
| 1929 (9 June 2010) | ||
| 1803 (3 March 2008) | ||
| 1747 (24 March 2008) | ||
| 1737 (23 December 2006) | ||
| 1696 (31 July 2006) | ||
US, UK, Canada sanction Iran's banks, petro-chem
The latest set of sanctions by US, Britain and Canada follows the International Atomic Energy Agency's report, published last week, on Iran allegedly pursuing nuclear weapons. The IAEA watchdog has said that they have evidence that Iran does possess the technology to make a nuclear weapon and is already trying to do so.The US, Canada, South Korea, Australia, Britain and France have all imposed sanctions on Iran in the last few years, but they have not had much affect.
Iran remains firm in insisting that its nuclear program is purely civilian and is aimed at scientific research.
“Sanctions are a lose-lose game in which both sides make a loss. If they don’t invest in our oil projects, they will lose an appealing market,” Iran's Minister of Industry, Mines and Commerce Mehdi Ghazanfari said, speaking to the press before the sanctions were officially announced.
Ivan Eland, an expert on political economics from the the Independent Institute told RT sanctions that are pushed on Iran are a blunt tool and will probably hurt the Iranian people.
“When you bomb a country, it unifies the population with the government, even if they don’t like the government. In this case we are not bombing yet, but we are attacking them economically. It actually helps the regime because a lot of the people in Iran, especially the young, don’t really like the regime,” he stated.
The Russian Deputy foreign minister said that recent events resemble an attempt to bring about regime change. And according to Eland, that is what the West really wants, though it is not going to work.
Disparate sanctions: US sanctions, North Korea and Burma
The case of US sanctions against North Korea and Burma/Myanmar is an interesting anomaly among sanctions.
‘The United States does not maintain a comprehensive embargo against North Korea. However, imports from North Korea require approval from the Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC).’
Yet, there are comprehensive sanctions against Burma/Myanmar imposed in three separate bills in 1997, 2003 and 2008. Together these include all of the factors noted above with the addition of interbank transfers that go though the US, which many international transactions do even if they do not originate in the US.
Does the US government really believe that the present, newly elected (admittedly in an unfair election) government or the previous military rulers are worse than those in North Korea? The estimated 2,000 political prisoners in Burma/Myanmar seem far less than the 200,000 or so in North Korea. There is far more freedom in Burma/Myanmar, where civil society exists, even if it does not flourish, than in the rigidly controlled North. Now, even policy criticisms can be public and in the presence of the head of state. Opposition parties, albeit small, are in the legislatures. Sanctions have not results in its goal-regime change. Yet there is now a call for more and targeted sanctions, as though past failure will miraculously lead to success, and even a UN commission of inquiry into crimes against humanity.
Related Articles:
- Burmese sanctions likely to stay, despite ASEAN call
- Burma, North Korea and the nuclear question
- Sanctions against North Korea
- Burma in 2008
What other people are reading:
US and Israel Demand Greater Measures against Tehran
Sanctions imposed by the EU against the regime in Iran have done more so far to harm European businesses than the mullahs. With the United States and Israel both urging sharper penal measures, Germany is considering tighter restrictions on trade with Tehran.German Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle is thus considering a number of more minor ways to ratchet up sanctions. He says that he rates the European policy of sanctions as a partial success because it has at least slowed down Iran's nuclear program. Westerwelle also argues that additional members of the Iranian regime could be banned from traveling to Germany and their bank accounts could be frozen. He says it is also possible to expand the list of goods that are banned from being exported to Iran. Meanwhile, officials in the Economics Ministry say that Rösler agrees in principle that the threat of the Iranians developing a nuclear bomb should be met with a tougher boycott, as long as "the fulfillment of previously authorized contracts is not overly affected."
This month an Israeli delegation will travel to Berlin to make proposals on how the sanctions could be further tightened. The Israelis are expected to deliver a list of names that includes companies and individuals who they say help prop up the Iranian regime.
The Israelis' most far-reaching demands are directed against the Iranian central bank, the oil trade and Iran's elite military force, the Revolutionary Guards.
The Israelis' most far-reaching demands are directed against the Iranian central bank, the oil trade and Iran's elite military force, the Revolutionary Guards.
Shaul Mofaz, the chairman of the Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee of the Knesset, the Israeli parliament, visited Berlin last summer. In the corridors of the Bundestag, Germany's federal parliament, he ran into a parliamentary delegation from Iran. He wasn't pleased at the time. "Germany has to have a clear policy toward Iran," says Mofaz. "It should support tough sanctions."
In a number of cases, Israel has supplied concrete information on how goods exported by Germany are used for dubious purposes. Israel's foreign intelligence agency, the Mossad, supplied photos of German trucks that the Revolutionary Guards have modified to use as rocket launch ramps. The German government subsequently banned the export of heavy trucks to Iran. For Daimler, whose Actros line of heavy trucks is coveted worldwide, the ban on exports meant millions of euros in losses. In a letter addressed to the Foreign Ministry, Daimler asked for the heavy trucks to be removed from the sanctions list, but to no avail.
The forced closure of the Hamburg-based European-Iranian Trade Bank (EIHB) last spring was also the result of dossiers that were made available to the German government by Israeli, American and British intelligence agencies. Germany's Federal Financial Supervisory Authority (BaFin) conducted its own research and concluded that there was insufficient evidence of illegal business transactions to warrant taking measures against the EIHB. But Israel increased the pressure until the Iranian bank ended up on the European sanctions list. Since May the bank has been prohibited from engaging in new business. All accounts have been frozen. EIHB is challenging these actions before the European Court of Justice.
The EIHB ban has created problems for German companies like NNE Pharmaplan, though, a manufacturer of medical instruments located in the central German town of Bad Homburg, but with a parent company in Denmark. It manufactures blood filters for patients suffering from kidney failure. The company supplies a pharmaceutical production plant in Karaj, less than an hour's drive west of Tehran, and estimates that 15,000 Iranian dialysis patients depend on its products.
Once every month, NNE Pharmaplan normally ships the high-tech membranes for the blood filters to Iran by truck. But since September all business has been stopped because the deliveries from June, July and August have not been paid. The unpaid bills amount to a total of €3 million. Due to the sanctions imposed against it, the European-Iranian Trade Bank, which used to handle the transfers of payment, has run out of money. There are now additional membranes in storage worth €2.5 million that should have actually been delivered long ago.
In a number of cases, Israel has supplied concrete information on how goods exported by Germany are used for dubious purposes. Israel's foreign intelligence agency, the Mossad, supplied photos of German trucks that the Revolutionary Guards have modified to use as rocket launch ramps. The German government subsequently banned the export of heavy trucks to Iran. For Daimler, whose Actros line of heavy trucks is coveted worldwide, the ban on exports meant millions of euros in losses. In a letter addressed to the Foreign Ministry, Daimler asked for the heavy trucks to be removed from the sanctions list, but to no avail.
The forced closure of the Hamburg-based European-Iranian Trade Bank (EIHB) last spring was also the result of dossiers that were made available to the German government by Israeli, American and British intelligence agencies. Germany's Federal Financial Supervisory Authority (BaFin) conducted its own research and concluded that there was insufficient evidence of illegal business transactions to warrant taking measures against the EIHB. But Israel increased the pressure until the Iranian bank ended up on the European sanctions list. Since May the bank has been prohibited from engaging in new business. All accounts have been frozen. EIHB is challenging these actions before the European Court of Justice.
The EIHB ban has created problems for German companies like NNE Pharmaplan, though, a manufacturer of medical instruments located in the central German town of Bad Homburg, but with a parent company in Denmark. It manufactures blood filters for patients suffering from kidney failure. The company supplies a pharmaceutical production plant in Karaj, less than an hour's drive west of Tehran, and estimates that 15,000 Iranian dialysis patients depend on its products.
Once every month, NNE Pharmaplan normally ships the high-tech membranes for the blood filters to Iran by truck. But since September all business has been stopped because the deliveries from June, July and August have not been paid. The unpaid bills amount to a total of €3 million. Due to the sanctions imposed against it, the European-Iranian Trade Bank, which used to handle the transfers of payment, has run out of money. There are now additional membranes in storage worth €2.5 million that should have actually been delivered long ago.
The obvious is being ignored If an extraterrestrial being arrived tomorrow and this problem was explained to him - that a nation with nuclear weapons, which refuses any monitoring of them, is insistent, using all its powerful influence, that another nation cannot similarly equip itself; and that no leader or government questions this imbalance - he would probably conclude that we do not possess the intelligence to reach his planet.
U.S. slaps Iran with more sanctions
The Obama administration's harshest step will be a move to identify Iran as a source of 'primary money-laundering concern.'
U.S. counterfeiting charges against N. Korea based on shaky ...
www.mcclatchydc.com/.../us-counterfeiting-charges-aga... - United States
10 Jan 2008 – Two years ago, President Bush accused North Korea's communist regime of printing phony U.S. currency. However, a 10-month McClatchy ...US lifts economic sanctions on Libya
Move comes two months after Gadhafi was captured and killed by rebels
The action unfreezes all government and Central Bank of Libya funds within U.S. jurisdiction, with limited exceptions. Assets in the U.S. of the Gadhafi family and former Gadhafi regime members remain frozen.The move was announced the same day the U.N. Security Council lifted sanctions on Libya's central bank and a subsidiary, clearing the way for their overseas assets to be unfrozen to ease a cash crisis, a council diplomat said.
The Central Bank of Libya and the Libyan Foreign Bank, an offshore institution wholly owned by the central bank, were taken off the council's sanctions list drawn up earlier this year amid civil war in the Arab state.
Gadhafi killing may be war crime, ICC says After a rebellion broke out in February against Gadhafi, the Security Council froze Libyan assets abroad, estimated at $150 billion. Most of that sum has remained beyond the reach of the oil-rich country's new rulers.
Frustration at the delay in releasing the assets has been growing inside Libya, where the interim government says it urgently needs the cash to pay the wages of public sector workers and to start re-building state institutions.
Sanctions in 72 hours: How the U.S. pulled off a major freeze of Libyan assets
Now, at 2:22 Friday afternoon, Feb. 25, an e-mail arrived from a Treasury official with startling news. Their $100 million estimate was off — orders of magnitude off.
The e-mail said there was in “excess of $29.7 Billion — yes, that’s a B.”
And most of the money was at one bank.
.........economic sanctions have become a centerpiece of national security policy.
3/23/2011 7:53 PM MDT
There's probably almost no one who thinks Gaddafi either dead or in exile is a bad idea. The problem is the awful and torturous efforts to establish credulity which ultimately undermine the very efforts to oust him. In just this past week, Clinton said we were supporting the rebels, General Ham said we're NOT supporting the rebels but only stopping civilian casualties, and the President seemed to say both things almost simulltaneously at that disastrously bad press conference he gave. >Even the attempts to kill Gaddafi have been inept. Why send one or two missiles into his compound and act as if it was unplanned? At least send 5 or 10 and demolish the place! Also why pretend that this a coalition? Who are we really fooling talking about Arab participation? The only actual offensive military operations that have occured and will occur are conducted by the French, the Brits and us. Trying to find an Arab country that will send a plane or two into the skies to be photographed makes things look worse, not better.
Presidnet Obama should have realized that he has already been hypocritical in conducting exactly the type of military operations as President that he said were not permissible as a Senator. The least he should have accomplished is to be an effective hypocrite!
Sudan: U.S. Says South State is Exempt From Economic Sanctions
Washington — The new state of South that will officially see the light in less than three months is exempt from the decade-long sanctions imposed on the entire country, the United States said today.
A referendum was conducted last January in which Southern Sudan were asked to pick whether they want to have their own state or remain with the North as one nation.
The outcome was a near unanimous vote in favor of independence and it is scheduled to take place at the end of the interim period on July 9th.
On Tuesday, the U.S. Department of Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) issued a press release explaining the sanctions policy with regard to the new state. "When the new state is formed by Southern Sudan, it will not be included in the territorial boundaries of Sudan nor be governed by the Government of Sudan," OFAC said in its statement.
"Following interagency consultations, OFAC has concluded that the SSR will continue to apply only to Sudan and the Government of Sudan, and that such a new state and its government will not be subject to them".
26-August-2002
Carter Administration
US unilateral sanctions against Iran began almost a quarter of a century ago after the take-over of the US embassy in Tehran (November 1979). President Carter responded immediately by issuing Proclamation 4702, imposing a ban on the importation into the US of Iranian oil. Ten days later, he issued Executive Order 12170, which blocked all property within US jurisdiction owned by the Central Bank and Government of Iran. In April 1980, President Carter issued Executive Order 12205, instituting an embargo on US exports to Iran (including restrictions on financial transactions) and Executive Order 12211, imposing a ban on all imports from Iran and prohibiting US citizens from traveling to Iran or conducting financial transactions there. Once the US hostages were released, the US revoked the previous executive orders, with the exception of the order blocking Iranian Government property within US jurisdiction, and committed the US not to intervene in Iran’s internal affairs.
Reagan Administration
Following the 1983 bombing of the US embassy and marine barracks in Lebanon, the Reagan Administration on 20 January 1984 declared Iran “a sponsor of international terrorism”. This designation made Iran ineligible for various forms of US foreign assistance. A year later, the Administration withheld funds from international organizations equal to the amounts allocated by those organizations for Iran and in 1988, US Executive Directors of international financial institutions were required to vote against issuing loans to Iran. In August 1986, the US prohibited Iran from receiving US arms (including spare parts) under the US Arms Export Control Act.
By Executive Order, a ban was imposed on US imports of Iranian crude oil and all other Iranian imports in October 1987 because of Iran’s “active support of terrorism as an instrument of state policy” and its “aggressive and unlawful action against US flag vessels and merchant vessels of other non-belligerent nations engaged in peaceful commerce in the international waters of the Persian Gulf.” The order was precipitated by congressional criticism of US Government purchases of Iranian oil for the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR).
Bush Sr Administration
In October 1992, the Iran-Iraq Arms Non-Proliferation Act was signed into law. It included provisions concerning dual use items which could be used for military purposes. The principal reason for including Iran was concern about Iran’s development of Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD). A CIA report had estimated that Iran had allocated $2bn for the development of WMD.
Search the Blog
Dec 15, 2011
I suggest you go surf CASMII if you have any concern that the operation of the propaganda of the NPT TRAP has not completely fried any ability to assess the situation that you might consider yourself to have. Nor do you know ...
Nov 10, 2011
... by Cheney's office and subsequently 'yellowcake' was ginned up as an 'atomic menace' as part and parcel of the NPT TRAP shows that the fabrication of 'intelligence' is as pervasive as advertising used as 'news' videos. ...
Dec 14, 2011
( Ignorant of the NPT TRAP ? ) Global_Policy Global Policy. "Two new studies released this week have further shredded the authority of the existing global order"... fb.me/SmNH4LGR · HannahAtState Hannah Rosenthal ...
Sep 22, 2011
( Any assessment should recognize that Iran has signed an international treaty whose conditions circumscribe negotiating tactics and possible offers. Meanwhile, the U.S. position is clear : the NPT TRAP. ) ...
The oil industry was quite optimistic that the Bush Administration would lift the unilateral US oil sanctions. Both Bush and Cheney were oilmen who understood that unilateral sanctions were not working and were discriminatory against US companies.
Various senior future members of the Bush Administration had been quite outspoken in their opposition to unilateral sanctions and the oil industry expected that a Bush Administration would not renew ILSA when it expired in August 2001. AIPAC supporters were concerned when they heard Secretary Colin Powell say during his confirmation hearings that: “differences with Iran need not preclude greater interaction, whether in more normal commerce or increased dialogue. Our national security team will be reviewing such possibilities”.
It came as a surprise to the oil industry that the Cheney energy report in the spring of 2001 favored the use of sanctions as a tool to advance national and global security objectives. While the new Administration was searching for a new policy towards sanctions, super-active AIPAC was pushing for a renewal of ILSA for the following reasons:
· Iran had developed a new missile which could reach Israel;
· Ten Iranian Jewish nationals had been accused of spying in Iran;
· Hamas and other Palestinian organizations were still supported by Iran;
· Statements by Iran against the State of Israel.
AIPAC - The American Israel Public Affairs Committee
www.aipac.org/
Non-PAC self-identified as 'America's pro-Israel lobby', working to strengthen relations between the United States and Israel. Offers Middle East news, analysis ...Stop AIPAC!
www.stopaipac.org/
AIPAC had played a key role in fomenting support for the U.S. invasion of Iraq. It is playing an even greater role in supporting a future military strike against the ...AIPAC North: "Israel Advocacy" in Canada (Part 3 of 3) | NOTES ON ...
www.notesonhypocrisy.com/node/21
26 Jun 2006 – AIPAC North firms up its base .... CIJA's main lobby apparatus, once again joined AIPAC for its annual conference in Washington, D.C.. ...Penny for your thoughts: Round'em up! Iran Plot/ AIPAC "wet dream ...
pennyforyourthoughts2.blogspot.com/.../roundem-up-iran-plot-aipac...
14 Oct 2011 – Iran Plot/ AIPAC "wet dream". Mass Pro Syrian Rallies & more. Gonna finish up this week with a round up of news post and a reminder- ... Syria sanctions: 'outraged' US seeks fresh resolution after double ... | |
www.guardian.co.uk/.../syria-sanctions-us-fresh-resolu...5 Oct 2011 US envoy says America will not rest until UN security council meets its responsibilities after Russia and China ... | |
( Notice the quotation marks surrounding outraged : one might surmise something like "You protest too much".....Guilt and Smokescreen )
Cato Handbook for Congress: Unilateral Sanctions
www.cato.org/pubs/handbook/hb105-53.html
There are no examples of U.S. unilateral economic sanctions changing the basic ... Yet, as Table 53.1 shows, the United States maintains sanctions against a ...Congress should
The attempt to punish foreign governments through unilateral sanctions and secondary boycotts is an unwelcome obstacle on the road to greater freedom of commerce. That development bodes ill for U.S. citizens, for America's diplomatic relations with our major trading partners, and for the poor of the targeted nations who are the most likely victims of economic sanctions. U.S. government restrictions send the wrong message about America's belief in the positive influence of private investment and fail to recognize that U.S. companies help foster greater economic and political freedom for people in developing nations. Why Unilateral Sanctions Are Bad Policy
Unilateral sanctions simply do not work. There are no examples of U.S. unilateral economic sanctions changing the basic character or significant policies of a foreign nation.
- require an analysis that measures the economic cost to the U.S. economy of all current and proposed economic sanctions;
- provide compensation to U.S. companies whose investments are lost or devalued because of a U.S.-imposed sanction;
- establish a time limit on any new economic sanction;
- require an explicit national security justification for any new economic sanction; and
- grant China, a frequent target of proposed sanctions, a multi-year waiver for most-favored-nation trading status and facilitate its entry into the World Trade Organization.
The attempt to punish foreign governments through unilateral sanctions and secondary boycotts is an unwelcome obstacle on the road to greater freedom of commerce. That development bodes ill for U.S. citizens, for America's diplomatic relations with our major trading partners, and for the poor of the targeted nations who are the most likely victims of economic sanctions. U.S. government restrictions send the wrong message about America's belief in the positive influence of private investment and fail to recognize that U.S. companies help foster greater economic and political freedom for people in developing nations. Why Unilateral Sanctions Are Bad Policy
Unilateral sanctions simply do not work. There are no examples of U.S. unilateral economic sanctions changing the basic character or significant policies of a foreign nation.
-
Haiti Earthquake Relief Mission | Article | The United States Army
14 Jan 2010 ... U.S. Army paratroopers board a transport aircraft at Pope Air Force Base, N.C.,
Jan. 14, 2010, en route to support recovery efforts in Haiti ...
http://www.army.mil/article/32919/ -
Haiti Earthquake Relief - United States Department of Defense
WASHINGTON, June 1, 2010 – The U.S. military today officially ended its
earthquake disaster response in Haiti today, leaving what is left of assistance
with ...
http://www.defense.gov/home/features/2010/0110_haiti/ -
The U.S. Military in Haiti: A Compassionate Invasion - The Haiti ...
16 Jan 2010 ... The U.S. Military in Haiti: A Compassionate Invasion ... Within two hours of the
quake, one of the globe's biggest warships, the carrier USS Carl ...
http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1953379_1953494_19543 -
First U.S. vessel arrives at Port-au-Prince - World news - Haiti ...
13 Jan 2010 ... WASHINGTON — As the U.S. advanced its massive military response to aid
survivors of Haiti's earthquake, devastation greeted the first Coast ...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34832613/ns/world_news-haiti/t/first-us-vessel-arriv -
US military behind Haiti quake, says Innsbruck scientist - General ...
11 Mar 2010 ... Report on Austrian Times english news online newspaper: Innsbruck political
scientist Claudia von Werlhof has accused the USA of being ...
http://www.austriantimes.at/news/General_News/2010-03-09/21370/US_military_behind -
Mass US military presence in Haiti arouses contention
20 Jan 2010 ... The dominant US role in earthquake-hit Haiti has been questioned by some
countries. A French minister claimed Monday that international aid ...
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/world/haitiearthquake/2010-01/20/content_9350681.ht - US accused of 'occupying' Haiti as troops flood in - Telegraph
- 18 Jan 2010 ... Haiti earthquake: US forces not taking up policing role, Robert Gates says. 18
Jan 2010. The diplomatic row came amid heightened frustrations ...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/centralamericaandthecaribbean/haiti/70 -
Haitian Earthquake: Made in the USA | Common Dreams
14 Jan 2010 ... As grim accounts of the earthquake in Haiti came in, the accounts in ... From 1915
to 1934, the U.S. Marines imposed harsh military occupation, ...
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/01/14-13 -
Haiti Earthquake Rebuilding | World Concern
Cholera Care Kits help families survive. Across Haiti, World Concern is bringing
the message of cholera to communities who may be suffering - or may be at risk. ...
http://www.worldconcern.org/haiti-earthquake/ -
Haiti: A year after the quake, waiting to rebuild - World news - Haiti ...
11 Jan 2011 ... The bodies still being found in the rubble are a sign of how far Haiti has to go to
recover from a disaster that left the capital in ruins and is ...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41023645/ns/world_news-haiti/t/haiti-year-after-quak -
FAQs: Rebuilding Haiti after the Earthquake
7 Jan 2011 ... Amid the overwhelming challenges facing Haiti, Canada remains committed to
supporting its hemispheric partner, both in the ongoing ...
http://www.canadainternational.gc.ca/haiti/highlights-faits/Faq-Foire-Reconstruc -
BBC News - Haiti PM criticises post-earthquake rebuilding efforts
27 Dec 2010 ... Haitian Prime Minister Jean-Max Bellerive says the international community is
not allowing his country to play a big enough role in its own ...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-12082047 -
Independent Evaluation - WBG Response to the Haiti Earthquake ...
In Haiti, the long period between earthquakes and the perceived urgency of
emergency and reconstruction tasks can be expected to lead to a loss of focus on ...
http://web.worldbank.org/external/default/main?noSURL=Y&theSitePK=1324361&am - Paul Farmer
- Overhaul Foreign Aid to Rebuild Haiti
- The international community's response was fast and effective during the emergency cause by the Jan. 12, 2010 earthquake in Haiti that claimed at least 230,000 lives. But the "impressive" outpouring of solidarity stalled when reconstruction began, as international and local institutions failed to measure up to the challenge.
- foreign aid efforts and funds should be channelled through local and mid-level public authorities and local NGOs and companies, given the ineffectiveness of the traditional power structures.
He said there is "a disconnect in the dialogue between international and local know-how," - Tens of thousands of people left homeless by the 7.0 magnitude quake have no choice but to survive in "huge camps on the outskirts (of the capital), which will soon turn into enormous slums,
- André Yves Cribb, a Haitian agronomist who travelled to Brazil in 1992 to earn a graduate degree, and stayed on as an EMBRAPA researcher, although he frequently visits his country.
Haiti needs "fewer soldiers and more engineers, doctors and technicians" for reconstruction, he said.
Cribb agreed with Seitenfus that his country is "paying the price of proximity to the United States." And he added that the solidarity of Cuba, which sent 1,300 doctors, has fuelled the hostility of Haiti's powerful neighbour. Rep. Donna Edwards: Invest in Women to Rebuild Haiti
Our attention on Haiti has waxed and waned,” she said Nov. 29. “I think we have to change that story.” I do think we give a lot of lip service… about the importance of investing in women, and the importance of investing in Haiti, but we haven’t really put the meat to that bone
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment