Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Bill Clinton Scandal - SANITY CHECK -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: DMaA who wrote (52781)	6/11/1999 12:25:00 PM
From: Johannes Pilch	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

Russia springs Yugo troops surprize on NATO MOSCOW, June 11 (AFP) - Moscow sprang a surprize on NATO by despatching an advance contingent of troops into Yugoslavia on Friday amid a spat over Russia's role in an international Kosovo peace force. A top US diplomatic team that had left Moscow after delicate and inconclusive peacekeeping negotiations turned round their plane mid-air and headed back to the Russian capital seeking an explanation. US Deputy Secretary Strobe Talbott entered closed-door talks with Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov at 5:00 p.m. (1300 GMT). Russia's decision to move troops to Yugoslavia's border with Kosovo came hours after senior generals threatened to go it alone into the separatist province. Hours after the deployment Defense Minister Igor Sergeyev called an emergency meeting on Kosovo to discuss Russia's future options. Interfax said the contingent comprised 500 paratroopers who were previously stationed in Bosnia and would remain on station until a final decision on their role in a Kosovo peace force was taken. But sources with SFOR, the NATO-led stabilisation force in Bosnia, said the contingent comprised 150-200 troops. The independent Beta news agency in Belgrade said that the "first unit, consisting of transporters, trucks and many vehicles," entered Yugoslavia at 10:30 a.m. (0830 GMT) at the Bijeljina-Pavlovica Cuprija border crossing, some 120 kilometers (72 miles) west of Belgrade. Interfax cited defense sources as saying that Moscow later Friday could send another 1,000 paratroops to Yugoslavia, although ministry officials refused to confirm the report. That deployment would need to be approved by the Federation Council, the upper house of the Russian parliament. NATO has balked at Moscow's demands to run a Kosovo sector without having to answer to commanders from the Atlantic alliance. "If there is no accord, Russia has the same rights as NATO," said General Leonid Ivashov. "And considering our decisive role in reaching an end to the war, we will take that sector which will be agreed with Yugoslavia and which answers to our interests." He later told ITAR-TASS: "We will not come up to the Americans with an outstretched hand and ask to be let into Kosovo. Our position is firm." Talbott before leaving Moscow at midday Friday appeared to rule such a request out. "We will have one operation, called KFOR," Talbott said firmly following talks with Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov. The United States has voiced fears that an independent Russian sector could lead to a partition of Kosovo and deter hundreds of thousands of ethnic Albanians from returning to the province. Ivanov sought to calm down Washington over the troop movement by explaining that the contingent was on the Kosovo border only in preparation for future deployment. "We never deployed troops in Kosovo," Ivanov said, "but active preparations are underway for the deployment of an international presence in Kosovo." US Secretary of State Madeline Albright expressed "surprize" when she heard reports of the Russian troop movements, spokesman James Rubin said. But Ivanov in a telephone conversation told Albright that "the Russians understood that there would be a unified command structure for the peacekeeping force," Rubin said. "The secretary is satisfied with the response from Ivanov," he added. The standoff came amid a stark announcement by President Boris Yeltsin that Russia's ties with the Atlantic alliance remained "frozen" despite NATO's decision to halt air strikes against Yugoslavia. Speaking of Russia's relations with the alliance, Yeltsin said: "Right now they are frozen, then we will see." The Kremlin chief called the Balkans conflict "a tragedy from which we must all draw lessons. The world really was on the brink of a catastrophe." But he congratulated Moscow's diplomatic efforts which he said had helped restore "world order." "Russian diplomats and military personnel worked well, I am pleased with them," Yeltsin said. "Our efforts produced a result. We defended the UN Charter and order in the world." ----- Russia was one of the heroes in the Kosovo fiasco, but recently has appeared weak, quite helpless. Now it seems a bit more desperate in its desire for an appearance of strength, such that it will insert troops into Kosovo to acquire it.

To: DMaA who wrote (52781)	6/12/1999 12:02:00 PM
From: Johannes Pilch	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 67261

Thomas Sowell Mass shootings and mass hysteria jewishworldreview.com IN A WORLD of emotional-outburst TV shows and dumbed-down education, it may not be so surprising that the deaths of 15 people have stampeded Congress toward laws affecting more than a quarter of a billion Americans and their descendants. That stampede is called "gun control." The tragic irony is that such laws are much more likely to increase shooting deaths than to reduce them. For those of us old-fashioned enough to think that facts still matter, comprehensive research has shown that allowing law-abiding citizens to carry concealed weapons reduces gun violence, as well as other kinds of violence. Unfortunately, facts may carry very little weight politically, in the midst of an emotional orgy with rhetorical posturing. Yet the evidence is overwhelming that allowing law-abiding citizens to be armed has reduced violence in general and mass shootings in particular. For those to whom facts still matter, John Lott's book "More Guns, Less Crime" presents overwhelming evidence. Another study of his, with Professor William Landes of the University of Chicago as co-author, addresses mass shootings, such as those which have been taking place in schools, post offices and other public places. These shooting rampages have been far more common in places where there are strong gun control laws. No matter what other factors these authors take into account -- poverty, race, population density, etc. -- the results are still the same. Places with many armed citizens have fewer mass shootings. Their data cover mass shootings in every state and the District of Columbia, going back nearly two decades. Congress would do well to call Lott and Landes as witnesses who could provide some much-needed education for the public and the media, as well as for the legislators who are being rushed toward ill-considered legislation. Gun control laws have a bad track record, however popular they may be in some quarters. Think about it: People who are committing illegal acts are not going to be stopped because guns are illegal. What does stop them then? Often it is somebody else with a gun. Indeed, such shootings may not occur at all in places where there is a high probability of encountering armed resistance, either from an intended victim or from someone else on the scene in a public place. If those who are asking emotionally, "How can we stop these school shootings?" were serious, they might discover that some of these shootings have in fact been stopped by an armed adult at the school. None of them would have been stopped by the kinds of gun control laws that Congress is currently being stampeded into passing. Waiting periods? The young murderers in Colorado waited longer than any waiting period ever suggested before carrying out their well-planned orgy of death. "Assault weapons" ban? Such bans would not have applied to the kinds of guns that were used. Nor would the Columbine High School tragedy have been prevented by programs for "troubled youths." The Columbine killers had already been given a clean bill of health by shrinks running such programs. So had the young killers in another school mass shooting. The track record of psycho-babble is miserable, however popular it may be in the media. Some people support gun control laws simply because they are opposed to guns. We may all agree that the world would be a better place if guns had never been invented. The same could be said for everything from bows and arrows to nuclear weapons. But there is no way to unring the bell. The only options available to us today involve choices about what to do now, given that all these deadly things exist and cannot be made to disappear, no matter what kinds of words we put on paper. In a country where there are millions of guns available illegally to criminals, the real question is whether we should allow potential victims be armed as well. Even people who never carry a gun are less likely to become victims in a community where concealed weapons are widely permitted to law- abiding citizens, because the criminal has no way of knowing who is armed and who isn't. Statistics on gun accident deaths need to be weighed against statistics on reduced murders where gun ownership is widespread. The latter far more than balance the former -- but only if facts matter. jewishworldreview.com