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 : Sioux Nation -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: SiouxPal who wrote (102698)	3/21/2007 2:38:49 PM
From: Wharf Rat	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 361375

I'll bet it's not as ugly as Gollum's face

To: SiouxPal who wrote (102698)	3/21/2007 3:10:40 PM
From: Karen Lawrence	Respond to of 361375

All right South Africa! Calling time out on UN sanctions against Iran is judith miller back on the payroll: "the New York Times, which has been under fire recently for turning the allegations of "anonymous" US sources on Iran's troublemaking in Iraq into front-page articles. The US media, so adept at manufacturing consensus on foreign-policy agendas, have been singing from the same music sheet with the White House with respect to the Iran nuclear issue." By Kaveh L Afrasiabi Here is an interesting twist: the UN system may actually improve a notch if the clock on the Iran sanctions is moved back as requested by South Africa, which currently holds the presidency of the Security Council. Heading the 10 non-permanent members of the council, and bitterly complaining about being left in the dark about the preliminary meetings among the Permanent Five (China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States) plus Germany on the the draft of the third resolution against Iran, South Africa has jolted the United Nations community by calling for a 90-day time-out on further UN action, combining this with the equally stunning blow of backing Iran's right to enrich uranium. Surprised by this unexpected development on the eve of a Security Council vote tentatively scheduled for this week, the five permanent members and Germany are now faced with the choice of whether to respect South Africa's wish, widely shared among members. Not doing so would expose the charade of global consensus and unanimity of the international community vis-a-vis Iran. Or they might embrace this idea and give diplomacy, instead of coercive sanctions, more time. Coinciding with this has been the misinformation put out by the New York Times regarding a Russian ultimatum to Iran, claiming that a Russian official, Igor Ivanov, told the Iranians last week that unless they abide by the Security Council's demand to suspend enrichment activities, no nuclear fuel will be delivered to the Bushehr nuclear power plant, nor will it be completed. This report, by veteran reporter Elaine Sciolino, has been denied by Tehran, as well as by Russia's envoy to the UN, Vitaly Churkin, who held a press conference on Tuesday and flatly denied the allegations, reminding reporters that both resolutions on Iran have carefully separated the issue of Bushehr from the matter of uranium enrichment (see the press conference here ). Incredibly, in a later editorial, the New York Times not only failed to reflect the Russian ambassador's unequivocal denial of Sciolino's story, it referred to her piece approvingly and gave an extended interpretation about Russia behaving better that bore no connection to the Russian dismissal of the newspaper's false allegations. Clearly, this does not bode well for the New York Times, which has been under fire recently for turning the allegations of "anonymous" US sources on Iran's troublemaking in Iraq into front-page articles. The US media, so adept at manufacturing consensus on foreign-policy agendas, have been singing from the same music sheet with the White House with respect to the Iran nuclear issue. www.atimes.com