|
|
Tuesday, May 6th, 2008
| |
5:11 pm - "Everything starts with _"
|
Grabbed this from chaaaaaaaaa (in Multiply)
Use the 1st letter of your name to answer each of the following...They MUST be real places, names, things...NOTHING made up!
If you can't think of anything, skip it. Try to use different answers if the person in front of you had the same 1st initial.
And remember - you CAN'T use your name for the boy/girl name question.
Your Name
- Wilbert
a song:
- Where are You Going by Dave Matthews Band
4 letter word:
- what
Color:
- white
Animal:
- Whale
TV Show:
- Whose Line is it Anyway
Country:
- Western Sahara
Boy Name:
- William
Girl Name:
- Wilona
Occupation:
- Worker
Celebrity:
- Wesley Snipes; Washington, Denzel; Willy Wonka!
Something found in your kitchen:
- wok
Reason for Being Late:
- work; wasn't able to wake up; will not go; watched TV
**Post as "Everything starts with _"
current mood:  rushed
|
|
(3 comments | comment on this)
|
| Wednesday, April 9th, 2008
| |
6:18 pm - PHILLIP FULLON!
|
Hoy Fullon! Nice to see you again! Good to know that you're still alive. Hehe
Busy, busy week... And I can't help feel indifferent and hyper at the same time.
current mood:  hyper
|
|
(comment on this)
|
| |
10:02 am - How to Start Your Own Country
|
|
| Tuesday, April 8th, 2008
| |
2:07 am - After 35 weeks...
|
Wow, I haven't posted in LJ for 35 weeks now.
Passed by PIDC. It feels good to be back in the circuit. But it also feels bad that you only recognize a handful of people (and they're the same people who were in the circuit when you retired). Hmmm, it's an official sign that I have evolved into a dinosaur.
Now on to some random thoughts:
Happy birthday Tetski! :P
Sorry Meow, but I hope you understand where I'm coming from.
I remembered that Carl posted something about a trip to Taal. Having been there over the weekend, I now empathize with his angst.
Thank you, for appreciating what I did.
And boo to you. I should've listened to him when he gave me that advice about you.
Oh well, the long weekend's done... Back to work tomorrow/later...
current mood:  disappointed
|
|
(2 comments | comment on this)
|
| Saturday, March 18th, 2006
| |
2:36 am - Oh Canada!
|
Oh Canada!
By Joseph Cirincione
Published: March 13, 2006
U.S. President George Bush last week struck a deal with India that directly violates the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, or NPT, as well as several major U.S. laws, setting off waves of criticism in the states and around the world. Canadian officials have not been part of that criticism. Instead, the nation that helped India build its first nuclear weapon may now help India build dozens more.
The Bush deal would directly encourage and assist India’s nuclear bomb program, in contradiction to Article 1 of the NPT that prohibits any signatory nation from helping another nation develop nuclear weapons. Fortunately, before President Bush can sell one gram of uranium to India, the U.S. Congress will have to approve changes to U.S. laws. Congress could block or amend the agreement. Senior members of both parties have indicated their deep concerns about the deal and the precedent it sets for other nations, including Iran. The reaction has been so negative that the Indian ambassador to the United States complained, “the nonproliferation ideologues have high jacked the debate.”
Still, other nations, including France, Russia and Canada, are tempted by the profits to be made in nuclear sales to the world’s second most populous nation. The nuclear industries in these countries are salivating at the prospect of billions of dollars in trade and hoping that the construction of dozens of new reactors in India and China could restart their long-stalled industry, launching a new wave of nuclear power around the world. So-called “realists” in the foreign policy establishments dismiss proliferation concerns, focusing instead on the need to forge strong ties with India. Neoconservatives are eager to forge a grand alliance against China. For them, as one architect of the deal told my colleague, the problem is not that India has nuclear weapons; it is that it does not have enough nuclear weapons.
Canada will play a key role in determining whether this deal lives or dies. Canada has a special responsibility in this matter. More than any Indian scientist, Canada can be called the true mother of the Indian nuclear bomb.
Canada began its nuclear cooperation with India fifty years ago. In 1955, Canada agreed to build a 40MW research reactor for India, known as the CIRUS (Canada-India Reactor, US) reactor. India promised that both the reactor and the related fissile materials would only be used for peaceful purposes. Canada supplied half the initial uranium fuel for the reactor and the United States supplied the other half, plus heavy water to moderate the nuclear reactions. Canada signed two cooperation agreements that provided India with designs for the CANDU-type reactor. Many of India’s nuclear reactors, both operational and planned, are based on CANDU technology and designs received from Canada.
All were supposed to be exclusively for peaceful use. But in 1974, India cheated on its commitments. It took out fuel rods from the CIRUS reactor, extracted the plutonium from those rods and detonated its first nuclear test. India called it a “peaceful” nuclear explosion, but the country now admits it was a test of a weapon design. In response, Canada ceased all nuclear cooperation with India.
Now, following the US lead, Canada has begun to revive that cooperation. In September 2005, Canadian Foreign Minister Pettigrew met with Indian External Affairs Minister Singh and agreed to forget this history and let bygones be bygones. Significantly, they agreed to develop a broad bilateral cooperation framework, possibly by mid-2006. Canada agreed to open the supply of nuclear technology to any Indian civilian nuclear facility. This means that Canada, too, will violate the NPT. It will break Canadian laws that now require that a nuclear cooperation agreement only be concluded with a state that has signed the NPT (which India refuses to do) or has accepted full-scope safeguards (which India has not).
Full-scope safeguards means that a country agrees that all its nuclear facilities will be open to thorough inspection by the International Atomic Energy Agency. These inspectors will make sure that no nuclear fuel is diverted to weapons purposes. But the Bush India deal exempts fully one-third of India’s reactors from any inspections. It does not matter that inspectors will be allowed in to the others. If the deal stands, India will use foreign fuel for its power reactors, freeing up Indian uranium for its military reactors. India will be able to double or triple the number of weapons it can make annually. They could go from the 6-10 they could currently produce to 30 a year.
The consequences could be severe. Regionally, it could ignite a new nuclear arms race. Pakistan will not stand idly by, nor will China. What will Japan do, a country that signed the NPT, but now sees India reaping the benefits of standing outside the treaty?
Globally, the deal cripples the main diplomatic and legal barrier to the spread of nuclear weapons. The United States is now trying to restrain the Iranian program by relying on the very treaty it has just weakened with the India deal.
There are ways to fix this deal to minimize the damage, including getting India to promise to cease all further production of nuclear bomb material (the way all other nuclear weapon states have, save Pakistan). Canadian officials can help. But they must now decide if they want to. A bit of reflection on their past history with India wouldn’t hurt.
Related Links:
Canada: 'True Mother of the Indian Bomb'
No BMD, eh?, Canadian blog on anti-missile systems
|
|
(2 comments | comment on this)
|
| |
1:52 am - A Restrictive Human Rights Council Gets Mixed Reviews
|
A Restrictive Human Rights Council Gets Mixed Reviews
By Thalif Deen
Inter Press Service
April 28, 2005
The 53-member Geneva-based Human Rights Commission (HRC) has come under fire for accommodating abusive governments as its elected members. But proposals to fix it are drawing mixed reaction. The accusations have come mostly from Western nations and human rights groups that have condemned the membership of countries such as Sudan, Cuba, Democratic Republic of Congo, and Zimbabwe -- and specifically the election of Libya as chair of the HRC in 2003.
UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan, who also has publicly criticised the composition of the UN's supreme human rights body, wants to replace the HRC with a smaller human rights council. If Annan has his way, membership in the new body would be confined only to governments, perhaps mostly from the Western world, who abide by what he called "the highest human rights standards."
But his idea, part of a proposed radical restructuring of the world body, has spawned questions about the new council's membership and remit. "If the U.S. State Department's annual report on human rights is to be used as a yardstick", says one Asian diplomat, "most developing nations would be barred from the new Human Rights Council because they are all human rights abusers in the eyes of the United States."
Norman Solomon, executive director of the Washington-based Institute for Public Accuracy, points out that the United States, which sits in judgment over the rest of the world, should be barred from the proposed new Council because of its own violations of basic human rights under the guise of fighting terrorism. "Let those without human-rights sin cast the first stone," Solomon said. "Along with pouring massive amounts of monetary aid, military arms and political capital into some of the most heinous human-rights-abusing regimes on the planet, the U.S. government has been killing tens of thousands of Iraqi people since the invasion," he told IPS. "This hardly qualifies Washington to credibly pontificate or pass judgment on the deadly crimes of others," said Solomon, author of the forthcoming book 'War Made Easy: How Presidents and Pundits Keep Spinning Us to Death'.
Addressing the annual HRC meeting in Geneva earlier this month, Annan proposed that members of the new Council should be elected by a two-thirds majority of the 191-member General Assembly. "Those elected should have a solid record of commitment to the highest human rights standards," he said. Annan added that the existing HRC not only had lost its credibility but also had "cast a shadow on the reputation of the UN system as a whole." "No one can claim complete virtue when it comes to human rights application," Annan told reporters at the Geneva talks. "The new Council should have the opportunity periodically of looking at human rights records of every country, and we should be able to apply the rules fairly and consistently across the board."
Jim Paul, executive director of the New York-based Global Policy Forum, which closely monitors the United Nations, also expressed strong reservations. "I think it is going to be very problematical," he told IPS. "It is risky, this idea of measuring a state's human rights behaviour. Are they going to say that the United States cannot be in the new Council because its military tortured prisoners in the Abu Ghraib prison in Baghdad?," he asked. "I am sure they are not going to say that," Paul added.
Malik Al-Arkam of the Washington-based group All For Reparations And Emancipation (AFRE), which campaigns for reparations from former slave-trading countries for descendants of slaves taken from Africa to the West. "If the Human Rights Commission is restructured or replaced with a more credible body, the first nation to be excluded should be the USA," he told IPS. "For centuries, the United States has committed ethnocide and forced assimilation upon slave descendants. And these vile practices blatantly violate U.N. covenants, including article 27 of the international covenant on civil and political rights. We the Afro descendants demand our human rights and massive reparations," he added.
Some 15 leading human rights organisations -- including Human Rights Watch, International Commission of Jurists, Association for the Prevent of Torture, and Amnesty International -- endorsed Annan's plan and appealed to UN member states to "quickly establish" the new human rights council. The coalition said it was supportive of "a new body that has greater authority by being given a higher status in the United Nations."
"At this time when the Commission on Human Rights is becoming increasingly paralyzed in effectively addressing human rights violations around the world, the creation of a Human Rights Council with enhanced authority that can sit in sessions throughout the year could be a huge step forward," Yvonne Terlingen, Amnesty International's representative at the United Nations, said in a statement.
Annan's proposal also has been welcomed by the 25-member European Union. But several developing nations have expressed scepticism. "The proposal to create a new human rights council appeared to be counter-intuitive to addressing the complex and controversial problems relating to the United Nations," Ambassador Munir Akram of Pakistan told the General Assembly in early April. "There were simpler avenues by which the consideration and action of the United Nations on human rights issues could be more effective," he added without elaborating.
Paul, at the Global Policy Forum, also questioned Britain's standing to join the new council "because of what they are doing in Northern Ireland". Likewise, Russia has been accused of rights violations in the troubled province of Chechnya, which is fighting for a separate nation state, he added. He further highlighted Washington's self-proclaimed fight against terrorism. The USA Patriot Act, enacted in 2001 and designed to boost anti-terrorist intelligence gathering by giving law enforcement officials greater latitude to search and seize property and track people's reading and consumption habits, in particular violated constitutional and legal privacy and due-process protections, he said.
Beyond questions about the council's composition and mandate, it remained to be seen how the new body would interact with non-governmental organisations and organise its work, Paul said. "What access would non-governmental organisations have in the new council compared with the existing HRC? And what would be the role of special rapporteurs who are mandated by the HRC to investigate human rights violations in specific countries? Will the various UN subcommissions on human rights continue under the new Council?" Until those details are worked out, Paul said, "most of us will reserve judgment."
|
|
(comment on this)
|
| Sunday, March 5th, 2006
| |
1:24 am - Drugs! (and some unexpected stuff)
|
|
| |
12:54 am - How well do you know me?
|
|
| Friday, December 30th, 2005
| |
12:35 am - The Madrassa Myth
|
The Madrassa Myth
By Peter Bergen
Schwartz Fellow
and Swati Pandey
Research Associate
The New York Times
June 14, 2005
It is one of the widespread assumptions of the war on terrorism that the Muslim religious schools known as madrassas, catering to families that are often poor, are graduating students who become terrorists. Last year, Secretary of State Colin L. Powell denounced madrassas in Pakistan and several other countries as breeding grounds for "fundamentalists and terrorists." A year earlier, Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld had queried in a leaked memorandum, "Are we capturing, killing or deterring and dissuading more terrorists every day than the madrassas and the radical clerics are recruiting, training and deploying against us?"
While madrassas may breed fundamentalists who have learned to recite the Koran in Arabic by rote, such schools do not teach the technical or linguistic skills necessary to be an effective terrorist. Indeed, there is little or no evidence that madrassas produce terrorists capable of attacking the West. And as a matter of national security, the United States doesn't need to worry about Muslim fundamentalists with whom we may disagree, but about terrorists who want to attack us.
We examined the educational backgrounds of 75 terrorists behind some of the most significant recent terrorist attacks against Westerners. We found that a majority of them are college-educated, often in technical subjects like engineering. In the four attacks for which the most complete information about the perpetrators' educational levels is available - the World Trade Center bombing in 1993, the attacks on the American embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998, the 9/11 attacks, and the Bali bombings in 2002 - 53 percent of the terrorists had either attended college or had received a college degree. As a point of reference, only 52 percent of Americans have been to college. The terrorists in our study thus appear, on average, to be as well educated as many Americans.
The 1993 World Trade Center attack involved 12 men, all of whom had a college education. The 9/11 pilots, as well as the secondary planners identified by the 9/11 commission, all attended Western universities, a prestigious and elite endeavor for anyone from the Middle East. Indeed, the lead 9/11 pilot, Mohamed Atta, had a degree from a German university in, of all things, urban preservation, while the operational planner of 9/11, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, studied engineering in North Carolina. We also found that two-thirds of the 25 hijackers and planners involved in 9/11 had attended college. Of the 75 terrorists we investigated, only nine had attended madrassas, and all of those played a role in one attack - the Bali bombing. Even in this instance, however, five college-educated "masterminds" - including two university lecturers - helped to shape the Bali plot.
Like the view that poverty drives terrorism - a notion that countless studies have debunked - the idea that madrassas are incubating the next generation of terrorists offers the soothing illusion that desperate, ignorant automatons are attacking us rather than college graduates, as is often the case. In fact, two of the terrorists in our study had doctorates from Western universities, and two others were working toward their Ph.D.
A World Bank-financed study that was published in April raises further doubts about the influence of madrassas in Pakistan, the country where the schools were thought to be the most influential and the most virulently anti-American. Contrary to the numbers cited in the report of the 9/11 commission, and to a blizzard of newspaper reports that 10 percent of Pakistani students study in madrassas, the study's authors found that fewer than 1 percent do so. If correct, this estimate would suggest that there are far more American children being home-schooled than Pakistani boys attending madrassas.
While madrassas are an important issue in education and development in the Muslim world, they are not and should not be considered a threat to the United States. The tens of millions of dollars spent every year by the United States through the State Department, the Middle East Partnership Initiative, and the Agency for International Development to improve education and literacy in the Middle East and South Asia should be applauded as the development aid it is and not as the counterterrorism effort it cannot be.
|
|
(comment on this)
|
| Monday, December 26th, 2005
| |
6:39 pm - WTO matter
|
|
| Sunday, December 25th, 2005
| |
8:25 pm - Iraqi: Turning Point at Last?
|
Iraq election: Turning point at last?
By Paul Reynolds
World Affairs correspondent, BBC News website
One is tempted to say "here we go again" - another Iraqi event which is supposed to be the turning point.
We have had the invasion, the capture of Saddam Hussein, the elections in January to the transitional government, the constitutional agreement and the referendum approving it.
All of these were supposed, in their different ways, to mark the moment when Iraqi democracy would take hold, the insurgency would slacken and hopes of a foreign troop withdrawal would become reality.
Now we have what is supposed to be the big daddy of them all - elections for a fully constitutional Iraqi government.
President Bush is certainly turning up the volume.
He called 2005 not just a momentous year for Iraq but for the whole Middle East and beyond. In the third of his recent speeches to rally support for his policies on Iraq he declared:
"There's still a lot of difficult work to be done in Iraq, but thanks to the courage of the Iraqi people, the year 2005 will be recorded as a turning point in the history of Iraq, the history of the Middle East, and the history of freedom."
And the neo-conservatives in Washington have not given up. In an article in the Wall Street Journal on 12 December, Norman Podhoretz suggested that gloom and doom in Iraq was like the depression in the 13 American colonies in the early stages of their war with Britain - with one big difference.
"In Iraq today and in the Middle East as a whole, a successful outcome is staring us in the face," he wrote.
Again, "successful outcome" has still to be defined.
Whether it turns out like that remains to be seen. A certain amount of caution, to say the least, is justified by events. And there are those who argue, anyway, that the cost will have been too high, whatever the results.
But certainly the election is a major event and it is important to listen to what Iraqis themselves are saying about it to see if there is any basis for hope.
Opinion poll
We can listen to them because an opinion survey was published this week by Oxford Research International on behalf of the BBC and other media groups.
The survey showed considerable faith in democracy but also a desire for a "strong leader." In answer to the question: "What do you think Iraq needs after the election planned for December 2005?", 51% said a "single strong leader" and 28% said "An Iraqi democracy".
The likelihood is that a coalition government led by the majority Shias will emerge but lacking the charismatic figurehead which many Iraqis want
In fact the two are not seen as incompatible since a different question about what Iraq needed now brought a response of 75% calling for a strong leader and 74% for democracy.
This demand for the leader is especially strong in the main Sunni central belt, where the insurgency is strongest, and weakest in the Kurdish areas, which are the most stable.
They probably won't get that person.
The same poll failed to show support for any one individual and the likelihood is that a coalition government led by the majority Shias will emerge but lacking the charismatic figurehead that many Iraqis want.
The survey also shows a definite intention to vote, with 83% of those interviewed saying they would do so. This time there should be no major Sunni boycott.
That result is a considerable rise on the same responses late last year ahead of the January election.
The survey also shows that the foreign forces are not popular but that the Iraqi army and police are. This indicates support for the current US policy of trying to hand over to Iraqi forces and offering an Iraqi solution to the insurgency. Again whether that actually happens is the issue.
All this is not unhopeful for US policymakers.
The whole picture
And yet opinion polls and official figures do not always give the whole picture.
I used to go to one country in Central America, El Salvador, in the 1980s. It had a strong currency, low inflation, full employment, a balance of payments surplus etc - and it was in the middle of a civil war.
It, too, had what was regarded as a successful election in 1982, when people queued up for hours to vote and guerrillas failed to stop them. A guerrilla attack on the capital San Salvador from a nearby volcano was beaten back and a guerrilla ambush on fuel tankers on the Pan American highway was seen off.
The civil war went on for another 10 years.
|
|
(comment on this)
|
| |
8:05 pm - Merry Christmas
|
|
| Thursday, December 22nd, 2005
| |
2:47 am - Snap
|
|
| |
2:18 am - Goodfellas, with Filipino Subtitiles
|
|
| Friday, December 9th, 2005
| |
12:27 am - Bribery
|
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit.
Bribery is the practice of offering a professional or an authority person money or other favours in order to circumvent ethics or other rules in a variety of situations. It is a form of corruption and is generally illegal, or at least cause for sanctions from one's employer or professional organization. Often the term corruption generally refers to bribery.
For example, a motorist may bribe a police officer not to issue a ticket for speeding, a citizen seeking paperwork or utility line connections may bribe a functionary for faster service, a construction company may bribe a civil servant to award a contract, or a narcotics smuggler may bribe a judge to lessen criminal penalties.
In some cases, the briber holds a powerful role and controls the transaction; in other cases, a bribe may be effectively extracted from the person paying it.
Expectations of when a monetary transaction is appropriate can also differ: tipping, for example, is considered bribery in some societies.
The level of non-monetary favours that constitute an incentive to unethical behaviour is variable and may constitute a matter of opinion in a given field:
Music
Payola is the commonplace practice where record companies buy air time from radio and television stations for songs they are promoting.
Government
A grey area may exist when payments to smooth transactions are made. United States law is particularly strict in limiting the ability of businesses to pay for the awarding of contracts by foreign governments; however, the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act contains an exception for "grease payments"; very basically, this allows payments to officials in order to obtain the performance of ministerial acts which they are legally required to do, but may delay in the absence of such payment. In some countries, this practice is the norm, often resulting from a developing nation not having the tax structure to pay civil servants an adequate salary. Nevertheless, most economists regard bribery as a bad thing because it encourages rent seeking behaviour. A state where bribery has become a way of life is a kleptocracy.
Medicine
Pharmaceutical corporations may seek to reward doctors for heavy prescription of their drugs through gifts. The American Medical Association has published ethical guidelines for gifts from industry which include the tenet that physicians should not accept gifts if they are given in relation to the physician’s prescribing practices. [1] Doubtful cases include grants for travelling to medical conventions that double as tourist trips.
Dentists often receive samples of home dental care products such as toothpaste, which are of negligible value; somewhat ironically, dentists in a television commercial will often state that they get these samples but pay to use the sponsor's product.
Law
In legal situations, lawyers, judges, and others with power may be subject to bribery or payoff for making a decision that benefits someone willing to pay for favours. Operation Greylord revealed that bribery was rampant in the bench and bar community of Chicago in the early 1980s.
Politics
Politicians receive campaign contributions and other payoff from powerful corporations when making choices in the interests of those corporations, or in anticipation of favorable policy. See also influence peddling and political corruption.
|
|
(comment on this)
|
| Friday, December 2nd, 2005
| |
6:54 pm - World Bank Reveals How Politicians Divert Public Money
|
World Bank Reveals How Politicians Divert Public Money
Ghanaian Chronicle (Accra)
November 30, 2005
Posted to the web November 30, 2005
Charles Takyi-Boadu
A research finding by the World Bank reveals that lack of transparency and accountability allow for most cases of theft, where politicians take advantage of their powers to channel money into their own pockets.
According to the findings, contained in the 'World Bank Corruption and Development Report 2005', when the scrutiny of finance ministries and central banks is bypassed, excessive debt may be incurred through 'white elephant' investment projects that are, in many cases, the result of bribes.
Considering that these bribes are used in the political process to 'buy' support from the electorate or members of parliament, they deplete public revenue and may lead to an increase in public deficits, affecting the country's financial situation.
In Uganda, empirical investigations revealed that only 13% of public funds allocated for education actually reached schools.
The rest was either pocketed by public officials or used for purposes other than education.
The bank has indicated that tax policies in corrupt countries often favour the rich, well-connected, powerful people in society.
It noted that tax evasion through corruption as well as poor tax administration, where some of the revenue 'disappears' before it reaches government coffers, reduces the tax base and adds to the progression of the tax system.
It further takes serious note of the fact that one of the main ways in which corruption reduces state fund is through its negative effect on tax income by opening up loopholes in tax collection.
Indications are that corruption thrives in the unofficial economy and vise versa.
Data analysis of registered firms in countries like Poland, Slovakia and Romania shows that higher levels of bureaucratic corruption is associated with underreporting of revenue, which results in forgone tax revenue for the state.
From the banks study, in transition economies and many developing countries, corruption is believed to reduce revenue collections by driving firms or most of their profitable activities out of the formal sector and by providing a moral jurisdiction for widespread tax evasion.
Likewise, businesses in the informal sector do not report revenue and therefore do not pay taxes.
It has been said that tax evasion offers a competitive advantage while simultaneously disadvantaged companies in the official economy drive others out of market and this further reduces the tax base.
This is estimated to have two dire effects, by first reducing the distributive function of tax collection, hence contributing to increased income inequality, and by reducing the amount of public funds, thus the amount of public spending.
The bank has detected the reduction in opportunities of corruption in tax administration and the changing of incentive structures for tax officers, while keeping tax policies simple, as an entry point of curbing corruption in revenue administration.
Also, transparency and arms-length relationships between taxpayers and officials are said to be key factors in reducing vulnerability to corruption.
Korea is cited as one of such countries where reforms of tax administration led to a drop in reported corruption cases from 45 to nine over a one-year period, while the tax revenue increased.
Equally harmful to fiscal stability is forgone state revenue through corruption in customs, involving senior public officials as well as low-level customs officials.
Evidently, participants in corruption surveys, rank tax and customs administrations among the most corrupt government agencies in developing countries.
Notwithstanding the fact that corruption has been detected as a contributory factor in the promotion of excessive spending, a major challenge, not only in the developing world, is corrupt procurement where contracts are awarded to high-cost bidders without competitive tendering.
Corruption in procurement is said to decrease state funds since it leads to higher spending on projects of often-inferior qualit
|
|
(comment on this)
|
| Thursday, November 24th, 2005
| |
11:28 am - More on the ICANN vs. UN thingie
|
|
| Monday, November 21st, 2005
| |
9:19 pm - Change
|
|
| Friday, June 3rd, 2005
| |
10:49 am - Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind
|
( Eloisa to Abelard by Alexander Pope )
This is the poem mentioned in "Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind." Was able to watch it recently. Learned a few more insights about human fears. Some include the fear to be mundane, the fear of rejection and forgetting, the fear of being lost and confused, the fear of loneliness and the fear of conspiracy. But in the end fate has a way of setting everything straight...
current mood:  contemplative
|
|
(comment on this)
|
| Wednesday, June 1st, 2005
| |
1:07 pm - Kisses by Me
|
|
|
|
|
|
![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif?v=92.1){kind=small}
weebph's journal
calm
curious
worried
chipper