Posts Tagged ‘ny times’

NEW YORK TIMES si Iulian Urban informeaza: Circumcizia obligatorie pentru baieti, ca masura pentru prevenirea transmiterii HIV-SIDA

Oficialii americani din domeniul sanatatii publice vor sa promoveze circumcizia la scara nationala, pentru a reduce raspandirea virusului HIV. Mai exact, autoritatile vor ca toti baietii nascuti in Statele Unite sa fie supusi acestei interventii, ca preventie fata de raspindirea SIDA, transmite The New York Times.
Subiectul este unul sensibil in SUA si a generat deja mai multe controverse. Discutiile s-au aprins si de aceasta data, chiar daca documentul oficial care cuprinde recomandarile nu a fost inca publicat. Normele vor fi gata la finalul anului si vor fi elaborate de Centrele pentru Controlul si Prevenirea Bolilor.
Expertii iau in considerare si urmatoarea varianta: pe langa copii, sa fie propusi la acest program si adultii heterosexuali, ale caror practici sexuale ii expun riscului infectarii cu HIV. Specialistii recunosc, insa, ca impactul unui astfel de plan realizat in Statele Unite nu va fi unul semnificativ: procedura ii ocoleste exact pe cei care comporta cel mai mare risc – homosexualii.
Studii recente arata ca in tarile africane afectate de virusul care produce SIDA, barbatii care au fost circumcisi au redus la jumatate riscul de infectare. Cercetarile clinice s-au concentrat, insa, pe barbatii heterosexuali.
Pentru moment, punctul central al planului autoritatilor din domeniul sanatatii este sa recomande operatia in cazul tuturor nou-nascutilor. O strategie de preventie care nu isi va arata efectele imediat, ci peste mai multi ani. De cealalta parte a baricadei, criticii avertizeaza ca programul ii supune pe copii la interventii medicale inutile, fara consimtamantul acestora.

Reclamati abuzurile la adresa:

sau la adresa Senatorului: [email protected]

NEW YORK TIMES despre PACEPA: "CURVA FERICITA a comertului cu spioni" – David Binder, jurnalist veteran american.

IN SHORT; NONFICTION
By DAVID BINDER
Published: Sunday, January 3, 1988

RED HORIZONS: Chronicles of a Communist Spy Chief. By Lieut. Gen. Ion Mihai Pacepa. (Regnery Gateway/ Kampmann, $19.95.)
In 1945, Rumanian intelligence officers provided the nascent United States intelligence organization with copious secret files on the Soviet Union – of value in part because they covered Soviet territory occupied by Rumanian forces during World War II. In 1978, Ion Pacepa, chief of the Rumanian foreign intelligence service, defected to the United States, one of the highest-ranking East European espionage chiefs to change sides since Communist rule was established in Eastern Europe. On the face of it, he seemed to be the biggest catch from Rumania since the 1945 files.
But since his defection, Mr. Pacepa, who in Rumania attained the rank of lieutenant general and was a personal adviser to President Nicolae Ceausescu, has several times changed his stories. The changes, according to the State Department and counterintelligence officers who have debriefed him, have cast doubt on his veracity.
Now, with ”Red Horizons,” he offers a version of his life and experiences that increases one’s doubts about whether his defection was much of a coup. Mr. Pacepa is the Happy Hooker of the spy trade, relating utterly sordid tales of a drunken Ceausescu son tearing the clothes off women at parties and urinating on a plate of oysters, of the deviant sexual tastes of a Palestinian leader and vile acts by Rumanian politicians. These squalid anecdotes about the private lives of the Communist elite make up a good part of the memoir; I can confirm his picture of the debauchery of the Ceausescu son Nicu, who heads the Communist youth movement. But when Mr. Pacepa describes the poor, rundown Athenee Palace Hotel as a grand nest of spies, or boasts that Rumania maintained powerful ”agents of influence” in this country, or profited from the theft of American advanced technology one can only chuckle. Besides, his stories are all at least a decade old.
https://www.nytimes.com/1988/01/03/books/in-short-nonfiction-770088.html

ROMANIA si "porcii zburatori" din New York Times. Un atac la Basescu care poarta amprenta noilor consilieri ai lui Geoana fosti in slujba lui Obama


Potrivit unei noi ipoteze a publicatiei americane New York Times, virusul gripei porcine ar avea originea in Romania, fiind o mutatie a pestei porcine, izbucnita in trei ferme din Romania ale americanilor de la Smithfield, in anul 2007.
Concret, cei de la New York Times au implicat Romania, intr-un articol publicat miercuri, in scandalul gripei porcine din cauza americanilor de la Smithfield, care au vandut si au facut schimb de porci contaminati cu pesta porcina intre fermele din Romania si Polonia cu o alta ferma pe care o detin in Mexic.
Singurul argument concludent al publicatiei americane este ca, desi Smithfield detine ferme atat in Romania, cat si in Polonia, pesta porcina a izbucnit in tara noastra, in judetul Timis.
Iar ca explicatia sa prinda fond, amintesc ca americanii detin o ferma de porci si in Mexic, situata foarte aproape de locul unde specialistii Organizatiei Natiunilor Unite investigheaza o posibila legatura intre porci si aparitia virusului gripei porcine la oameni.
“Smithfield detine si o parte din ferma de porci localizata foarte aproape de locul in care specialistii ONU investigheaza o posibila legatura intre porci si noua gripa H1N1, care afecteaza omul.
Avand in vedere ca originile exacte ale virusului sunt inca necunoscute, Smithfield a subliniat ca aceasta gripa nu a afectat niciun angajat al sau si niciun animal”, scrie New York Times.
In ceea ce priveste pesta porcina din 2007, Smithfield a recunoscut ca a plasat porci tineri in ferme care se aflau in constructie, dar a insistat ca acest lucru nu a avut un impact asupra sanatatii animalelor.

Gigantul american Smithfield schimba estul Europei

In articolul “Gigantul american Smithfield schimba estul Europei”, New York Times aminteste ca, in numai cinci ani, americanii au reusit sa isi creeze sustinatori in randul politicienilor din Romania si Polonia.
Mai mult de atat, au absorbit sume mari din fondurile pentru agricultura ale UE si au reusit sa invinga orice opozitie pe plan local, creand un conglomerat de crescatorii de porci, dotate cu sisteme de hranire, grajduri controlate climatic si abatoare.
In Romania, de exemplu, Smithfield, sustinuta la cel mai inalt nivel gratie lobby-ului facut de fostul ambasador Nicholas Taubman pe langa importanti politicieni romani, printre care si presedintele Traian Basescu, isi permite sa nu respecte normele de mediu si sa opereze fara autorizatii.
Compania a construit imense containere metalice si injecteaza deseuri in pamant. Oamenii care locuiesc langa aceste ferme se plang de mirosul ingrozitor. New York Times mai scrie ca fermele Smithfield din judetul Timisoara se numara printre cele mai mari surse de poluare a aerului si a solului. Asta in conditiile in care Smithfield are 40 de ferme in Romania, iar impactul asupra mediului este mai mare decat cel asupra micilor fermieri.
Amintim ca, desi nu a respectat masurile de biosecuritate, Smithfield a fost ajutata de Valeriu Tabara, seful de atunci al comisiei de agricultura din Parlamentul Romaniei.
Cu sustinerea altor politicieni, Tabara a reusit sa treaca un amendament prin care proprietarii de animale aveau dreptul sa fie compensati dupa pierderi cauzate de boala, indiferent daca au fost ignorate masurile de biosecuritate.

Smithfield, sustinuta la nivel inalt in Romania

Inca de la sosirea in Europa de Est, Smithfield a curtat politicieni de varf din Polonia si Romania, cea din urma fiind o tara foarte saraca, cu o populatie 23 de milioane de oameni, cu o guvernare slaba si cu presiune constanta din partea UE pentru a-si rezolva problemele de coruptie.
“In haosul care a urmat erei comuniste, este esential sa stii cum sa iti croiesti drumul. La Bucuresti, Smithfield s-a adresat lui Nicholas Taubman, un bogat om de afaceri republican, care a fost ambasador al SUA in Romania in timpul administratiei Bush. Taubman a insotit toti marii oficiali ai Smithfield in timpul intalnirilor cu presedintele roman si cu premierul”, scrie New York Times.
Odata ce liderii de la cel mai inalt nivel din Romania si-au manifestat sustinerea pentru Smithfield, lucrurile au mers ca unse: aproape 12 dintre fermele Smithfield au fost proiectate de firma de arhitectura detinuta de Gheorghe Seculici, un fost vicepremier cu stranse legaturi cu presedintele Basescu, care este chiar nasul fiicei arhitectului.
Basescu nu a avut nicio retinere in a recunoaste legatura cu Smithfield, companie pe care a laudat-o intr-o conferinta de presa comuna cu presedintele George W. Bush din timpul summitului NATO de anul trecut.
“Basescu a apreciat deschis Smithfield. Compania a contribuit cu 20.000 de euro pentru a plati uniformele ceremoniale ale Romaniei de la reuniunile summitului, potrivit Ministerului de Externe”, scrie New York Times.
Chiar si ambasadorul Taubman a spus ca accesul la nivel inalt este vital. “Este extrem de dificil sa faci afaceri acolo, daca nu cunosti pe cineva ca premierul sau pe cineva din cabinetul premierului, care sa poata sa le spuna celor vizati ce trebuie sa faca”, a spus Taubman.
Ziare.com
Vezi si
Cate voturi aduc consultantii lui Obama platiti cu milioane de …

NEW YORK TIMES a văzut porci zburători. Treceau Atlanticul fara cip biometric. Asa ca d-asta trebuie sa le bagam romanilor Pasapoarte Biometrice…

“Eu cred că New York Times a văzut porci zburători care au zburat din România în Mexic şi au venit înapoi în România la firmele SmithField. Dacă vrea cineva să distrugă creşterea animalelor din România, acel cineva nu ştie realitatea de aici”, a afirmat Sorin Minea, preşedintele Asociaţiei Române a Cărnii.
Ipoteza “porcului zburător” a fost vehiculată şi de către Marian Zlotea, preşedintele Autorităţii Naţionale Sanitar – Veterinare şi pentru Siguranţa Alimentelor.
“Mi se par nişte informaţii incredibile. Cum poate un ziar să scrie astfel de lucruri? Nu e nimic logic. Cum să vină virusul în Mexic din România? A venit cineva cu porcul în geantă? Au zburat porcii acolo? Cum să se spună aşa ceva?”, a afirmat Zlotea.
“Informaţiile apărute în ziarul New York Times sunt rău intenţionate şi atacă grav creşterea animalelor din România şi garantez că reacţia noastră va fi una pe măsură faţă de aceste informaţii calomnioase”, a declarat astăzi Dan Nica.
Articolul din New York Times este o speculaţie
“Le cer românilor să cumpere marfă românească, marfă sănătoasă, să cumpere fructe româneşti, legume româneşti şi îi îndemn să cumpere cu încredere carne românească pentru că produsele de carmangerie românească sunt bine controlate şi selecţionate, iar informaţiile de genul celor din New York Times sunt devastatoare pentru opinia publică, pentru că românul nu mai stă să se gândească dacă e adevărat sau nu, şi preferă să nu mai cumpere”, a explicat Nica.
Citeşte şi Dan Nica consideră că articolul din New York Times este o speculaţie

Adevaratul motiv al razboiului din Gaza: umflarea ministrului Apararii, Ehud Barak, inainte de alegerile din Israel. Un articol surpriza din NY Times

Gaza War Role Is Political Lift for Ex-Premier

JERUSALEM — A few weeks ago, Defense Minister Ehud Barak was considered a dead man walking in Israeli politics. Members of his Labor Party were plotting to replace him after elections on Feb. 10, if not before. Under his leadership, the storied party of David Ben-Gurion and Golda Meir had sunk so low in the polls that there was serious talk it might disappear.

No one is talking like that now. Twelve days into a punishing war that he is leading against Hamas in Gaza, Labor’s poll numbers are spiking. Mr. Barak is everywhere, in sunglasses and leather jacket, striding among his military commanders, talking strategy, calculating the next move.
“The respect I get when I go into schools since the war is amazing, and it is all about Barak,” remarked Daniel Ben-Simon, a Labor Party candidate for Parliament. “Israel’s MacArthur is back.”
There is, however, much irony — and uncertainty — in this political upheaval. Although Mr. Barak has gained from the war, he was opposed to it for far longer than any of the other top leaders and has been the most eager of them for a cease-fire since it began. Many abroad recall Mr. Barak as the prime minister who in 2000 went further than any Israeli leader in peace offers to the Palestinians, only to see the deal fail and explode in a violent Palestinian uprising that drove him from power.
If the current war goes on for long and kills many young Israeli men on the battlefield — so far casualties have been few and his shock-and-awe approach of the first days has been widely admired in Israel — Mr. Barak’s gains may again disappear. But his caution has gained him renewed support from the left.
On Wednesday, at a meeting of the country’s security cabinet, he helped persuade his fellow ministers to hold off on expanding the ground war to give diplomats a chance to stop Hamas from rearming through its smuggling routes under the Egyptian Sinai. The focus of the discussions, involving Egypt, France, Britain and the United States, is on using an international force of experts and troops at the southern Gaza border.
“Barak is very cautious,” noted Isaac Herzog, Israel’s minister of social welfare and a fellow Labor Party member who was at the meeting. “He is a cool-headed manager of this campaign but wants to exhaust diplomatic avenues.”
Voters seem aware of the risk to their soldiers of deepening the Gaza invasion, so the relative pause should not be politically problematic. But the truth is that the public wanted this war more than Mr. Barak did. With elections coming, he felt it would be difficult to hold off any longer, especially when Hamas increased its rocket fire to some 60 rockets a day, several who know him believe.
Furious and frightened after thousands of projectiles had rained down on the south over several years, Israelis yearned for a traditional Zionist warrior to rally around and send a harsh message to Hamas. For months, Mr. Barak, the natural candidate for that warrior role, declined.
At 66, Mr. Barak is the country’s most decorated soldier, famous for having foiled an airplane hijacking years ago while disguised in a mechanic’s uniform and for leading a revenge killing operation against Palestinian guerrillas in Lebanon while dressed as a woman. A skilled pianist famed for a steel-trap mind, he has also been the military chief of staff.
But he never took Hamas as seriously as many others, considering it a relatively small strategic challenge whose rockets and arms buildup could be tolerated for a while to allow bigger problems to be handled.
“His eyes are focused on Iran,” noted Gilead Sher, who was his chief of staff when he was prime minister a decade ago. “Hamas and Hezbollah largely worry him in relation to Iran.”
This, too, is an irony of Mr. Barak’s renewed popularity from the war, because his failure to grasp how average Israelis viewed the rockets is part of a larger political failure on his part. He lacks the kind of easy direct contact with the public that makes for a successful political leader.
In fact, only days before beginning the war, Mr. Barak was berated at an internal Labor Party meeting over his lack of response to the rockets.
“Members were asking aloud what had happened to him, whether he had lost it,” a party member who was present recalled. “One member, a minister, said, ‘I’m embarrassed to walk in the street and hear people talk about you as a big nothing. I get text messages from my cousins in the south asking what’s going on. Why aren’t we attacking?’ ”
Mr. Barak, the party member said, flew into a rage, saying he had seen more blood than anyone in the room, that he had witnessed things so horrible they would faint just hearing of them, that he would not be lectured to on the need to be tough.
At that time, Labor was polling about 8 seats in the 120-seat Parliament, with the opposition Likud, headed by Benjamin Netanyahu, at 30 and the centrist Kadima, led by Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni, in the mid-20s. Today polls show Labor around 16 to 18; some are fantasizing about squeezing past Kadima for second place.
There is a long history in Israel of warriors becoming peacemakers, and Mr. Barak seemed to fit that pattern a decade ago. But he was always something of a hybrid, and returned to politics after a long hiatus in 2007, when he was elected the leader of the Labor Party. Now it remains to be seen whether he can again turn his comfort in the military arena into a platform for political success.
One reason he might not do so is his political tin ear. After he left politics at the start of this decade he went into business and got rich, buying an apartment on the 31st floor of Tel Aviv’s exclusive Akirov Towers. In recent months he tried to sell it for $11 million. For a leader of Israel’s social democratic party that seeks to speak for the working man, this was clearly a misstep.In an interview with Ari Shavit, a writer for the newspaper Haaretz, about 10 days before the war began, Mr. Barak described the purchase as a mistake.
“I admit I did not take into account that an apartment like this would become a symbol,” he said. But he argued that the contest for national leadership should not be a popularity contest.
“When a plane has to be landed in a storm, you don’t ask if there is someone nice here,” he said. “Nor do you ask whether there is someone who looks like a pilot or talks like a pilot or once stood next to a pilot during a flight. You ask if there is a real pilot here, not a nice guy, not a back-slapper.”
That sales pitch was adopted by the party, with advertisements showing an unsmiling Mr. Barak and the words “not friendly, not trendy and not nice.” It is seen as a surprisingly successful approach.
Most analysts say that whether the election victor is Likud or Kadima, Mr. Barak could well remain in his post as defense minister, where the public is comfortable seeing him. Mr. Netanyahu has told others that if he becomes prime minister he will seek to bring Labor in by keeping Mr. Barak as defense minister.
At the same time, some on Israel’s left seem to be looking again at Mr. Barak as the man to vote for precisely because he has shown caution in going to war.
“Many see Barak as the old Israel, the one that won the ’67 war brilliantly and overwhelmingly after hesitating for a month,” Mr. Shavit of Haaretz said. “This is his pattern. Don’t rush in. Try to avoid it. But if you start the war, win the war. It is exactly the opposite of Olmert of ’06, which was to rush in and lose it. If the war doesn’t turn into a disaster, there is feeling of relief that we are back to being the old Israelis in the sense of thinking a bit before we act.”
Isabel Kershner contributed reporting
New York Timesc
January 7, 2009
Powered by WordPress

toateBlogurile.ro

customizable counter
Blog din Moldova