Sunday, July 10, 2011

salma hayek grown ups black dress from

images salma hayek grown ups black salma hayek grown ups black dress from. salma hayek grown ups black
  • salma hayek grown ups black



  • paskal
    04-09 11:50 AM
    Yes, pete, other people should have hurdles. So when they stumble on those hurdles, it would be your gain.

    Its a zero sum game.

    We cannot all unite and work on this issue. So let's divide ourselves. Let's split IV into 2 organization, one for EB3 dumbasses who are getting a free ride and didnt go thru the whole 9 yards , and other for smart kids like you and rimzhim.

    Let me ask both of you. If you are that smart, how come you are not applying for EB1. I thought researchers would qualify for EB1. Why are you facing difficulty? Could it be that you are not really that good? Because the system does have an HOV lane for scientists to cruise to greencard. Its called EB1. And its current for most categories. What about that?

    Why dont you join the fast lane of EB1 and leave the bachelor's degree losers behind who didnt thru the whole 9 yards?


    given you find someone's opinion distatsteful, yours is no better. unneeded hostility and provocation help no one. please chill out. everytime something new comes up we are at each others throats. there are better ways to express yourself than personal attacks. i sympathise with your viewpoint but your attitude make me want to run far away.





    wallpaper salma hayek grown ups black salma hayek grown ups black dress from. 2011 salma hayek grown ups
  • 2011 salma hayek grown ups



  • chanduv23
    05-17 07:13 AM
    Behave like a high skilled person. Do not use bad words just because someone is against your opinion. Again if you use everything is appilcable to you. That means you are losing track and you do not have valid argument. You do not have sense that this thread is not for discussion for gc. This thread is about the H1b issue and Durbin bill. This my last reply for you. I will ignore you hereafter if you behave like this. I wasted my time for replying you. So you also do not reply my arguments.

    Look at the bigger picture, my dear friend. The biggest thing in life that drives a man's opinion is not education or skill or awareness, it is purely perception. A good example is of the man who shot his wife as soon as she opened the door for him and all the while he was thinking that there is an intruder at home. This was his perception.
    A public system always has issues and loopholes and a business is created basic on public systems like h1b or GC etc.... thats how public systems are. You are no special. Take example of American Idol. No matter how good you are, you can be voted out. You are exactly in a public system. In a pubilc system everyone goes through something that is called reality check and this will happen to anyone. If rich people think their kids must never gop through this and protect them, at some stage they have to come in terms with reality.

    I am in full support of American friends who lost their jobs, and I think we must do everything we can to help them get a job. But when it comes to businesses, the logic is different. They will try to get the best deal. Everyone knows the system and its loopholes and will do best to get more competitive and get better.

    Open yourself up and come out of your narrow minded approach, you will see a different world.

    One thing I noticed in likes of you. You people are jelous of desi consulting companies because of their misuse of loopholes and making great money and driving ferraris. Well, if you have an option to do that, you must and if you can you must, so many American people mix hands with desi body shops on partnerships and involve in this business. While an abuse of visa may affect you, you must work hard to stop that abuse. Just to protect your self interest you are blaming them, is not right.





    salma hayek grown ups black dress from. dresses hot salma hayek grown
  • dresses hot salma hayek grown



  • Macaca
    12-30 06:41 PM
    India vs. China in 2010 (http://blogs.wsj.com/indiarealtime/2010/12/30/india-vs-china-in-2010/) By Tripti Lahiri | IndiaRealTime

    Economists and western political leaders love to compare India and China, and it�s an understandably irresistible comparison: They�re both rising Asian economies with more than a billion people, and neighbors to boot.

    On India Real Time we�ve done a little of that ourselves from time to time.

    If you�re pressed for time we can sum it up like this: China has more of everything (except poor people.) If you�re not, here are five blogs that stacked India and China up against each other on different indicators in the past year.

    Warren Buffett: The billionaire from Omaha so far has appeared to be leaning a bit more towards China, at least in terms of investments. Mr. Buffett�s company, Berkshire Hathaway Co., holds a sizeable stake in Chinese battery and auto-maker BYD Co. And Mr. Buffett visited in September, along with Bill Gates, hoping to convince Chinese billionaires to give away more of their wealth to charity. The love is returned, with a Chinese man having paid a record $2.1 million to have a one-on-one lunch with the investing wizard.

    Mr. Buffett has said that he�d like to invest in India but his plans have been stymied by caps on foreign holdings in insurance.

    However, India can at least look forward to hosting him in the new year. The billionaire announced at a shareholders� meeting this year, in response to a question from a young Indian-American, that he plans to visit India in 2011, perhaps in March.

    The big-ticket event: India hosted the Commonwealth Games in October, China hosted the Asian Games in November. Of course, China�s already hosted the Olympics�and how�so it hardly seems fair to compare the two.

    But we did anyway. The news coverage of the Indian Games was rife with words like �delays,� �corruption,� �shambles� (we�re pretty sure that was the British press) and �filthy� until the opening night extravaganza quelled criticism for a bit.

    China, it appeared, had lovely, shiny venues ready to go about five months ahead of the event, so it could spend the final days flicking away little specks of dust from its Games merchandise.

    Their middle classes: According to a report on Asia�s middle classes this year, India still has about 650 million people living on under $2 dollars a day measured in 2005 purchasing parity dollars.

    China now has less than 100 million living on that amount. Yet there was a time, as recently as the 1990s, when the two countries had similar numbers of poor. China has just done a better job of lifting people from that bracket into the middle class, and not just onto the next rung �the $2 to $4 range, where a majority of India�s middle class folks fall.

    The majority of Chinese now fall in the �mid middle class� category that can spend $5 to $10, a group whose numbers appear to have quadrupled between 1995 and 2007.

    But don�t blame the slower rate of reduction in poverty on India�s political system, says John Lee of the Sydney-based think-tank Center for Independent Studies.

    The economy, stupid: China is still a much bigger economy than India, even though the two countries have roughly similar numbers of people. At a Hindustan Times conference on India, Shashi Ruia, chairman of Essar Group, compared the two countries on steel production, car production and trade.

    As we already said, China does more of everything. The gap is undoubtedly glaring on roads, electricity production, trains and other infrastructure.

    Surfing: India�s and China�s online populations belong to different worlds, judging by their Google searches. India appears to be firmly embedded in the English-speaking western world, looking for products like Nokia and applications like Facebook, Yahoo! and YouTube, although when it comes to films, it�s all Bollywood. China seemed to be the reverse�relying largely on Chinese applications but much more likely to seek out Hollywood films. They did have this much in common though: outr� pop star Lady Gaga.


    India and China in 2010 (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203525404576050850667532420.html) IndiaRealTime





    2011 2011 salma hayek grown ups salma hayek grown ups black dress from. hair Salma Hayek salma hayek grown ups black dress from.
  • hair Salma Hayek salma hayek grown ups black dress from.



  • raysaikat
    06-24 12:04 PM
    [snip...]
    If you can rent the same house for 50% of your monthly mortgage and on top of it never have to worry about declining home prices why would you be more happy owning it?
    [snip...]

    You should compare only the interest part of your mortgage payment when comparing with rent.



    more...


    salma hayek grown ups black dress from. salma hayek grown ups black
  • salma hayek grown ups black



  • sanju
    12-18 12:46 PM
    Guys..

    If you believe in Science, you wont tend to believe in any religion or for that matter any God..

    God was created by man..

    Imagine this :

    Take for ex : God is human.. How can a human being be supreme or whatever and manage other humans.. For ex if 1000 people commit crime how can a God being a instance of human being watch them.. Even if he watch them how can he punish them.. all not humanly possible.. so God cannot be human..

    So let us take like what Islam says.. God is not human nor he is physically presence.. In that case how an Supreme being again watch all of our deeds when even a human kind of thing is not possible.. So God cannot be supremely supreme to watch us..

    Earth all happened by itself and it evolved by itself.. It will destroy itself and it will retransform itself.. this is the absolute truth.. believe it or not..

    Everyone has some kind of inner consciensus.. you be afraid to that and answerable to that.. (You can call it as God if you want..)

    Other than that start believing in Science and be answerable to yourself.. Nothing else matters...

    You are saying all this out of sheer ignorance and you yourself dont know what you are speaking about your own creator. If you know little science you will go away from religion, if you know more science, you will come towards religion. You are a victim of the former.

    All through out the history, Religion has been in competition with science. Why? Because Religions want to be the answer to every question -why do we have day and night, earth is flat,...? Then came science, providing valid reasoning to these questions. So there was competition. In earlier years, as we all know, people who said that earth was round were executed by the religious people who felt thretened. That close mindedness did not end there, it still flows in everyone still praticing some form of oraganzied religion.

    Human behavior is such that we try to make up reasons to explain everything around us. And for the things we don't understand, we go to our religion to find answers for the unknown. Religions always comes up with some answer, which is proved wrong 100% of the times as science progresses. It would be ok to believe religious view that earth is flat and "GOD" is spinning the earth on his/her fingers. But you see, we no longer live in medival period, and know better than that. Although, we have gained knowledge and we continue to find out more things, but the religious leader still wants mankind behave as if we are living in medivial period. Based on what the so called religious leaders tell us, people still follow these books litterally and blindly, because mankind continue to look towards religions whenever we are not able to find answers to our questions. And this bahvior pattern has gotten embrossed into our genes during 100s of generations.

    And scientist do not have answers for everything, yet. And for the things they don't have answers, because of their genes and their lack of ability to answer every question, they look upon religion for answers to questions that they cannot explain. But great scientist have never relied on "a religion" to explain GOD, although most have acknowledged their believe in the existance of GOD. But that in itself is not enough for us to take the word of the book each religion preaches litterally, and call people from other faiths as non-believers, evil, kafirs or every other synonym out there. That's the same kind of ingorance and disease as demonstrated and abetted by people who killed scientist in the middle period for saying that earth is round. Its the same kind of behavior that tells others to riot because some newspaper published a cartoon in some part of the world and that cartoon offended my GOD. I mean, how shallow is that God or show narrow minded is that religion which gets offeneded by a cartoon. And that doesn't applies to one religion, it applies to evey organized religion out there. Just think ....

    Following an organzied religion doesn't mean that you acknowledge the existance of GOD or you "believe" in GOD. It just means that you believe in the religion in which you were born, and inspite of everything you learned, you fall short of finding answers to your questions, and hence the narrow world view.





    salma hayek grown ups black dress from. In Salma Hayek#39;s Closet – YSL
  • In Salma Hayek#39;s Closet – YSL



  • aadimanav
    07-13 10:09 AM
    Friends,

    Please vote here, and share your ideas, regarding "Campaign for Visa Recapture"

    http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=20132

    There should be enough people supporting any campaign to be successful.

    Thanks,



    more...


    salma hayek grown ups black dress from. hot salma hayek grown ups
  • hot salma hayek grown ups



  • malaGCPahije
    07-14 09:29 AM
    Do you have any idea what are you talking about and why are you talking about? In which year you entered into this GC hell queue? I would suggest you to go through last 8 years of EB category happenings and then you would realize why EB3-India are frustrated....I would generally write but before that I would think first and then write. Best Luck.

    Eb2- I people are wrong when they think any steps taken by EB3-I are because of jealousy. I have contributed in each of IV effort knowing fully well that Eb3I is not going to be benefited by the effort. Still someone was getting the benefit. Now if EB3I want to do something, what is the issue? If a person from Eb2I with PD of 2006 feels that the reason behind efforts taken by a EB3 I person with PD of 2001/2002 is jealousy, then the EB2I person is being very narrow in his/her thinking. It should not take a huge amount of brainpower to realize the frustration and sadness the EB3 I person would be feeling. Irrespective of this I think a lot of people who contribute to IV campaigns are EB3I.

    Everyone irrespective of what category he or she is would very easily realize that Eb3I needs help, else it is going nowhere. By reading comments in this thread, my fear is coming true that the help needed may not come from IV. Once all EB2 people get their GC, there would be no further fight for EB3.





    2010 dresses hot salma hayek grown salma hayek grown ups black dress from. salma hayek grown ups black
  • salma hayek grown ups black



  • sledge_hammer
    06-05 04:01 PM
    A very simple, dumbed down calculation to see which one trumps the other, buying or renting:


    1. Home Cost: $300,000
    2. Down: $ 30,000 (10% of 300k)
    3. Mortgage: $270,000

    4. Mortgage Interest/yr: $ 13,500 (5% of 270K)
    5. Tax, Insurance, Maintenance /yr: $ 9,000 (3% of 300K)

    6. Returns on Downpayment otherwise/yr: $ 3,000 (10% of 30K)
    7. Rent on a similar home/yr: $ 18,000 (1.5K/month)

    8. Equity/yr: $ 15,000 (5% of 300K)
    9. Savings on tax deductions/yr: $ 4,050 (30% bracket, $13.5K interest)


    I'll take a home appraised and bought for 300K for my example. The numbers are basically self explanatory. Contrary to popular claim among those who are pro renting, I don't think I pay more than 3% for tax, insurance and maintenance combined (item# 5). Of course, I was wise enough to buy a home in good condition. But that number will change as the home gets older. Maintenance should not include any upgrades that you do, which is basically only "gravy" and based on owner's discretion. Item# 6; I am going with the average returns if you invested in S&P 500. Item# 7; is what a similar 300K home costs to rent. Item# 8; I have only taken 5% growth which is I think under normal market conditions is the growth you would see on your home. The principal payment has not been accounted for yet. I'll do it later.

    Situation Rent:
    If you rent, then your expense per year is item# 7 minus item# 6 = $15,000.
    Of course, your capital of $30,000 is still earning compounded returns.

    Situation Own:
    Your expense is item# 4 + item# 5 - item# 9 - item# 8 = $3,450.

    As I mentioned in the first line, this is a dumbed down cost comparator. There are many loopholes that can be plugged. All comments are welcome.



    more...


    salma hayek grown ups black dress from. hair salma hayek grown ups
  • hair salma hayek grown ups



  • willwin
    07-13 04:05 PM
    Go ahead do it..... send a badly written letter.
    The content of the letter does not read like it was written by a college graduate - at least seek help with writing a professional letter, it sounds very archaic ! Bad expression, poor grammar, poor reasoning, unreadable.

    The letter will fare better if it is at least readable.

    I'm in EB2 but i will continue to help in IV efforts, and contribute $$ when i can for all efforts EB2 or EB3. I understand the pain of EB3 applicants, so do several (most) others.
    Your posts like ".....crying like little babies...." will not help......

    Peace! That letter wasn't the final print; we could change it for better. That was just an initiative. Do not pick on others writing skills. English is after all not the language in which most of us think; we use our mother tongue instead and then do the translation!

    Please help if you can, nobody would deny an helping hand.





    hair hair Salma Hayek salma hayek grown ups black dress from. salma hayek grown ups black dress from. in a salma hayek grown ups
  • in a salma hayek grown ups



  • manub
    07-08 09:39 PM
    Thank You for all the support.
    I couldn`t reply any sooner.I was busy with Open house( a whole lot of scrubbing and cleaning).
    I cannot post the contents of the RFE`s as most of the info is private and not appropriate for the public forum.But the info I got from the forum so far has been helpful.
    What we are trying to do now is to get appointments with atleast 2 other attorneys(murthy and khanna) .our current Lawyer responded to our questions on a sunday .Not many lawyers do that. and we have only 2 weeks to respond Once we get some answers we`ll go from there.
    Our case is very complex.I don`t want other members be discouraged by the amount of papers uscis requested.Not every one gets this unlucky.They asked for all w2`s,first and last paystubs with each employer and federal tax returns.Rule of thumb don`t discard any paper that you ever submitted to uscis and all your employment records.
    I will keep you posted.
    thank you again.



    more...


    salma hayek grown ups black dress from. salma hayek photos
  • salma hayek photos



  • Macaca
    05-01 06:05 PM
    A New Immigration Consensus
    A bipartisan coalition of business leaders and mayors have joined together to make the case that visa reform is an economic imperative. (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703387904576279293334248326.html)
    By MICHAEL R. BLOOMBERG | Wall Street Journal

    Last month, President Obama convened a diverse group of business executives, mayors, law enforcement leaders, ministers and advocates at the White House to discuss a problem that threatens America's economic future�our broken immigration system.

    We've tried before to fix it. President George W. Bush made comprehensive immigration reform a major legislative priority during his second term. Congressional leaders from both parties, including Sens. Ted Kennedy and John McCain, worked tirelessly to pass legislation. But the bill could not garner the required votes. Nor could a much narrower bill, the Dream Act, which would have granted legal status to the children of immigrants who enroll in college or the military.

    These defeats have led to a conventional wisdom in Washington that bipartisan immigration reform is impossible. But a new consensus on immigration reform has emerged in the business community that could break the logjam and provide a much-needed jolt to our economy. The idea is simple: Reform the way we attract and keep talented and hard-working people from abroad to better promote economic growth.

    In the global economy, the countries that attract the world's best, brightest and hardest-working will grow and succeed. Those that refuse them entry will not. America has long understood this. We would not have become a global superpower without opening our doors to immigrants�and we cannot long remain one without continuing that practice. Smart, self-motivated immigrants spur the innovations and create the jobs our economy needs to thrive. Between 1995 and 2005, for example, 25% of high-tech startups in the U.S. had at least one immigrant as a key founder. Those companies alone have created 450,000 jobs�with the vast majority of them going to Americans.

    Our global competitors understand how crucial immigrants are to economic growth. They roll out the red carpet for entrepreneurs; we have no entrepreneur visa. They heavily recruit our advanced-degree students; we educate them and send them home. They woo the engineers, scientists and other skilled professionals who invent new products, launch product lines, and develop the technology of tomorrow; we erect arbitrary, senseless and bureaucratic barriers to recruitment. And we do all this even as our unemployment rate hovers around 9%.

    Although each party claims to have the solution to our country's economic woes, neither has embraced a job-creation strategy based on immigration reform, which would not add a penny to the national debt. To spur them into action, a bipartisan coalition of business leaders and mayors has joined together to make the case that visa reform is an economic imperative. In nine months the Partnership for a New American Economy has grown to more than 200 members, including companies that together employ more than 3.5 million people.

    We believe in the need to secure our borders, make it possible to hold businesses accountable for verifying the status of workers, address the reality that 11 million people are here illegally and cannot be deported en masse�and increase lawful opportunities for those who want to come to this country and contribute to our prosperity. Nevertheless, our nation cannot afford to wait for Washington to get its act together and pass comprehensive immigration reform. There is too much at stake. Our economy demands that we take immediate action on the most urgent�and politically attainable�reform: making it easier for job creators to come and stay here.

    Creating a visa for entrepreneurs who already have funding to start their businesses will lead directly and immediately to American jobs. Visa reforms to improve temporary and permanent pathways for companies to fill the current shortages of engineers, scientists and other specialists�whose annual visa caps are often exhausted within days of becoming available�will spur growth at existing U.S. companies.

    Providing visas to the brightest foreign graduates of our universities will allow our economy to reap the rewards of their work. At the same time, allowing immigrants who succeed in college, or serve in our military, the chance to pursue a career and build their lives here legally will strengthen the long-term health of the American economy.

    Finally, developing a reliable way for employers to hire guest workers�who grow the nation's food, support our $1.3 trillion tourism industry, and fill seasonal gaps across industries�will help support U.S. businesses and create additional, better-paying American jobs.

    Those who focus on where the parties differ on immigration, rather than where they both agree, have paralyzed the debate in Washington for far too long. Despite this deadlock, there is an opportunity for both parties to seize upon the economics of immigration reform and focus on what all Americans agree we need: more jobs. Leaders of both parties talk about creating jobs, but they are ignoring the voices of business leaders who can actually create them�if only Congress would give them the tools.

    Mr. Bloomberg, an independent, is mayor of New York City

    In Arizona, Sheriff Joe Arpaio shrugs off a rough April (http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-arpaio-trouble-20110501,0,3084923.story) By Nicholas Riccardi | Los Angeles Times
    Obama renews call for immigration action in Miami speech (http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obama-renews-call-for-immigration-action-in-miami-speech/2011/04/29/AFbdHUHF_story.html) By Perry Bacon Jr. | The Washington Post





    hot salma hayek grown ups black salma hayek grown ups black dress from. salma hayek grown ups black
  • salma hayek grown ups black



  • CreatedToday
    01-07 05:27 PM
    Looks like Muhammad fooled his followers or enticed them!

    Apart from Lesbians, the virgins could be Male, Underage girls, Old Ladies or even a eunuch! :D

    You lived in India and hate India, because of your ....
    ..... . Do suicide bomb to get 72 virgins. If any one of the virgin is a lesbian, what will do ?. If the guy is old, do he get viagara???They don't know in heaven no sex. No flesh, people in spiritual state.



    more...


    house dresses of quot;Grown Upsquot; salma hayek grown ups black dress from. salma hayek grown ups
  • salma hayek grown ups



  • sdrblr
    03-23 11:57 AM
    I just wanted to point out that please be careful of what personal information you give as this is a "Incoming Call" and it is hard to verify the authenticity of it.





    tattoo In Salma Hayek#39;s Closet – YSL salma hayek grown ups black dress from. Salma Hayek defies gravity in
  • Salma Hayek defies gravity in



  • pd_recapturing
    08-05 10:55 AM
    Rolling_Flood, great idea to benefit just U'r own GC cause. If you are positive about U'r logic why don't you go ahead and file a lawsuit. Looks like your true intention of creating this thread is to create a divide among IV members. Already members had a tough few weeks (in terms of unity) after the Aug bulletin. Now you are poking another rift.

    The EB classification is for a future job. Since the person is qualified, he ports to EB2 midway so what. The GC is for a future job, and when the person gets his/her GC, he/she is qualified for that position at that time. So what is U'r logic??


    If you want to truly fight the system them fight for a common basis for EB classification. There are cases where the same job title has been classified under all 3 categories. Example

    Senior Programmer (say Bachelor's with 5 yrs exp)

    Files under EB1 : because he/she came L1, qualification might be few yrs exp.
    Files under EB2 : because he/she has 5 yrs of exp and the attorney was smart to classify it as EB2.
    Files under EB3 : because of company policy or based on bad attorney advice (conservative approach).

    The above example shows that if U'r company and attorney is smart U can get U'r GC faster.

    If you are keen on doing a lawsuit why not
    File one against USCIS for wasting thousands of visa's over the past few years, which is the source of this backlog.
    Or file one against DOL for taking n number of years to get the LC done.
    Or file one against 245 filers who clogged the USCIS system which is causing USCIS to be inefficient.
    Man, you hit the nail on the head !!! Thats precise the point, I was trying to say in my last post (somewhere on page 1) ... The whole eb2/eb3 qualification, job requirements etc can be rigged easily by employer/lawyers ...There is no black and white in this game ..



    more...


    pictures hot salma hayek grown ups salma hayek grown ups black dress from. 2010 Salma Hayek salma hayek
  • 2010 Salma Hayek salma hayek



  • ShantiRam
    07-11 09:12 PM
    My employer back in 2001 and 2002 did not pay me in a consistent way..I was paid once in every three months during the time I was in bench. I have the W2 returns from those two years which shows average income of only 29K. However I had valid visa status and h1b approval from my employer as well as employment verification letter from them. Now i am with a new employer since 2003 and do not have any problems with them and get paid regurarly. After reading manub's post I am also worried if my I485 will be denied whenever I apply for it... or is there somethings I can take care of before? It is not my fault that the employer did not pay me consistently - right?

    Anyone - united nations - please advice.





    dresses salma hayek grown ups black salma hayek grown ups black dress from. pictures Salma Hayek attending
  • pictures Salma Hayek attending



  • Macaca
    05-09 05:50 PM
    China’s America Obsession
    Why Osama bin Laden's death is making Chinese leaders nervous. (http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2011/05/06/china_s_america_obsession)
    By JOHN LEE | Foreign Policy

    In Thursday's edition of China's Communist Party-owned Global Times newspaper, the lead editorial was headlined, "After Bin Laden, will China become US's foe?" Hoping that economic integration would defuse "right-wing paranoia" about China in the United States, the editorial nevertheless concluded: "The rise of China is certain to cause friction" in America. On Friday, the paper led with an editorial that referenced an interview I had given the Global Times in late April to admit that "China could be the loneliest rising power in world history."

    Of course, editorials in state-owned newspapers do not always mirror the Communist Party's thinking or policies. But in this case, these two editorials remind us of two related points about Beijing's worldview. First, China respects and even fears the United States more than the vast majority of Americans probably realize. And second, China's sense of isolation is not an act but acute and real -- and Osama bin Laden's death will only accelerate America's reengagement with its Asian allies and partners at China's expense.

    When Washington shifted its focus toward terrorism and the Middle East after the September 11 attacks in 2001, Beijing experienced genuine relief. As China's leaders and strategists came to believe, an America distracted by two wars and a weak economy presented a priceless window of opportunity for China to extend its influence in Asia and beyond. But Beijing realizes that Washington's strategic attention will eventually turn eastwards, and the death of bin Laden is one small but significant step in hastening the arrival of that day. As one prominent Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (CASS) analyst put it to me recently, the American "spearhead will soon be pointed at Beijing."

    China's focus on America is obsessive and omnipresent among its leaders and strategists. In a study of 100 recent articles by leading academics at CASS, comprising the network of official state-backed think-tanks and institutes throughout the country, I found that about four in every five were about the United States -- whether it was seeking to understand the American system and political values, or describing how to limit, circumvent, bind, or otherwise reduce American power and influence. Of these themes, several emerged that help better understand the thinking behind editorials like the one in the Global Times.

    One is that Beijing views international politics in broadly neorealist terms. Chinese strategists believe the distribution of power in the world today will determine tomorrow's conflicts. China has long seen building competition between itself and America in particular as the inevitable and defining big-picture strategic play. In Beijing's thinking, tension can be managed, but never resolved, between the established power and the emerging one. Tension is a structural inevitability.

    But Chinese experts also view America as a unique superpower that relentlessly seeks not only to build and maintain its power, but also to spread its democratic values. This is of grave concern to the authoritarian Chinese leaders, because they believe that America will have difficulty accepting a greater leadership role for Beijing so long as Communist Party remains exclusively in power. Senator John McCain's "League of Democracies" might never become a formal reality, but Beijing believes that it already exists, at least in Asia, through democracies such as India, Japan, and South Korea.

    Moreover, Beijing fears the American democratic process. While Americans view democracy as an advantage since it can offer United States an institutional and bloodless process for leadership and policy renewal, China views American democracy as a source of irrationality and unpredictability. Many in Beijing, pointing to President George W. Bush's rapid decisions to go to war in Afghanistan and Iraq after 9/11, believe a new administration might actually increase the chances of uncomfortable shifts in policy that will lead Washington to suddenly focus its competitive and hostile gaze to the east.

    Some of Beijing's strategists now even argue that the United States has three advantages over China that will help preserve American strategic primacy in Asia.

    First, the United States has built an order based not just on American power but also democratic community. It has not escaped Beijing that few countries in East and Southeast Asia fear India's democratic rise. Whereas India's ascent is seen as natural, predictable, and welcomed, almost every country in Asia is trying to benefit from China's economic success while strategically hedging against Chinese military power by moving even closer to the United States. (Witness the recent speech by Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard to Congress in which she reaffirmed the alliance with America as the bedrock of Canberra's security strategy, or Singapore's leader Lee Hsien Loong urging America to remain engaged in Asia.)

    Second, unlike China, America does not have land and territorial disputes with other Asian states. For example, China still claims around 80 percent of the South China Sea as its "historic waters" and is in an ongoing dispute with India over the eastern-most Indian state of Arunachal Pradesh. In this sense, China's rise is inherently disruptive since a more powerful China is likely to demand a resolution to these issues that is in Beijing's favor.

    Third, the United States is not a resident power in that it is not geographically in Asia. China now realizes that this simple fact, once seen as a handicap, instead presents America with a unique advantage. To maintain its military bases in the region and thus remain the pre-eminent strategic power in Asia, the United States requires other key states and regional groupings to acquiesce to its security role and relationships. There is broad-based regional approval of U.S. alliances with Australia, Japan, and South Korea, as well as with partners such as India, the Philippines, Singapore, and Thailand. This interdependent relationship means that America is not so powerful that it can easily ignore the wishes of Asian states.

    In contrast, if China were in the dominant strategic position, its pre-eminence would be much harder to challenge or shift. Beijing would not need the same level of regional acquiescence. As a resident power, China would not need the "approval" of other Asian states to maintain its military footholds. As the largest Asian power, it would be easier to dominate regional institutions without an American presence -- yet one more reason why America is trusted to provide the public and security goods in Asian sea lanes while China is not.

    All this is why, instead of taking full advantage of America's terrorism obsession, Beijing has watched resentfully as the United States has built a hierarchical democratic order in which Asian states willingly aid in preserving American pre-eminence. In such an order, China remains a strategic loner in Asia, with Myanmar and North Korea as its only true friends.

    China is well aware of its relative vulnerabilities. Rather than lament the irretrievable loss of its better days, America should learn to better appreciate its relative strengths.

    John Lee is research fellow at the Centre for Independent Studies in Sydney and the Hudson Institute in Washington, D.C. He is author of Will China Fail?

    U.S.-China Talks: What to Look for (http://www.cfr.org/china/us-china-talks-look/p24923) By Elizabeth C. Economy | Council on Foreign Relations
    Security and U.S.-Sino Scientific Collaboration (http://blogs.cfr.org/asia/2011/05/02/security-and-us-sino-scientific-collaboration/) By Adam Segal | Council on Foreign Relations
    US, China vie for influence among Indonesian riches (http://atimes.com/atimes/Southeast_Asia/ME06Ae02.html) By Sara Schonhardt | Asia Times
    As China Invests, U.S. Could Lose (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/04/business/global/04yuan.html) By DAVID BARBOZA | New York Times
    China Invests Overseas (http://www.asiasentinel.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3171&Itemid=422) Asia Sentinel
    Is the Asian century a dream or reality? (http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2011/05/06/is-asian-century-a-dream-or-reality.html) By Haruhiko Kuroda | Jakarta Post
    A Future Scenario for Asia (http://www.asiasentinel.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3177&Itemid=422) By Philip Bowring | Asia Sentinel
    Japan, After March 11
    The country, resilient as ever, remains Asia’s true power. (http://www.city-journal.org/2011/21_2_japan.html)
    By Guy Sorman | City Journal



    more...


    makeup hair salma hayek grown ups salma hayek grown ups black dress from. dresses of quot;Grown Upsquot;
  • dresses of quot;Grown Upsquot;



  • Macaca
    03-06 09:04 PM
    The Top 200 H-1B Employers Of 2006 (http://www.networkworld.com/community/?q=node/15273) By Brad Reese | Network World, 05/17/2007
    Page 12 & 31 of Driving jobs and Innovation Offshore (http://www.nfap.com/pdf/071206study.pdf) The impact of high-skill Immigration Restrictions on America, National Foundation for American Policy (NFAP) Policy Brief, Dec 2007

    Top 19 Employers of New H-1Bs Petitions Approved in FY 2006

    WIPRO LTD. 3,143
    INFOSYS TECHNOLOGIES LTD. 3,125
    TATA CONSULTANCY SERVICES LTD. 2,754
    SATYAM COMPUTER SERVICES LTD. 1,753
    MICROSOFT CORP. 1,297
    PATNI COMPUTER SYSTEMS INC. 969
    COGNIZANT TECH SOLUTIONS U.S. 863
    I-FLEX SOLUTIONS INC. 695
    HCL AMERICA INC. 652
    LARSEN & TOUBRO INFOTECH LTD. 624
    TECH MAHINDRA AMERICAS INC. 614
    INTEL CORP. 613
    DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP 545
    ACCENTURE LLP 519
    POLARIS SOFTWARE LAB INDIA LTD. 497
    MPHASIS CORP. 445
    SYNTEL CONSULTING INC. 415
    ERNST & YOUNG LLP 396
    LANCESOFT INC. 394

    Other 88,070 (80.3 percent)
    TOTAL 109,614 (0.07 % of U.S. labor force)
    Source: USCIS
    Explanatory note from USCIS: Employers were identified and counted on the basis of tax ID.
    The number of approved petitions for new workers is not identical with the number of workers on the job because

    workers are occasionally sponsored by more than one employer,
    the job offer may subsequently be withdrawn,
    the job offer may be declined, or
    the worker if residing outside the country, may be denied a visa.

    The total of 109,614 exceeds 65,000 regular plus 20,000 masters caps because it includes petitions for new workers exempted from the caps.
    Fiscal year of petition approval often is earlier than fiscal year of worker start date. For example, about 50,000 H-1B petitions were approved in FY 2006 for a start date in FY 2007. The reason is that many petitions were filed in April beginning of cap season) and May by sponsors for workers beginning their employment in October---two different fiscal years.
    The same phenomenon occurred this year, offsetting last year's effect to an unknown extent, but rendering straight comparisons between petition approvals and employment starts in a fiscal year subject to error and misinterpretation.
    The CIA Fact Book estimates the size of the U.S. labor force in 2006 at 151.4 million.
    The list in the table is for individuals who were hired on an approved H-1B petition for “initial employment” in 2006. Petitions approved for “continuing employment” would include both H-1B renewals by that same employer and individuals who had been working on H-1B status for another employer.

    Pages 11-12

    Critics charge that “most” H-1B visas are used by companies that engage in “outsourcing.” The 10 companies cited in these reports are Infosys Technologies, Wipro Technologies, Cognizant Technology Solutions, Patni Computer Systems, Mphasis, HCL America, Deloitte & Touche, Tata Consultancy Services, Accenture and Satyam Computer Services.

    WIPRO LTD. 3,143
    INFOSYS TECHNOLOGIES LTD. 3,125
    TATA CONSULTANCY SERVICES LTD. 2,754
    SATYAM COMPUTER SERVICES LTD. 1,753
    PATNI COMPUTER SYSTEMS INC. 969
    COGNIZANT TECH SOLUTIONS U.S. 863
    HCL AMERICA INC. 652
    DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP 545
    ACCENTURE LLP 519
    MPHASIS CORP. 445

    Total 14,768
    The 10 companies cited most by critics used less than 14 percent of new H-1B petitions approved in 2006 for initial employment (new hires who were not in H-1B status for a prior employer), according to USCIS.
    The new H-1B professionals hired in 2006 by these global companies totaled fewer than 15,000, representing less than 4 percent of the approximately 440,000 people employed by these 10 companies worldwide.

    It would be difficult to claim such a small number and proportion of employees are leading to the loss of a large number of American jobs, particularly within the context of a U.S. economy producing employment for over 145 million people. In fact, it is not clear it is leading to the loss of any American jobs.
    The vast majority of H-1B visas go to U.S. high tech companies, financial institutions and U.S. universities.
    Senators Grassley and Durbin wrote a letter to the companies on this list with headquarters in India.

    Crackdown on Indian Outsourcing Firms (http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/content/may2007/db20070515_218119.htm?chan=search) Two senators are probing how Indian outsourcing firms use U.S. work visas, with an eye on new restrictions by Peter Elstrom | Business Week, May 15, 2007
    Lawmakers ask foreign firms for work visa data (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=63251&postcount=896) By Donna Smith, Reuters, Monday, May 14, 2007
    Senators questioning tech company use of H1-B visa program (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=63122&postcount=892) By Suzanne Gamboa | Associated Press, 05/14/2007





    girlfriend Salma Hayek defies gravity in salma hayek grown ups black dress from. Salma Hayek in Yves Saint
  • Salma Hayek in Yves Saint



  • Macaca
    12-30 06:57 PM
    A Bridge to a Love for Democracy (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/30/us/30iht-letter30.html) By RICHARD BERNSTEIN | New York Times

    I write this, my last �Letter from America,� looking out my window at my snowy Brooklyn neighborhood. It�s midmorning Wednesday, three days after our Christmas weekend blizzard, and my street has yet to receive the benefit of a snowplow.

    Cars, as the prize-winning novelist Saul Bellow once put it, are impounded by the drifts. The city is still partly paralyzed, pleasantly, in a way. There�s nothing like a heavy snowfall to give one a bit of a respite, to turn the ordinary, like walking to the corner store, into a little adventure. And there�s the countrylike stillness of this city block filled with snow, absent the usual traffic.

    It seems a good moment, in other words, to pause and reflect. My thoughts turn to a very unsnowy moment in 1972 in a village called Lowu, which was the last village in the Crown Colony of Hong Kong just before the border with China. I was a graduate student in Chinese history and a stringer for The Washington Post going to the territory of Chairman Mao for the first time in my life.

    There was a short trestle bridge at Lowu. I�ve often wondered if it�s still there. The Union Jack flew at one side, the red flag of the People�s Republic of China at the other. The border town on the other side was a little fishing and farming village called Shenzhen, now a modern city of skyscrapers and shopping malls, an emblem of China�s amazing economic development.

    I was favorably disposed toward China as I strode across the bridge, ready to experience the radical egalitarianism of the Maoist revolution, which was generally viewed with favor among American graduate students specializing in China. I was a member of a group, moreover, that partook of a certain leftist orthodoxy. We had learned the �Internationale� so we could sing it for our revolutionary hosts. We were supposed to return to America and report the truth about China, which was, essentially, that it was the future and it worked.

    But it took only about 24 hours on that first journey to China for me utterly to change my mind and, indeed, to become a lifelong anti-Communist and devotee of liberal democracy, to find great wisdom in Winston Churchill�s dictum about its being the worst of all systems except for all the others.

    The noxious cult of personality around Mao was the first thing that effected my political transformation. But deeper than that was the pervasive odor of orthodoxy, the uniformity of it all, the mandatory pious declarations, which, if they were believed, were ridiculous, and, if they were forced, illustrated the terror of it all.

    Many of my American fellow travelers felt very differently about this. In my intense discomfort, I found myself in a sort of Menshevik minority, criticized by the majority for what I remember one person calling my �Darkness at Noon� mentality.

    Still, that discomfort, and the unwillingness of most of the others to experience it, has informed my work as a journalist ever since. I have to admit it: When I went to China as a correspondent for Time magazine seven years after that first trip, my impulse was not so much to look with fresh and impartial eyes on a country that had just opened up to a degree of foreign inspection as it was to expose what I felt many Americans were missing in those rhapsodic days. Namely, that the country under Mao and after belonged to the 20th-century totalitarian mainstream � that it was a poverty-stricken police state and not a viable alternative to Western ways.

    There was a degree of bias in this view, and it led me into some mistakes. On China, in particular, I was perhaps focused too single-mindedly on its totalitarian elements so that I underplayed other elements, notably the speed of change in China, and perhaps even the unsuitableness of many Western democratic ways for a country so essentially backward.

    And perhaps, too, I extrapolated a bit too much from the China experience when it came to other places and other times. When I covered academic life in the United States, for example, I tended to see vicious Maoist Red Guards in the phenomenon of what came to be called political correctness, and, while I don�t think this was entirely wrong, it was an exaggeration.

    And yet, it seems appropriate in this final column to say, as well, that my nearly 40 years in the journalism game haven�t shaken me from the essential belief that formed during that first, memorable visit to China.

    Ever since, despite all our infuriating faults, our wastefulness, our occasional self-satisfied sluggishness, our proneness to demagogy and other forms of anti-intellectualism, our crumbling infrastructure, the Fox News channel, the cult of Sarah Palin, the narcissistic self-indulgence of our urban elites, the detention center in Guant�namo Bay and our crisis-creating greed and shortsightedness � despite all that � I continue to believe that, not to put too fine a point on it, we�re better than they are.

    This doesn�t mean that I think we�re perfect, or that our impulse toward a kind of benevolent imperialism has always had benevolent results. But I have stuck for 40 years to a belief that, yes, our ways are superior � and by our ways I mean such things often taken for granted as a free press, strong civil institutions, an independent judiciary and, perhaps above all, the belief that the powers of the state need to be restrained, and that the institutions of government exist to serve the individual, not the other way around.

    The essential difference with China, even the much-changed China of today, and most of the other non-Western political cultures, is the absence of this sense of restraint, and the primacy of the collective over the individual.

    That�s the idea that I was actually groping toward when I crossed the bridge at Lowu. It�s the idea that I want to end with here on this snowy day in New York in my final sentence on this page. Goodbye.





    hairstyles salma hayek photos salma hayek grown ups black dress from. Salma Hayek made a classic
  • Salma Hayek made a classic



  • Refugee_New
    01-07 09:44 AM
    If you are comparing the Sivakasi rocket with the Hamas's rocket, I can only sympathize with you. You certainly need to learn a lot--atleast the definition of 'Rocket' or 'Terrorists'.

    My point is sivakasi rocket has the capability of killing 6 people and 7000 hamas rockets taken lesser than that. We are reacting as if they have wiped out the entire nation. How inferior these rockets are when compared to sivakasi rocket. I am not justifying the rocket attack, but pointing out their impact and the voilent reaction to that.

    Every nation has right to defend itself and its people. Isreal has the same rights to protect people. That doesn't mean they can go and kill innocent civilians including elderly person, women, children, shcool children and bombing schools, hospitals, detroying infrastructure etc. After killing school kids, just dont justify your killing by saying they use kids as human shield. Dont destroy and don't lie.





    thakurrajiv
    04-06 09:12 AM
    :eek:

    I have been reading this thread with a lot of interest and could not hold back from commenting on the unbridled optimism many of you guys are showing towards the housing market, which reminds me of the "long tailed" euphoria that followed long after the NASDAQ had crashed over 50% in 2001 after the tech bubble, and people kept wishing it would come back long after it became clear to most cynical observers that it would take decades to achieve the same levels as before (and it hasn't yet)...

    Housing has not yet bottomed. It still has a long way to go. You guys may think that the foreclosures related to subprime resets have subsided so the market may recover. You haven't seen anything yet. Consider:

    http://www.irvinehousingblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/04/loan-matrix.jpg

    and:

    http://www.irvinehousingblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/04/adjustable-rate-mortgage-reset-schedule.jpg

    Option ARMs (adjustable rate mortgages) and Alt-A ARMs are the next two shoes to drop. In case you've had your head buried in the sand, the economy is on verge of a collapse. Unemployment is soaring and many more companies are considering layoffs. Many economic observers are opining that we are already in recession.

    Desi junta, and others, I entreat you readers to please consider this seriously in your house purchase decisions. If for some reason you need to sell and move out, at a minimum you will be saving some money (by not losing your downpayment, for example) by choosing to rent. Rent a house/townhouse from a private owner if you are tired of renting an apartment and have growing kids - it's a "renters market" in the private rental marketplace right now with so many investment properties purchased during the housing bubble available for rent.

    I would like to offer up a few blogs, whose commentators should be taken seriously. I recommend you read and bookmark the following blogs if you want to follow the housing market and the economy:

    http://calculatedrisk.blogspot.com/

    http://www.irvinehousingblog.com/

    http://housingpanic.blogspot.com/

    http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/

    I like this website for people just starting out to get more financially educated (in an entertaining way):

    http://www.minyanville.com/

    Good luck and please be careful before 'taking the plunge!'

    very good post jung.lee. As you said lay offs have not even started !! Recent 80000 job loss data came in. This is givt data which is a lot worse than expected. Imagine the real job losses !!
    For me this is beginning of end !! Things will get real now. House prices will come in line with what people can afford .....





    Macaca
    05-27 05:56 PM
    U.S. Must Adapt to China's New Patterns of Growth ( | World Politics Review) By IAIN MILLS | World Politics Review

    The global financial crisis catapulted China into a position of international economic leadership a decade earlier than Beijing's strategists had intended. That significantly increased the urgency of rebalancing the Chinese economy away from the low-quality, export model toward higher-value, domestically driven growth.

    One consequence has been new and accelerated patterns of Chinese trade and investment abroad. For the United States, China's largest economic partner, the implications of this new multidirectionalism are significant. But with recent figures showing that bilateral investment between the two countries is contracting, the U.S. must adapt its approach to this issue to ensure it benefits from the forthcoming chapter in China's domestic growth story.

    American investment and consumption were the two key drivers of China's economy in its early reform years. By the time the global financial crisis struck, China had amassed $2 trillion of foreign exchange reserves, and it has added another trillion since. The U.S. economy benefitted from cheap, inflation-suppressing Chinese goods, while China's absorption of American debt was a key facilitator of the pre-2008 credit bubble.

    Beijing seemed content to watch the coffers swell, while largely ignoring the need to rebalance the Chinese economy and devise strategies for making use of its mounting foreign exchange reserves. But the post-crisis collapse of investment and demand from developed economies has forced China to mobilize newly acquired national wealth to maintain economic momentum.

    China's overseas investment strategy was originally aimed at securing key natural resources. Recently, there has been a growing focus on importing advanced technology and machinery, particularly in "strategic sectors" identified in the 12th Five-Year Plan. International expansion is being led by increasingly cash-rich state-owned enterprises and their affiliates, with sovereign wealth vehicles such as China Investment Corporation and China Development Bank also adopting more active investment strategies.

    But early indicators suggest the U.S. is missing out on the first wave of new Chinese overseas spending. As one recent report on the subject notes, "the main event in 2010 was a flood of [Chinese] money into the Western Hemisphere outside the U.S., led by Brazil but also featuring Canada, Argentina and Ecuador." Last year, China's total nonfinancial outbound direct investment (ODI) jumped 38 percent, to $60 billion, even as Chinese ODI to the U.S. contracted slightly, to just less than $6 billion. Inversely, April's foreign direct investment (FDI) into China was up by more than 15 percent on the year, but American FDI dropped 28 percent.

    For China, the benefits of reducing asymmetric interdependence with the U.S. economy are clear, but it is less apparent whether the U.S. can currently afford to miss out on the huge opportunities presented by China's continued domestic growth and rapidly increasing overseas spending. Therefore, while the yuan remains a critical issue in bilateral relations, reaching consensus on the scale and scope of bilateral nonfinancial investment is an equally significant emerging topic. And although a series of diplomatic disputes in 2010 may have been partly to blame for depressed Chinese investment, the institutional arrangements of U.S.-China relations have generally failed to keep pace with China's rapid economic ascent.

    Nowhere is this clearer than in bilateral investment agreements.

    China is keen to expand its investments in the U.S. agricultural, natural resource, advanced manufacturing and financial sectors. But political resistance in the U.S. is high, and sources in Beijing claim that Washington is giving mixed signals over how welcome Chinese investment is. Chinese officials are seeking a list of acceptable investment areas from Washington and seem frustrated by the complex institutional arrangements of the U.S. political economy. Meanwhile, American officials have expressed concern about the security implications of Chinese capital, and a general lack of transparency on the Chinese side continues to exacerbate these fears.

    Clearly, resolving these issues requires action from both sides. Washington must accept Chinese overseas investment as an economic reality going forward and design a strategy capable of deploying it in support of the national interest. The politicization of the yuan has damaged Washington's credibility in Beijing; avoiding a similar degeneration of legitimate debate on investment parameters must be a strategic priority. Washington should consider mechanisms for targeting Chinese capital in areas where it is needed most, such as urban real estate development and manufacturing. These need not amount to a centrally imposed directory, as produced annually by Beijing, but rather a semi-formal consensus that provides some kind of consistent framework for prospective Chinese investors.

    Washington could also learn from the European Union's approach, which tends to maintain a greater distinction between ideological and economic policy differences with Beijing. Although the EU has the luxury of leaving political criticism to national governments, Brussels has been more low-key and consistent in discussions with Beijing on potentially inflammatory economic issues such as the yuan and China's "market economy" status. As a result, financial and nonfinancial economic integration between the two has increased substantially since 2008.

    For its part, China must accept that poor standards of domestic corporate governance remain a major barrier to future economic development at home and abroad. The credibility of Chinese companies is undermined by opaque ownership structures and a general lack of transparency regarding strategic and commercial intentions. Notably, over the past five years, there has been a direct correlation between total Chinese investment in a given country and the volume of failed deals, regardless of the developmental level of the host nation. Moreover, foreign investment in China remains heavily regulated. Beijing must accept greater liberalization at home before it can push the issue too far with international partners.

    Clearly, China has the responsibility to improve its domestic culture of openness and accountability. Greater and more symmetrical engagement with experienced capitalist nations can hasten this process while providing much-needed capital injections to the latters' ailing economies.

    For the U.S., the central challenge is to formulate more consistent and strategically constructive responses to China's economic rise. That would entail initiating a paradigm shift in Washington -- one that focuses less on "the China threat" and more on how to benefit from new opportunities presented by China's rise.



    GOP sees red over China (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0511/55559.html) By Alexander Burns | Politico
    America And China: Finding Cooperation, Avoiding Conflict? (http://blogs.forbes.com/dougbandow/2011/05/23/america-and-china-finding-cooperation-avoiding-conflict/) By Doug Bandow | Forbes
    Henry Kissinger on China. Or Not.
    Statesman Henry Kissinger takes a cautious view of Beijing's reaction to the Arab Spring, and U.S. relations with the world's rising power. (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703730804576321393783531506.html)
    By BRET STEPHENS | Wall Street Journal
    Kissinger and China (http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2011/jun/09/kissinger-and-china/) By Jonathan D. Spence | The New York Review of Books
    Henry Kissinger’s On China (http://blogs.cfr.org/asia/2011/05/26/henry-kissinger%E2%80%99s-on-china/) By Elizabeth C. Economy | Council on Foreign Relations
    General Chen’s Assurance Not Entirely Reassuring (http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-skeptics/general-chen%E2%80%99s-assurance-not-entirely-reassuring-5351) By Ted Galen Carpenter | The Skeptics
    Go to China, young scientist (http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/go-to-china-young-scientist/2011/05/19/AFCY227G_story.html) By Matthew Stremlau | The Washington Post
    No go
    The Western politician who understands China best tries to explain it—but doesn’t quite succeed (http://www.economist.com/node/18709581)
    The Economist
    Europe Frets Over Trade Deficits With China (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/21/business/economy/21charts.html) By FLOYD NORRIS | New York Times
    China’s Interest in Farmland Makes Brazil Uneasy (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/27/world/americas/27brazil.html) By ALEXEI BARRIONUEVO | The New York Times



    No comments:

    Post a Comment