هذه تقرير يتحدث عن الوظع الاقتصادي في الشرق الأوسط و البلدان الخليجية. يقيم التقرير على مقالة في الجريدة "Gulf News" و مقالة في "القدس العربي". يبحث في المقالات السعار النفط و ركودا الاقتصادي في المنطقة بسبب الازمة المالية العالمية.
يتوقع رئيس صندوق النقد الدولى مسود احمد انخفاض في النمو الاقتصادي بين البلدان في الشرق الاوسط و في الخليج من 2% في المائة في العام 2009.
وذكر التقرير الصندوق النقد الدولى ان معظم البلدان في العالم العربي سوف تستخدم ثروتة نفط لكي استثمر في الخدمات العامة و تجنب التراجع المالي.
المملكة العربية السعودية، التي عند الاقتصاد الاكبر في العالم العربي، سوف ملك عجز الذي يبلغ عن 1.7 بليون الدولار الأميركي.
يتوقع احمد ان سينزل الصادرات النفط الى النصف، و ستعاني الدول الخليج من تراجع في ثروتة نفط بنسبة 50%.
يقول الصندوق النقد الدولى البلدان التي تصدّر النفط هي الجزائر، والبحرين، وايران، العراق، الكويت، لليبية، عمان، قطر، المملكة العربية السعودية، السودان، واليمن.
حسب صندوق النقد الدولي يحدث الإنخفاض في اسعار النفط المؤسسات المالية المختلفة في المنطقة الخليج و العربية، ويشكل مشكلات طاويلً فيها.
يحدث الازمة المالية العالمية على قطاع الخاص و قطاع العام في منطقة الخليخ و العربية مثل سياحة و الصادرات.
اخيرا في الوضع الاقتصادي الصعب هل يمكن رؤساء العالم مثل الرئيس باراك اوباما يساعد في تعافي الازمة الاقتصادية العلمية؟
Monday, February 23, 2009
Thursday, February 19, 2009
Monday, February 09, 2009
"Restoring religious faith to its rightful place as a guide to our world and its future is of the essence." Or this: "In surrendering to God we become instruments of his love". He told the story of his "first spiritual awakening" aged 10 when his teacher knelt and prayed with him when his father had a stroke. He warned the teacher that his father was a committed atheist who didn't believe in God, only to be told "God believes in him". And he's had fun at the expense of the civil servants and Alastair Campbell who told him "we don't do God" by finishing with the hope that in acting, politicians will "follow God's will - and by the way God bless you all".
No doubt Mr Blair's religious outpourings will generate a spot of reaction from those who might find it a bit rich to be lectured in religious and moral terms by the man who led us into Iraq and oversaw the culture of casual mendacity that marked New Labour. But for those of us who toil along the Burma Road, watching Mr Blair put on a trademark display of self-deprecation and lip-quivvering guffery was a moment for nostalgia. Say what you like, this guy is good.
No doubt Mr Blair's religious outpourings will generate a spot of reaction from those who might find it a bit rich to be lectured in religious and moral terms by the man who led us into Iraq and oversaw the culture of casual mendacity that marked New Labour. But for those of us who toil along the Burma Road, watching Mr Blair put on a trademark display of self-deprecation and lip-quivvering guffery was a moment for nostalgia. Say what you like, this guy is good.
Sunday, February 08, 2009
Erich Fromm, 54 years ago, concluded: "Man [sic] today is confronted with the most fundamental choice; not that between Capitalism or Communism, but that between robotism (of both the capitalist and the communist variety), or Humanistic Communitarian Socialism. Most facts seem to indicate that he is choosing robotism and that means, in the long run, insanity and destruction. But all these facts are not strong enough to destroy faith in man's reason, good will, and sanity. As long as we can think of other alternatives, we are not lost."
Monday, February 02, 2009
Dear Mr Izza
Thank you for your e-mail regarding 'BBC News' on 3 January. Please
accept our apologies for the delay in replying. We know our
correspondents appreciate a quick response and are sorry you've had
to wait on this occasion.
I understand you felt Peter Sisson's did a poor job of presenting the
item on the Gaza protests in London. I also note that you felt the
item was biased in favour of an Israeli point of view.
The range of tastes and opinions held by our audience is so diverse
that it's inevitable some viewers will dislike or disapprove of the
performance of certain presenters. It's a very rare TV personality
who meets with everyone's approval, and it's clear that opinions on
them can vary considerably.
Our programme contributors are appointed on the basis of their
experience and talent, but judgements are often subjective and we
would never expect everyone to agree with every choice we make.
However, we don't engage any presenter or reporter unless we believe
they're competent and can meet the specific demands required of them.
All BBC journalists and newsreaders are well aware of our commitment
to impartial reporting. They seek only to provide the information
which will enable viewers and listeners to make up their own minds;
to show the political reality and provide the forum for debate where
there is full opportunity for all viewpoints to be heard.
In dealing with any controversial matter the BBC is required to give
a fair and balanced report. However, balance cannot simply be judged
on the basis of the time allocated to the representatives of either
side of an argument. One spokesperson may make his or her points
concisely while another needs rather longer to explain a point of
view. Account also needs to be taken of the way a subject is covered
over a period of time; perfect balance is difficult to achieve on
every single occasion while overall it is a more achievable goal.
Please be assured that senior editorial staff, the Executive
Committee, and the BBC Trust keep a close watch on programmes to
ensure that standards of impartiality are maintained.
I would also like to assure you that we've registered your comments
on our audience log. This is the internal report of audience feedback
we compile daily for all programme makers, news teams, and senior
management within the BBC. The audience logs are important documents
that can help shape decisions about future programming and content
and ensure that your points, and all other comments we receive, are
circulated and considered across the BBC.
Thanks again for contacting us.
Regards
Stuart Webb
BBC Complaints
__________________________________________
www.bbc.co.uk/complaints
-----Original Message-----
Why am I paying a liscence fee to listen to supercilious wankers like Peter
Sissons treat with contempt a popular gathering against an international c
rime (assault on gaza), endorse police brutality and apologise for Israeli
crimes by accentuating Hamas and equating protestors with Hamas sympathiser
s! Please address this, the BBC is worse than Sky news on this issue, its p
athetic and cringeworthy at times. Is Peter Sissons the self-appointed pros
cribor of 'evil terrorist' organisations because I certainly didn't get the
impression he was mediating and sourcing information like an actual report
er, as opposed to a sycophantic apologist for state crimes and those of the
ir allies.
Thank you for your e-mail regarding 'BBC News' on 3 January. Please
accept our apologies for the delay in replying. We know our
correspondents appreciate a quick response and are sorry you've had
to wait on this occasion.
I understand you felt Peter Sisson's did a poor job of presenting the
item on the Gaza protests in London. I also note that you felt the
item was biased in favour of an Israeli point of view.
The range of tastes and opinions held by our audience is so diverse
that it's inevitable some viewers will dislike or disapprove of the
performance of certain presenters. It's a very rare TV personality
who meets with everyone's approval, and it's clear that opinions on
them can vary considerably.
Our programme contributors are appointed on the basis of their
experience and talent, but judgements are often subjective and we
would never expect everyone to agree with every choice we make.
However, we don't engage any presenter or reporter unless we believe
they're competent and can meet the specific demands required of them.
All BBC journalists and newsreaders are well aware of our commitment
to impartial reporting. They seek only to provide the information
which will enable viewers and listeners to make up their own minds;
to show the political reality and provide the forum for debate where
there is full opportunity for all viewpoints to be heard.
In dealing with any controversial matter the BBC is required to give
a fair and balanced report. However, balance cannot simply be judged
on the basis of the time allocated to the representatives of either
side of an argument. One spokesperson may make his or her points
concisely while another needs rather longer to explain a point of
view. Account also needs to be taken of the way a subject is covered
over a period of time; perfect balance is difficult to achieve on
every single occasion while overall it is a more achievable goal.
Please be assured that senior editorial staff, the Executive
Committee, and the BBC Trust keep a close watch on programmes to
ensure that standards of impartiality are maintained.
I would also like to assure you that we've registered your comments
on our audience log. This is the internal report of audience feedback
we compile daily for all programme makers, news teams, and senior
management within the BBC. The audience logs are important documents
that can help shape decisions about future programming and content
and ensure that your points, and all other comments we receive, are
circulated and considered across the BBC.
Thanks again for contacting us.
Regards
Stuart Webb
BBC Complaints
__________________________________________
www.bbc.co.uk/complaints
-----Original Message-----
Why am I paying a liscence fee to listen to supercilious wankers like Peter
Sissons treat with contempt a popular gathering against an international c
rime (assault on gaza), endorse police brutality and apologise for Israeli
crimes by accentuating Hamas and equating protestors with Hamas sympathiser
s! Please address this, the BBC is worse than Sky news on this issue, its p
athetic and cringeworthy at times. Is Peter Sissons the self-appointed pros
cribor of 'evil terrorist' organisations because I certainly didn't get the
impression he was mediating and sourcing information like an actual report
er, as opposed to a sycophantic apologist for state crimes and those of the
ir allies.
Sunday, February 01, 2009
Actually, it is still not too late to bring back the Hereditary Peers, decent incorruptible old coves who have Britain in their bones and blood. Why do we believe that ‘democracy’ is the answer to everything when it so frequently elevates idiots and crooks to power?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
