MJ

Sorry for this Question&Answer format. It saves much time from me to address the material in that format.

Hello, neighbor. Funny choice of a name. Do you have a hatchet, too?

Here is a part of my reply to you, Azat: Azat, why do you make such unsubstantiated statements? Because you feel that way, or because you know? The summer additives are not practiced in the west, but in Illionis. Azat - This is very much so true in California. If you do not believe me ask someone on this board to drive to their local Unocal station(i only use Unocal 76, but I am sure this is true for others as well) and read the black and white sticker on the pump itself. Unocal used MTBE(I do not know what it is) to have cleaning burning fuel. This is what is in short supply. OK. Let’s say it is absolutely correct. As you claim, the additive is in short supply. If the regulations require this additive in California, which I didn’t know (oil is not my area of expertise), then the problem indeed is created by the shortages and the regulations, right? Why to blame the oil companies, then? I am smarter that you make me sound to be. We had the same taxes last year the same capacity as last year, maybe a 5%(I am not sure) increase in demand, yet the price of gas is sky high. It is MOSTLY due to the shortage of the additives. I can get sources that tell you that if you want. I have no doubts about your smartness, but rather I have questions about your information. Additionally, I remember last year the same picture was present – before the summer and in the summer the prices of gasoline went off the roof. You have probably forgotten it. It was followed by the symbolic gesture of Clinton administration to tap into the National Strategic Petroleum Reserve, and the Saudies increased production. The prices last year were as high as they are this year. BTW, I disagree with the tapping into the Strategic Reserve. That’s not what it is brought together for. I once again never said that they cut production, they only cut the supply. It is not bogus. They have used the pipeline to send other fuels to other places thus cutting the supply of gas. O, it is bogus, because if they cut the supply, but continue the production, the only thing that logically can be done is to put the gas in storage (this cannot be done for power, because it is a non-storable commodity – this is were the problems starts in power markets, in fact). But nobody has enough storage capacity, so that to put all the cut supply, as you claim, in that storage. Simply there are none! But there should be. This is a potentially hot market. However, having the storage just in any location is not a solution, because you need pipelines to transport the gas from the storage. Now, if the pipelines function at almost at their capacity limits, without additional pipelines you cannot transport much. If not the pipelines, then the storage needs to be built somewhere in California. It requires a lot of money. So that investors put that money in, they have to have the confidence with the government and the regulators. I hope you would agree that they don’t have a lot of reasons to have confidence in the California government. MJ, it is super expensive to store natural gas because to store it they have to almost make it to liquid form and thus it becomes expensive to store in masses. And just like power, gas is almost used on the spot or is wasted. It is the size and the use of the pipeline that has increased the price. Wrong. The liquid gas is one way of doing it, and it is a relatively small market. Storing of gas does not require liquefying. It just requires compressing. Gas is not used like power, i.e. only on the spot. You couldn’t be further away from the truth, here, though you were right about the power (and as I said, that’s the primary reason of a higher magnitude of problems in power markets- you don’t have much room for bad planning/scheduling). Gas is successfully stored, and this is widely practiced. Every Wednesday of the week, you can obtain the info on Gas storage availability. Check www.aquila.com, for example, for gas storage information – this is just one company. If not satisfied, I’ll give you more. It indeed seem like you get your information from the TV comedians. Azat - That is a stupid thing to say. Unfortunately I think you have been listening to sublibibibibal messages from Mr. Bush. I do listen Bush, and I really respect and admire him for his understanding of the issues. He is a simple speaker – no pompous expressions, doesn’t use complicated terms, says things which are correct, and he doesn’t mislead people. Is he an outspoken President as some others? No. But is that the value of the President? The value of the President is if he has the courage to surround himself with the best experts available, and take principal stance on the problems, no matter how unpopular the solutions may be. Additionally, as I have said, he demonstrates that he is able to make his superstar team work. However, you are mistaken that I get my info from him, or from whatever newspapers or “Gazetts.” In fact, evidently, that’s where you get your info. I get my info from professional sources. What part of Valdez was a foreign company or foreign territory or anything that you said in the above statement. How does it make it less likely? Just for your information, Valdez is in Alaska(you know the state up north) and it was Exxon(you know the largest US company) that caused the problem. No. Valdez was a tanker. It is irrelevant if it was foreign or domestic tanker. The accident and spillover rates with tankers are much higher than with pipelines. This is what my comment had meant. What would your answer be? You think that prices are high because of the free wholesale market of electricity I am sure. The fact is that six investigations by state and federal agencies are underway, seeking evidence of collusion or other illegal behavior. Multimillion-dollar lobbying efforts in Sacramento are intensifying. (Nancy Vogel, LA Times 12/9/00 "How State's Consumers Lost With Electricity Deregulation.") No. The opposite. If there were free wholesale and retail markets, this crisis would have been much mitigated. It is resulted from three sources: 1. The supply has not kept up with the growth of the demand; 2. The structure of the wholesale market in CA has been the most stupid structure in the nation – nobody has repeated this stupid experiment. It is not just the current and previous Governors to be blamed, but also the legislatures, and the previous Federal Government; 3. The wholesale market has been deregulate, but the retail has not. This has meant an industry having its one foot in the regulated world, and the other in the deregulated world, and the ground under feet slipping away. This is another major contributor of the problem. The six investigations underway are not the first ones, nor are they the last ones. They also had several investigations last year. These investigations would not lead anywhere in terms of concluding that the energy companies have created the situation, since they have not. These types of investigations are primarily oriented at the public opinion, and saving the skins of the politicians, which are up for reelection. You are right. The exploration is not short term. Neither power plant development or anything else is short term. In energy markets there are no short-term solutions. There is nothing that anybody can do in the short term. Azat - I agree 100%. But there are power plants being built. My previous post shows more info about this. Fine. But those plants would not be up and running in the summer, as you recognize in another paragraph. That’s when the demand peaks. It is like five years ago you had sex with a prostitute Azat - I can't believe she called and told you about this. I have to have a talk with her. She did. And I said, having Azat’s experience in front of me, I ask you not to call me ever again. I don’t know Carlin as a comedian, but I saw him speak in Larry King Live, recently. I think the guy is an idiot, and an ultra-socialist zealot. As to Bill Mahr’s funnyness – sorry. Have seen his comic monologs over HBO. Azat - This is why we each have different tastes in life. I like them both. Here is a link from our humor section on some one liners from Carlin. http://armenians.com/cgi-bin/forum/ultimat...c&f=14&t=000057 You are right. …but the situation in California should not be used as an example of a shortage, but rater as an example of both corporations and government (including the current governor) screwing things up. Agreed. But it was not a malicious attempt by the corporations in California. It was resulted from their incompetence – they had no understanding of the free market structures and forces, while being very experienced in the regulated world. I have spoken about this in the past, in our forum. They screwed up the market structure, but that was not the primary source of the problem, because even with this structure, if there were abundant supply, we would have not had the current experience. This market structure is inadequate only under the constrained supply, which is the primary source of the problem. The rest are just amplifying factors, or consequences. This is my primary point. I will not be in the dark like many in California because my little city has a public run power plant that is doing a MUCH better job than the private corporations who only care about their shareholders. Just because it is publicly owned, it doesn’t mean much. In the summer of 1998, some publicly owned utilities were behind the $7.5K per MWH price spike in the MidWest (Cinergy Hub). With the time, the demand in your city will grow, and you will need to either build new plants, or to bring power from elsewhere – that is if the transmission lines have excess capacity. Plus all 4 cities that I mentioned are selling power back to the state on the spot market. Wrong again. The prices go astronomically high namely in the spot market – not in the forward market. That’s why you have the problems that you do in California. The prices don’t go nearly as high in the forward markets. And the regulations prohibit the utilities to buy in the forward markets in California. That’s where also the problem of the short supply is aggravated. It was smart thinkers that built enough power into their system to make sure their city did not go dark. This is where we agree. Do you need me to get you sources that say that Glendale, Pasadena, Burbank and DWP from LA are selling power back too? Back to whom? Everybody sells back to … That is regulation. They are obligated to do so. The generating, distributing, transmission and marketing companies have to be separated. This is the law. Everybody does it. But you are right in saying that we in Southern California cannot produce enough to supply all the energy needs of Northern California. And who is at fault here. The environmentalists who would not allow for new power plants. Yes partially, maybe major blame can go to them. You are being very soft. The primary blame goes to them and the politicians who cater them. The environmentalists are against nuclear power, they are against the coal-generated power, and they are against the hydro-power (due to the problems with the migration of salmon). They sort of are more open to gas fired combined-cycle turbines. OK. But these are more expensive (actually most expensive), however necessary, sources of power, and additionally, you can build them only not far away from the existing gas pipelines - so that to be able to deliver fuel. And guess what – the environmentalists are also against building gas pipelines. Now, the other alternative is to build the plants outside California, for example. But then, you need adequate transmission lines to transmit the power. Guess what – the environmentalists are against the transmission lines, too. What do you think the implications of all these limitations would be? But one cannot forget all the money that SCE and PG&E sent back to the parent companies and sat on the sideline trying to see what was going to happen with deregulation without building any new plants. That is the truth. they even blocked other companies from building plants. Wrong again. What money was sent back to the parent companies? Do you know the source of that money? The regulations required that SCE and PG&E to sell all their power plants, since they were not allowed to have any of them by the screwed-up mentality of the regulators. They did. And this is the money that they sent back to their parent companies, which in turn paid of the shareholders (through dividends) and the debt holders because they were the ones who own the plants. If you would sell your house, who would you send the appropriate portion of the money (assuming you make profit)? Wouldn’t you be obligated to send it to your Mortgage Company, since the house belongs to them until it is paid-off? Don’t blame the Texan Companies, but blame your zealot and incompetent friends for not allowing to built neither electricity transmission lines, neither gas pipelines, neither oil pipelines, neither gas storage facilities, nor power plants. Azat - MJ, you are looking at this issue from only one side. Tell me what side should I look at it from. I don’t want to make this positing a lecture on energy markets. Besides, I am a professional consultant for energy markets, and it is unprofessional of me to give such lectures for free. However, out of our friendship, if you still are interested in it, I can give you also additional explanation on the subject through private messaging. Azat - i don't mind getting lectured by you as long as you don't mind me taking shots at your theories. Go right ahead. Finally, this year, we all are very lucky because it has been abnormally cool year, so far. Wait and see what happens next year, if we assume that the weather pattern goes back into its normal trend. Wait and see what is going to happen in California and New York. Azat - I don't know what will happen in NY, but IF all 4 new plants come online in CA we will be fine, especially since there are 2 more coming online in 2002. Maybe you will be fine for a while. But then, you would need more plants, and more plants, and more plants. Normally, construction of a power plant takes about two years, in average. FYI, New York would have been in the same mess, if they didn’t have an unusually cool weather for this time of the year. And their structure is not as bad in terms of the spot-forward market. The problem is the supply, again. Regarding your other comment on power plants being suspiciously offline at the same time. You probably have missed to note three things: 1. Every spring and summer, a whole host of plants are stopped for regular maintenance. It is required. And there is nothing that they can do about this. If they don’t do it, they would be forced to do it in the summer and the winter, which would have much worse consequences, or if they don’t do it at all, the plants would start experiencing frequent random outages, which would have the same results on the spot market. This is similar to your car having oil change. You may not do it, but then, you would need to live with the consequences; 2. A number of the plants that were off lines were the old plants, which don’t satisfy the environmental standards. When they are brought online, the owners of these plants pay huge fines for the pollution of the environment. Clearly, that cost is going to be past to the consumers. I will reply to the article of the Irvine Professor a bit later.

MJ, I am sorry, but how did you get the 114 figure. I understand that the umbers are inaccurate, but how did you go from 95 to 114? My apologies. Instead of 2% I had punched 20% in the numbers. But it doesn’t change the essence of the issue, given that my numbers were hypothetical, and several thousand MWH have to be allocated for reliability margin and ancillary services purposes. All I am saying is that the shortage is artificially created by the power suppliers. We did not have a single "stage 2" or "stage 3" power alerts the 12 months prior to this mess that we are in now, yet in the last 12 months we have had many. What caused this? You are wrong. The explanation is clear. 1. Growth of the Demand compared to the last year (it is not sudden – this growth is steady); 2. Law rain levels, due to which the hydropower plants could not be operated at their maximum capacities;3. Plant outages – these things happen every-now-and-then. I have an open mind and I am all for building new and improved power plants, including one in my back yard. That’s good. There are 4 new power plants that are coming online this year in california. If the power plants did NOT take all the money that they made from deregulation and send it to their parent companies and had invested some of that money back into building and improving their plants we would not be in this situation. Actually, it is not quite correct. It seems like they are behind the schedule. I think only one of them is guaranteed this summer. I would reply to the article you have pasted, later. There is some truth in it, but it is grossly exaggerated and the interpretations are not valid. Here is the short answer: if there is a price gouging or collusion, as those who would like to get clean out of the mess that they have created claim, there are anti-trust laws, and anti-profiteering laws, and the State of California can litigate them. And there have been such cases. My friend and business partner is a recognized expert providing expert testimony in the courts, when these things happen. Here is what he says: “You would be surprised at the incompetence of the politicians.” I was watching a program on C-SPAN, few months ago, where the politicians and the business executives – among them the executives of PG&E, were trying to come up with solutions (the one that failed). I was astonished at the stupidity and the incompetence of one of the senators in the commission – the senator of the Washington state. An I thought to myself that if the solution of the problems is left to this kinds of nincompoops, we would face nothing but misery. Now, I need to do some work, and when I have time, will comment on the article you have pasted. [ May 21, 2001: Message edited by: MJ ]

2.Not to be dependent on 1 source. But US already has the Middle East, Venezuela, Nigeria ect. From the discussion in "Energy resources and regional geopolitics" I can see that it needs more and more. Central Asia is the last big oil field. And lot of developing countries need that oil, including Iran. What consequences will bring the imrovement of US-Iran relations? Will the US do it as a silk-revolution (which they cannot), or by simply saying "We like you". How are they going to make Iran, Turkey, Syria and Isreal to leave peacefully under their umbrella? If their push on Central Asia becomes too strong, Russia and China will oppose that by any means. This, and the decission to open the Alaska oil fields brings to conclusion that the US policy in the region is more adventurist than peaceful. It is easy to have Syria, Israel and Turkey to coexist peacefully. The only major problem between Syria and Israel is the destiny of Golan Heights. I think there is solution to it, and it would be achieved in this decade – Israel returns the Golan Hights, and robust some guaranties are being given to Israel that it is going to be a demilitarized zone. The relations between Syria and Turkey are contingent upon two factors – the territorial claims that Syria has towards Turkey, and the water usage restrictions from Ephrata river imposed on Syria by Turkey, as far as I understand. This is a more difficult problem, however, I think it is solvable. The relations between Iran and Israel are most difficult. But they are primarily of emotional character, rather than of economic or political. The development of their relationship depends on the domestic transformations in Iran, in my view. Both countries would benefit tremendously if they establish economic relationship. The only way Russia may hamper the Western plans of access to the energy sources of Central Asia is through civil unrest, and threatening the security of the pipelines. This is possible, but it is also very possible that if they get a stake in the game, they may be more accommodating – I tend to believe in this scenario more than in anything else. China can intervene in one way only – offering its markets to the Central Asian governments as an alternative to the Western Markets. But it would require very significant capital investments to develop the necessary pipeline, etc, infrastructure. Whether China has that capacity or not, I don’t know, and I suspect it doesn’t. With all this, while the uncertainty at hands may have impact at other sectors of the Armenian Economy, I think the Software industry would be the least dependent.

Could be true. Nobody knows until they explore. I have heard the same numbers as well. The sad thing is that once they have the permission to explore the permission to extract is much easier to get. Isn’t this what one has to admit with honesty? Even if the resources are huge (to which some preliminary studies attest to), the environmentalists don’t want it to be extracted. Then why all this BS about the 6 month supply? Also there are no deficits in Gas or Oil in the west as officials will lead you to believe. We have a huge increase in the price of gas because the so called "summer additives" added to burn gas much cleaner is at a shortage. In fact the price of barrel of oil is about 20% less than this time last year, yet we are paying record high prices at the pump. Azat, why do you make such unsubstantiated statements? Because you feel that way, or because you know? The summer additives are not practiced in the west, but in Illionis. The price of the barrel of the oil being purchased in the International markets is not the entire picture. That oil is crude oil, which I am sure you know cannot be used in cars, etc. So that it becomes gasoline usable in the cars, it has to be refined. Therefore, if there are not enough refineries, even if the price of crude oil would be $10 per barrel, it is going to create deficit of gasoline, which is going to naturally push the prices up. This is elementary, I think. I live in Georgia, and I enjoy the lowest gasoline prices in the nation. You know why? For two reasons – there are a lot of refineries in South East, and the State has not imposed excessive tax burden on gasoline distributors. Think of this, if Armenia is under blockade, it would not matter that the flour is inexpensive elsewhere. The prices on bread are going to be high in Armenia. Gas is another monster story where few companies mostly in Texas have colluded together and have cut the supply to bring the price up. This is an absolute bogus, Azat. And it is a very irresponsible declaration. The gas companies have not cut production. Like any other source of energy, the demand on gas also grows annually. However, for decades, no gas storage facilities and no gas pipelines have been constructed. If you cannot transport increased amounts of gas due to the limitations of pipeline capacities, it makes zero sense to produce them? Isn’t this a very robust logic? In fact we do not even have a shortage in electricity. If all our power plants worked at capacity we would have an extra supply, however they "seem" to have problems every single day and are down for repairs far more than usual. It indeed seem like you get your information from the TV comedians. What is good for Alaskans does not necessarily mean it is the best solution for the entire country. Theoretically speaking, yes. But in this particular case it is an empty declaration. Because in this particular case, it is good for Alaska and for the US. Because Alaskans don’t experience energy shortages – it is the rest of the US that does so. remember Valdez? Yes, I do remember Valdez. And your position makes the future “Valdezes” more likely. Because due to your stance, increased amounts of oil have to be brought from oversees, thus increasing the likelihood of such catastrophes. In the mean time, the transportation of oil from the domestic sources of supply through pipelines would be much safer. There are no shortage. There are just greedy companies who give millions of dollars in bonuses to employees and management and tell the public that there is a shortage to just raise the price. I think it is obvious what my reply to this decleration of yours would be. This exploration is NOT short term. There is nothing that Bush or any of his cronies can do that will be a "short period" solution. You are right. The exploration is not short term. Neither power plant development or anything else is short term. In energy markets there are no short-term solutions. There is nothing that anybody can do in the short term. It is like five years ago you had sex with a prostitute, and you caught AIDS. For five years, not being a responsible person, you felt good about it. But five years later you come to experience the results of your irresponsible lifestyle. Now, you go around and complain that the doctors are cronies, and they refuse to do anything about your condition. I find Bill Mahr to be a very funny comedian, but he is noting more than a comedian. George Carlin was hilarious on that show as well. I don’t know Carlin as a comedian, but I saw him speak in Larry King Live, recently. I think the guy is an idiot, and an ultra-socialist zealot. As to Bill Mahr’s funnyness – sorry. Have seen his comic monologs over HBO. MJ, It is my belief that Energy companies(mostly from Texas) are the enemies in this situation that we are in. Exactly. You believe in it. You have no facts, and you have not studied the issue. And perhaps this is what you have heard from your Governer, who is trying to savve his neck in the next elections, by blaming somebidy else outside California. That’s why in my previous reply to you I said the environmentalism has become religion. It is a basic fact of life – when there is deficit, the prices go up. This was the case even in the socialistic USSR. It is your responsibility to plan consciously and in a responsible manner. Living with today’s needs only, and not thinking of the future always has consequences. You (allegoric you) have been irresponsible in your youth, have not thought of your future, now live with the consequences, and don’t blame the others. Even now, you live with declarations. You say there is no shortage, when it is out of question that there is significant shortage. So when your lights go down, you just declare that the lights are on, and feel comfrtable. And when the prices go up, you just say they are not up, they are normal. You claim French and Germans are paying much higher prices. Go ahead and believe in it. Why are your beliefs one sided? Cities of LA, etc, have been smarter/luckier for the time being. They have built adequate numbers of plants. They don’t need to transmit power from elsewhere. Moreover, the Southern California has excess power supply for the time being. Then ask the Southern Californians to sell inexpensive power to North California, and don’t go for Texas. But you cannot do it, right? Why? Because, the transmission lines (in particular the so called Path 15 connecting the Southern California grid with the Northern one) doesn’t have the capacity to allow increased transmission. The same way, there is a limited capacity to bring power to Northern California from elsewhere. Don’t blame the Texan Companies, but blame your zealot and incompetent friends for not allowing to built neither electricity transmission lines, neither gas pipelines, neither oil pipelines, neither gas storage facilities, nor power plants. Now, use candles, go to work on bikes – conserve! What do you expect from the government? It is up to you to conserve. Should the administration issue an order that you conserve your usage of energy? For example, I conserve as much as I can. If in a room of my house there is no one, we would not have the lights on. I have my air conditioning system serviced every year, so that it consumes less, and I conserve in any possible way. Do you? Additionally, one of the primary power companies who sells power and gas to California at increased prices is the Calpine Corporation, which is headquartered in San Jose. It was looking for an opportunity to do the same in Texas last summer – at that time I was spending a lot of time at their Texas office. Because of the measures that the Texan government had taken before, they couldn’t materialize such opportunities. I don’t want to make this positing a lecture on energy markets. Besides, I am a professional consultant for energy markets, and it is unprofessional of me to give such lectures for free. However, out of our friendship, if you still are interested in it, I can give you also additional explanation on the subject through private messaging. Finally, this year, we all are very lucky becasue it has been abnormally cool year, so far. Wait and see what hapens next year, if we assume that the weather pattern goes back into its normal trend. Wait and see what is going to happen in California and New York. [ May 21, 2001: Message edited by: MJ ]

I knock conservation? Where did you get it? All I have said is the conservation, while being necessary, is not a solution. Even 2% conservation would be an overwhelming success, and that is very hard to achieve, at least for this summer. I just say that when you make statements, you have to first study the issue. The conservation is exercised by the energy companies as much as it is possible. For example, the rolling blockouts are a way of conservation. I wonder what would’ve your attitude been if you were to reside in Northern California. How come we have such a "shortage" of power in California this past 12 months as compare to the last 12 months prior to that. The energy use has only gone up by 4%. The answer is elementary. Let’s assume that the total peak demand in California in the year 2000 was 95,000 MWH while the available supply was 100,000 MWH (my numbers are not accurate, but the qualitative picture they portray is accurate). The demand on power grows in average by 1.8-2% a year. For the sake of the ease of calculations, let’s take 2% (wouldn’t make qualitative difference). That means that in the year 2001, the peak demand would be 114,000 MWH. If no plants are built, that means that there is already 14,000 MWH shortage. And I am not taking into consideration all the required margins for the purpose of the reliability and stability of the system. Now, you can imagine what is going to happen a year later, if no plants are built – much more severe shortages. Now, let’s assume that you can conserve 2% of the demand (I am highly suspicious of it, though). But the growth of 2% is an annual growth rate, not a total growth. The conservation of 2% is a one time (or almost one time event). How are you going to deal with it. I should also say that it is very funny when you say there is no shortage of power in California. You should ask about it the residents of Bay area. Here is the projection (not mine) throughout the US: So that not to face power shortages in the US in the next 20 years, in average one new plant a week has to be brought online. Take it as written on the stone, if you have open mind for it. Otherwise the result is going to be a tremendous economic downturn. Unfortunately, the environmentalism in the US (and perhaps elsewhere) has become a religion. People claim things that they have no idea about, they just say “I believe there is no shortage.” “I believe we can conserve 40% of our demand,” etc. The question is what studies are your beliefs based on? The bottom line is – you cannot have your computers running in the future, and not have new power plants built. And by the way, the computerization of the industry accounts for the most significant share of the increased demand. I will reply to your previous material in a while – have to take care of few things, now.

quote:Originally posted by circassian: dialog needs to be started internally within turkish parliement via the contribution of all concerned. So how can we, being concerned, contribute to that dialog from the outside?

Whn it insults me, you'll know about it.

quote:Originally posted by circassian: Maybe he does see a way to co-exist & live together. So the way to co-exist is to give a pass to the murderer by claiming that no murder has taken place?

Interfax 20 May 2001 STEPANAKERT Nikolay Gribkov, the Russian co-chairman of the OSCE's Minsk Group for a Nagornyy Artsax settlement, believes that Artsax is "a major independent factor". "No stable or real settlement can be achieved without taking its interests into account or, worse still, disregarding these interests," Gribkov told the press on Saturday [19 May] during a visit by a Minsk Group delegation to Nagornyy Artsax. "Whether the others like it or not, Artsax is a serious party in the conflict." Concerning the possibility of involving a representative of Nagornyy Artsax in the talks between the Armenian and Azerbaijani presidents, Gribkov said that "this will happen by all means". He noted, though, that he cannot name the exact date when this will happen. "Taking into account the place where [Armenian President] Robert Kocharyan was born, he represents the interests of Nagornyy Artsax, as well, during his talks with Azerbaijani President Heydar Aliyev," he said. Following his confidential talks with the parliament chairman, prime minister, and foreign and defence ministers of breakaway Nagornyy Artsax, Gribkov told journalists before his departure for Armenia that the talks were useful for finding new solutions in the settlement process. Earlier, the delegation of the Minsk Group had arrived in Nagornyy Artsax and walked across the engagement line in the Agdam sector. Mines had been removed from this sector before the delegation's arrival and laid again afterwards. The American co-chairman of the Minsk Group Carey Cavanaugh described this fact as "rather interesting". Thus, the co-chairmen opened a symbolic path for the peacekeepers, he said, adding that hopefully roads between Azerbaijan and Nagornyy Artsax will be opened after the peace settlement.

Dialogs between two countries have to be facilitated by the corresponding Ministries of Foreign Affairs, first, not by the parliamentarians.

Alpha, Some of these sources may be credible, but others would hardly qualify as so – in particular the Times Magazine. Additionally, Wall Street Journal’s credibility may be frequently questioned. Additionally, neither in Forbes nor in Fortune magazines you can get the information that you have aluded to us earlier. I have to also add that I am not an advocate of what you call Social Darwinist – I am not any “ist.” Social justice requires implementation of opportunity for all. In now way expropriation of ones property, in Russian terms, “raskulachivanie” is a way of establishing social justice. Additionally, social justice doesn’t mean equal wealth for all. People are different with their abilities, the depth of their thinking, their working habits, their accomplishments, etc. The progress of the society requires adequate rewarding mechanism for adequate achievements. It is very hard not to advocate clean environment. You say again “I am glad you didn't go far enough to claim that CO2 is very healthy.” Why do you have to make such statements? Does it help you to make your case? You had eight years to demand implementation of CO2 regulations, but you didn’t do it. But this President has been in the office for just a little bit more than 100 days, and you are cornering him for not implementing his campaign promise regarding the CO2 regulations. He has not said he has not going to do it. He has said that all the regulations would be considered as a package deal, and he would revisit the issue of CO2 in six months. As to the Global Warming…. There has not been a single persuasive studies of this topic. Whether there is such phenomenon or not – it is not clear to me. This doesn’t mean that there isn’t. However, I would like to be familiarized with any serious studies that are there. From my side, I can attest to the following: Currently I have an ongoing project, which I am doing for an Energy company. The project involves full statistical analysis of maximum daily temperature in 48 cities in the US for the last 20 years. I am expecting to get similar data for 198 cities in the US. I can report you that so far, I have not seen an element of evidence suggesting “Global Warming” throughout the US in the last 20 years. I would keep you informed on the more comprehensive data, when I get it. Why are you such an ardent defender of an administration who defends only the interests of small part of the population (the ones that sponsored them to finance their campaign - mainly Texas oilmen, and big business). I think your statement above is built off of a false premise. This administration doesn’t represent the oil industry. If the oil industry has supported his candidacy – it is natural. Imagine that Gore would’ve succeeded. The energy problems of the US in the next decade would have made the US a third world country, not speaking about the compromise of the national sovereignty of the US. It is always good to have a competent administration, rather than an incompetent one. That’s why I ardently support this administration. I think never in the history of the US, the White House has had such a Five-Star Administration as it has currently. And the managerial skills of the president are obvious – he is being able to make the team work. Note that, normally, it is very difficult to have teams consisting of more than one five-star personalities function due to the multiple strong opinions. And what has been accomplished in 100 days by this administration is remarkable. He has been able to break through the deadlock in such sensitive issues as tax cuts and education. I have heard about the plan you call idiotic. First of all, it is not a plan, yet, but a thought. Your own reference claims that “It is highly unlikely that other members of the Bush administration share every aspect of Mr O'Neill's reformist visions.” Second, why is it idiotic? I think it is a very fair plan, assuming it would allow to collect enough revenues for the functioning of the Federal Government. Why should the shareholders be taxed twice? Why not to have just sales tax? Wouldn’t it be fairer? Why not to have people pay taxes based on the volume of merchandises they buy? I think the politization of the economic structure is one of the bloodiest things in the world history. And I have an impression that this is what you are proposing. P.S. As we have all learned in grade school, the best way of fighting CO2 is cultivating trees and other plants. I am cultivating about 70 trees in my front and back yards, and numerous plants. Are you doing any of this? Do you voluntere in any parks, etc, to promote any sorts of tree programs? [ May 20, 2001: Message edited by: MJ ]

quote:Originally posted by Domino: How about "God may not exist" ? Very good. In fact, it is a stronger statement than mine.

OK.

Did I say you did or said something wrong? Why all this defensiveness? [ May 20, 2001: Message edited by: MJ ]

I hope this would be no source of enmity here, I respect you as a person, but I will keep contact with my friends. No, as long as you can abide by the Code of Conduct of this forum, and would not exercise a pattern of annoying, homophobic, racist, dishonest, etc, behavior, no animosity would be exercised towards you. Besides, no animosity against anybody – if you don’t abide by our rules, we would deny you access. That’s all we would do. And then, immediately, we would forget about you. Allmost 3/4 of friends are from Iran, Anatolia, Armenia, Transcaucasus , central Asia and Caucasus, Spain and Italy are the second region on my list. Good for you. and furthermore I am a human from this world Really? Don’t human beings from this world practice the manner of knocking the door when entering and saying: “Hi! I am so and so. I wonder if …?” [ May 20, 2001: Message edited by: MJ ]

OK. But you didn't introduce yourself, right?

Tornado, Are you an ambassador in our forum? Could you introduce yourself, please?

Glad you found it.

How about "God may exist?" [ May 20, 2001: Message edited by: MJ ]

quote:Originally posted by Berj: No MJ, I wanted to say: the "Impressons ..." is a big topic. Yes, it is even bigger than "Israel and the Genocide."

quote:Originally posted by Berj: This is a BIG topic, isn't it. Berj, Did you mean "It was raining cats and dogs" is a BIG topic? [ May 20, 2001: Message edited by: MJ ]

We had severe thunderstorms and heavy rain yesterday. It was poring like from a bucket. My wife and me were driving home from our health club. We made a stop at an intersection due to red light. At that moment a lightening hit the traffic pole some 25 feet away from us. It was a spectacular sight. It was as if the pole was alive, and someone like Mike Tyson punched it into the face - its eyes went blank. My wife and me looked at each other and couldn’t speak of some 15 seconds.

Thorny, What was that thread about?