Відповіді

• 2002.10.02 | Yo Mama

  Re: Boucher - video dokazatel'stva prodazhi kolchugi

  Not sure what you are trying to say here with the title of your thread, PB.
  
  Boucher is a talking head, not a technical specialist. His reference to "videotape evidence" is a mistake--he is talking about the Melnychenko recordings, that's clear from the context. It's the same sort of imprecision that leads many people to say "tape recordings" when, as we all know, there are no tapes involved.
  згорнути/розгорнути гілку відповідей

  • 2002.10.02 | Peter Byrne

    Re: Boucher - video dokazatel'stva prodazhi kolchugi

    you're probably right. i keep on reading the transcript and wondering what the hell he is talking about.
    згорнути/розгорнути гілку відповідей

    • 2002.10.02 | Augusto

      Нічого, Пєтя, скоро до Гамерики Піскун поїде, він допоможе!

      Він знає, наприклад, як диван приєднати до диктофона, щоб вийшов диванофон, чи диктован.
      
      "До того ж, додав генпрокурор, до дивану, про який йшлося, фактично неможливо приєднати якийсь пристрій."

• 2002.10.02 | Augusto

  Тут відсилочка. Пєтя, ето не наука ракєта, не забувай!

  http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/dpb/2002/13973.htm
  
  Ти хлопець слизький, антиукраїнські налаштований, тебе (це ІМХО) потрібно перевіряти, бо ти і сам щось можеш дописати, нічого персонального, я просто випадково є українцем, був би я, наприклад, австралійським аборігеном, я б про тебе і не знав, не чув, не думав!

• 2002.10.02 | Михайло Свистович

  Re: Петер Бірне! Ви навіщо вводите в оману білоруських біженців?

  Історія з трьома біженцями з Білорусі продовжується.
  
  Помикавшись по партійних офісах і депутатах, вони, голодні і знесилені, побачили мою дружину під час протестних акцій, і вона, звичайно, не змогла їм відмовити у допомозі. Нарешті можна витерти піт з чола і сказати, що їм поки що є де жити. Точніше, тимчасово ми поселили їх у свого знайомого, українця, який знає білоруську мову, і який вчить цієї мови самих білорусів. Безкоштовно.
  
  Але політичний притулок їм тепер не світить, бо вони, коли їм відмовили в Київському управлінні з міграції, не подали апеляцію до Держкомітету, за що я їх сильно насварив.
  
  Вони мотивували це тим, що незгідні з таким законом, що подавати апеляцію чи судитись з чиновниками, це те саме, що судитись з Україною та її народом. І навели на свою користь такий аргумент: "От і Петер Бірне також сказав, що цей закон - дурниця".
  
  Закон може і поганий, але в підсумку білоруси вже не можуть отримати притулок в Україні, бо прострочили терміни подання апеляції, а звернутися за притулком до інших держав також не можуть, бо, згідно Конвенції про біженців, вони повинні були спочатку пройти процедуру отримання такого статусу в Україні, яка також підписала Конвенцію. І лише в разі відмови подавати таке прохання до інших держав. А так виходить, що вони самі не схотіли ставати біженцями в Україні і тепер знаходяться тут в становищі бомжів.
  
  Навіщо це зробив Петер Бірне? Замість того, щоб, як людина західна, пояснити їм, що держава та її чиновники і народ - це різні речі, що бюрократична процедура є об"єктивним явищем, якого не уникнути, він фактично підтримав їх совкове ставлення до держави як уособлення народу. Чим зробив людям ведмежу послугу.
  
  Але нічого. Світ не без добрих людей. Це я так скромно
  
  Житло на певний час ми їм знайшли, тепер ще й роботу знайдемо.
  згорнути/розгорнути гілку відповідей

  • 2002.10.02 | Peter Byrne

    Re: Петер Бірне! Ви навіщо вводите в оману білоруських біженців?

    kto-to chego-to ne ponyal.
    
    ya im skazal chto nado obratit'sya k fondu sorosa zdes' i poprosit' pomoshch'.
    
    po povodu zakonov, ne znayu.
    
    ya ne yurist, a zhurnalist i pishu chto oni ne soblyudayutsya i chto v ukraine otsutsvuet pravosudie, kak i v belarusi.
    
    mozhno ehto tsitorovat'.
    
    SMOOCH!
    згорнути/розгорнути гілку відповідей

    • 2002.10.02 | Михайло Свистович

      Re: А до чого тут фонд Сороса?

      Він притулку не дає.
      
      Peter Byrne пише:
      > kto-to chego-to ne ponyal.
      
      Можливо і навіть дуже ймовірно.
      
      >
      > po povodu zakonov, ne znayu.
      >
      > ya ne yurist, a zhurnalist i pishu chto oni ne soblyudayutsya i chto v ukraine otsutsvuet pravosudie, kak i v belarusi.
      
      Закон українська влада як раз і "соблюдала". Скрупульозно. І відмовила їм у притулку з причини пізнього подання прохання про надання статусу біженця.
      
      >
      > mozhno ehto tsitorovat'.
      
      Обов"язково. Як же без Ваших цитат
      
      
      А на майбутнє я порадив би Вам спочатку ретельно розібратися у справі, а потім щось казати, бо одне необережне слово може нанести велику шкоду, оскільки співрозмовник може не так його інтерпретувати. Вам, як іноземному журналісту, чомусь довіряють більше, ніж українським громадянам, тому це покладає на Вас додаткову моральну відповідальність.
      
      Я без претензій, але зважте на мій попередній абзац. Спочатку подумайте, як Ваше слово відгукнеться, а потім його промовляйте.
      згорнути/розгорнути гілку відповідей

      • 2002.10.02 | Peter Byrne

        Re: А до чого тут фонд Сороса?

        fond sorosa poluchaet den'gi ot dyadi sorosa dlya togo chtoby pomoch' lyudyam pomoch' sebe, vklyuchaya belarusov kotorye poteryalis' v ukraine po yakoby politicheskim prichinam (esli oni ne religioznye tozhe).
        
        est' spetsial'naya programa dlya ehtogo v fonde i otkrytyj fond. bolee togo, est' obyknovennaya elektronnaya pochta dlya togo chtob obosnovat' takuyu podderzhku chinovnikam dzhordzha esli nado.
        
        ya zapisalsya na priem duraka bystrytskogo, ostavil u nego moj telefon dlya togo chtob on svyazalsya po povodu belarusov. zhdu zvonka. govoryat chto on ochen' zanyatoj chelovek.
        
        pust' tolsty svyazhetsya s annette laborey esli u nego voprosy
        
        Paris 38 Boulevard Beaumarchais 75011 Paris France (33 1) 48 05 24 74 (33 1) 40 21 65 41 sorosfr@worldnet.fr
        
        SMOOCH!
        згорнути/розгорнути гілку відповідей

        • 2002.10.02 | Михайло Свистович

          Re: А хто такий tolsty?

          Peter Byrne пише:
          >
          > pust' tolsty svyazhetsya s annette laborey esli u nego voprosy
          >
          > Paris 38 Boulevard Beaumarchais 75011 Paris France (33 1) 48 05 24 74 (33 1) 40 21 65 41 sorosfr@worldnet.fr

      • 2002.10.03 | Елизабет Джоунс

        до чого тут фонд Сороса!

        брехня -
        
        Minsk
        March 16, 1997
        
        Reported by official Belarusian TV:
        
        US citizen Peter George Byrne, executive director of the Belarusian Soros Foundation, was refused entry into the Republic of Belarus by "competent" bodies, in accordance with Article 20, Paragraph 3 of the Belarusian law governing the legal situation of foreign citizens and persons without citizenship in the Republic of Belarus.
        The grounds for this decision were Mr. Byrne’s activities, which were deemed incompatible with his status in the country, that of a foreign citizen. This has been confirmed by Mr. Byrne’s repeated violations of the legislation of the host country. This includes the fact that he, a representative of a non-political non-governmental organisation, personally took part in illegal mass meetings held in Minsk. This can only be construed as interference in the internal affairs of a sovereign state.
        
        The measures implemented regarding US citizen Mr. Byrne should not be considered as an act intended to hinder the (sic) Soros Foundation Open Society Institute’s and Belarusian Soros Foundation’s activities in the Republic of Belarus, for they are non-governmental organisations which provide humanitarian aid for our country.
        
        It is known that Peter Byrne was a "personnel philanthropist" and, unlike the general practice inside the Soros Foundation, was one of the few foreigners holding an executive director position in a foreign representation of the Foundation. On the whole, Mr. Byrne paid no attention to Belarusian laws.
        
        From March 1995 until December 1996, he was resident in Belarus without registering, a required procedure for foreign nationals. This did not prevent him from attending almost all the illegal mass events organized by the opposition, both during the period when the old Constitution was in force and following the adoption of the new version. Perhaps his presence at all these rallies prevented Peter Byrne from registering, which is really a mere formality, but in general Peter was linking his future to Belarus. It is said that among friends he regularly dreamed of working in the State Department.
        
        Peter felt that in order to do so, all he had to do was force the Belarusian authorities to expel him from the country for his conduct and activities aimed at fighting totalitarianism. Peter’s dream came true, but not exactly the way he wanted it. He left on his own, but they wouldn’t let him back in again.
        
        All that remains is for us to wish him luck in speedily finding a job with the State Department. Obviously, Peter’s Belarusian friends will miss him, as well as his own and other people’s money which he distributed completely of his own free will.
        
        We may continue to hope that the management of the Soros Foundation will appoint a new representative from among those Belarusian citizens who were in Peter’s favour. These include extremely worthy people and a list will soon be published. Then it will be possible to elect either the most honest person out of them (the one who gained less than the others), or the "poorest" (the one who was awarded the fattest grant).
        
        We are also eagerly awaiting increased financial assistance for Belarus from the Soros Foundation, since we also believe in the open society.
        
        The majority of the Foundation’s employees truly wish to help our youthful Belarusian democracy. It is just a pity that the sharpest ones are attempting to buy it out in advance.
        згорнути/розгорнути гілку відповідей

        • 2002.10.03 | Peter Byrne

          Re: до чого тут фонд Сороса!

          predpochitayu drugoj istochnik...
          
          New York Times, July 12, 1997
          A Promoter of Democracy Angers the Authoritarians
          
          By Judith Miller
          
          MINSK, Belarus-- For the past decade, George Soros, the Hungarian-born
          financier and philanthropist, has spent more than a billion dollars
          promoting a free press and political pluralism abroad -- everything the
          world's authoritarian rulers despise. Now some of those political leaders
          are fighting back.
          In Albania, Kyrgyzstan, Serbia and Croatia, Mr. Soros's foundations
          have been accused of shielding spies and breaking currency laws. His
          employees have been assaulted and threatened with imprisonment or
          financial sanction for alleged crimes.
          Here in Belarus, Mr. Soros recently suspended operations after the
          Government, headed by Aleksandr Lukashenko, the popular but autocratic
          42-year-old President, fined a Soros foundation $3 million for alleged tax
          violations and seized its bank account.
          While expressing a desire to resolve the crisis here and lessen
          tensions with other authoritarian governments, the man whose own fortune
          was made in high-stakes business gambles is vowing not to back down.
          "We would like to continue working in Belarus, to do what we can
          wherever we can," Mr. Soros said in a recent interview in New York. "But
          we insist that all our foundations remain independent. We will not play by
          Mr. Lukashenko's rules."
          The growing pressure on Mr. Soros's philanthropic empire, which
          stretches from South Africa to Haiti and employs 1,300 people in 24
          countries, with two regional offices in New York and Budapest, appears to
          have only stiffened his resolve.
          This year he opened five new offices in Central Asia -- Mongolia,
          Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Azerbaijan and Armenia -- and one in Guatemala,
          his first in Latin America. And soon he is to open nine new foundations in
          southern Africa, he said, expanding the number of countries in which his
          foundations are active to 40.
          Moreover, given his growing personal fortune, which friends estimate at
          $5 billion, his efforts are likely to continue at current levels for at
          least a decade, and perhaps for two.
          While American foreign aid in the last decade has been cut in half in
          real terms, Mr. Soros, 66, recently signed a 20-year lease on his new
          headquarters in New York.
          In Central Europe alone, he spent more than $123 million between 1989
          and 1994 trying to help democracy take root -- roughly five times the sum
          spent by the United States Government's chief democracy-promoting
          foundation, the National Endowment for Democracy.
          
          Unlike United States Government development aid, about 80 percent of
          which is given to American contractors and consultants, most money Mr.
          Soros distributes is given quickly and with few strings to local groups
          and individuals, says Thomas Carothers, a former State Department lawyer
          at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, because local activists
          are less expensive and more efficient at spreading the democratic,
          free-market mantra.
          Mr. Soros's philanthropy has its critics. Some say it is too impulsive
          and mercurial, too arrogant and micromanaged, too confined to friends on
          the left of center and not as open to public scrutiny.
          Others criticize his investment in countries to which he gives; Mr.
          Soros's defenders reply by citing strict rules within the foundations for
          avoiding conflicts of interest.
          Mr. Soros noted, for example, that his investment company sold its 6
          percent interest in Alliant Techsystems Inc., a Minneapolis weapons
          manufacturer, because Alliant made land mines, a direct conflict with his
          program to ban land mines.
          But Mr. Soros has permitted his foundation in Russia to own GTS, now
          the second-largest telecommunications company in Russia, because the
          profits accrue to the foundation, not to him or to his investment funds.
          
          The Personal Touch, And Its Perils
          
          Some of those involved with his foundations wonder whether the
          financier is spreading himself too thin.
          "His Central European giving has been effective partly because of his
          personal involvement and familiarity with the region and its problems,"
          said a long-time associate, noting that Mr. Soros visits Eastern Europe
          about five times a year. "But can he possibly have the same passion for
          nine new African countries?"
          Mr. Soros himself acknowledges that he has had setbacks, including, for
          example, his foundations in Russia, which he was forced to restructure
          after discovering that employees were diverting foundation funds into
          Swiss bank accounts and using them to buy luxury cars.
          
          "I never have regrets," Mr. Soros said, "about having spent a lot of
          money trying to make things better." The current struggle in Belarus is
          shaping up as a test of Mr. Soros's staying power and a benchmark for him
          and perhaps for Central Europe.
          Serbia last year revoked his foundation's permit before finally
          restoring it under Western pressure. Croatia has put three Soros
          foundation employees on trial, charged with currency violations, a
          criminal offense.
          
          But no government has ever forced a Soros foundation to close permanently.
          
          "If Lukashenko can take Soros down, no one is safe," said Andrei
          Sannikov, Belarus's former Deputy Foreign Minister, who quit his post last
          year. "Perhaps not even in Russia, where our President's right-wing allies
          in Moscow sit and wait for Boris Yeltsin to die and their nationalist
          moment to come."
          Standing up to the West by taking on a man as powerful as George Soros
          would enhance Mr. Lukashenko's standing among hard-line nationalists,
          another diplomat said. "Kicking out Soros," he added, "is like shutting
          down General Motors."
          
          Moscow Is So Far, Yet So Near
          
          Mr. Soros's troubles in Belarus can be traced to the 1994 elections,
          when Mr. Lukashenko, a former boss of a collective farm, won an
          overwhelming victory.
          While Belarus's previous Government had stressed national identity and
          sought to free the country from Russian control, Mr. Lukashenko campaigned
          on a platform of reunifying Belarus with the Russian heartland and its
          fellow Slavs, while ending corruption.
          After taking office, he set out to restore at least the symbols of
          Russian rule, and appeared determined, one diplomat said, to make this
          Kansas-sized nation of 10 million people a "Soviet theme park."
          This year he and President Yeltsin signed a "unity" agreement, though
          it was watered down at the last minute at the insistence of Mr. Yeltsin's
          liberal advisers, who dislike Mr. Lukashenko and fear his right-wing
          Russian friends. But Mr. Lukashenko lost no time in (literally)
          re-hoisting the red flag.
          "We have McDonald's, but no freedom of assembly," said Mr. Sannikov,
          the former Deputy Foreign Minister. "People have subsidence potatoes and
          vodka; the streets are clean and well-maintained. Lukashenko doesn't kill
          massively because he doesn't have to. This is the new face of dictatorship
          in Europe."
          To express its displeasure, Washington has suspended some $40 million
          in aid. Europe, too, has frozen aid, as have the World Bank and the
          International Monetary Fund, all so far without visible political effect.
          A report in April from the Organization for Security and Cooperation in
          Europe accused Belarussians of "constructing a system of totalitarian
          government" and found a "clear pattern" that the Government was using tax
          audits and fines to silence opposition.
          The report also criticized a referendum last November that allows the
          President to rule by decree, and permits random arrests of opposition
          leaders. The new definition of "order" was characterized as "a complete
          lack of public expression of any views not authorized by the authorities."
          
          Tax Auditors As Police Officers
          
          It is no accident, diplomats say, that the first person expelled from
          Belarus was Peter G. Byrne, an American who directed the Belarus Soros
          Foundation, which finances about 80 percent of the country's tiny
          independent sector. (In Belarus there are 1,115 officially registered
          associations not controlled by the Government, only a handful of which are
          politically active or foreign sponsored.)
          Mr. Lukashenko has set his tax collectors against virtually every major
          foreign-supported foundation, as well as the independent news media,
          arguing that they support the opposition.
          "Lukashenko's gone over the edge," said the Rev. Paul Moore, an
          American who heads Citihope International, a New York charity that has
          provided more than $5 million in medicine since 1992 and which was
          recently told it must pay tax on its contributions. "As of now, we are out
          of business in Belarus."
          The Belarussian Soros Foundation made 5,000 grants totaling just over
          $6 million last year.
          One of the largest went to the foundation's "Step by Step" education
          project, which enrolls 1,000 Belarussians from kindergarten to high
          school. The program, which encourages children to think for themselves,
          had won the support of two education ministers and four deputy ministers
          since its inception four years ago.
          But problems abounded even before the Government charged the foundation
          with tax fraud, said Irinia Lapitskaya, its director. Customs officers,
          for instance, kept a $5,000 wooden play house for Kindergarten No. 56 in
          Minsk in storage for more than a year until hefty duties were paid.
          Also in jeopardy is Mr. Soros's support for high school debates,
          Belarus's only law library, the "Transformation of the Humanities"
          project, which oversaw the selection and publication of 53 new textbooks
          last year, and a $500,000 program to link Belarus to the Internet, a
          mainstay of Mr. Soros's philanthropy.
          "The irony is we have connected state institutions to the Internet, but
          not yet the independent sector," said Igor Boskin, the foundation's
          technical director. "So from the Government's standpoint, this is a
          perfect place to stop our work."
          Ivan I. Antanovich, the Foreign Minister, insisted in an interview that
          Belarus was becoming more democratic, but slowly. He said Mr. Soros had
          been "let down by his staff," who he said were supporting opposition
          political groups. In addition, he contended, the foundation had been
          "extremely careless with financial matters," a charge for which he offered
          no evidence.
          "The foundation has not financed nor will it finance the opposition,"
          Mr. Soros replied in the interview. "We insist on preserving our
          independence. We would like to stay in Belarus, but not at any price."
          
          Looking Ahead, Mostly in Hope
          
          If Mr. Soros regrets his decision to spend two-thirds of his time and
          half of his annual income on promoting democracy abroad and a more
          tolerant society in the United States, there is no sign of it.
          He exudes the quiet confidence of a man who knows his access to almost
          any world leader, including President Clinton, is just a phone call away.
          In the interview, he said his philanthropy was still most heavily
          influenced by his former professor, Sir Karl Popper, a philosopher who
          wrote a renowned critique of Marx and Marxism.
          It was Popper's emphasis on addressing "unintended consequences" that
          led to some of Mr. Soros's most creative giving -- the $127 million in
          grants he made between 1992 and 1996 to Russian scientists to discourage
          them from selling their nuclear know-how to the highest bidder, for
          instance; or his $50 million gift in 1992 to help alleviate the suffering
          of Bosnia's civilians.
          But he acknowledged that he was increasingly concerned about political
          developments in the Balkans and efforts by East European governments to
          centralize power.
          Mr. Soros is deeply disappointed in Washington's failure to seize what
          he saw as a "historic moment" created by the fall of Communism. The West,
          he said, has failed to pour money and resources into bolstering the former
          Communist nations' pluralistic, tolerant and independent forces -- the
          forces that underpin Western democracies.
          At the same time, he said, he is encouraged by the "growing social
          cohesion" of the people of the former Soviet bloc.
          Yes, he had known failure, Mr. Soros said. "But I'm willing to have the
          failures to get the successes," he continued. "I was just naive in
          thinking that it was only a question of time before the U.S. Government
          and the American people would feel the same."

    • 2002.10.02 | Augusto

      Ні фіга, ти великий злий прахвесі-анальний шпигун та експерт!

      Peter Byrne пише:
      
      > ya ne yurist, a zhurnalist i pishu chto oni ne soblyudayutsya i chto v ukraine otsutsvuet pravosudie, kak i v belarusi.
      
      
      Ти ж закінчив ФСБ, ЦРУ, БМВ, Сорбонну та Лувр! Чи ти збрехав? Пєтя?! Це ж ніхарашо так! Як ти міг?!!! Що тепер люди подумають?! Чи ти з тих, кому в очі сцють, а вони радіють?!
      
      Smooch!
      
      P.S. Подивись, який великий смуч!
      згорнути/розгорнути гілку відповідей

      • 2002.10.02 | Горицвіт

        лінгвістичне питання

        що таке smooch?
        згорнути/розгорнути гілку відповідей

        • 2002.10.03 | НеДохтор

          Re: лінгвістичне питання

          Горицвіт пише:
          > що таке smooch?
          
          
          "smooch" = "цьом-цьом"
          Поцілунок на прощання.
          
          В яке місце вони кожен раз цілуються в кінці допису - не знаю :-).
          згорнути/розгорнути гілку відповідей

          • 2002.10.03 | Горицвіт

            дякую (-)

        • 2002.10.03 | Мертві Бджоли Загудуть

          лінгвістична відповідь

          слово "smooch" - це
          сленговий американський термін поширений серед гендерних альтернативних меншин на Західному узбережжі США, який також набуває популярности й на Східному узбережжі. Саме таким словом пасивні гомосексуалісти та/чи лезбіянки вітають своїх активних партнерів/партнерок.
          
          Чому Підєр Бірнь настійливо використовує це слово наприкінці своїх посилань залишається для нас повною загадкою. Хоча, можна припускати, що у такий завуальований спосіб він (?) намагається привчити українську аудиторію на форумі Майдану не тільки до його латиничної москальскої мови, але й до його особистих альтернативних уподобань.
          
          Цур йому пек! (а не "смуч"!)
          згорнути/розгорнути гілку відповідей

          • 2002.10.03 | Горицвіт

            дякую (-)