Вход на сайт
Про кран и воду
27.08.05 07:18
в ответ балта 27.08.05 07:05
Так что, теория относительности-это продажная девка сионизма?
~~~~~~~~~/////Учите ТО, товарищ! Выучив это передовое учение, Вы не только увидите динозавров, но и сможете читать их выступления в поддержку теорий Энштейна.
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Кожинов или Попов (кстати, кто это?)
~~~~~~~~~~~~ПЕТР ПОПОВ, кандидат технических наук.
А про Коженова , кто он и чем занимаеця написано в статье. Если она на вас подействовала как краснаная тряпка на... и глаза застило....то я могу повторить то место в статье, где говориця о Козинове..... Его обнародовал известный русский писатель и публицист Вадим Кожинов.....
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Это что часть всемирного еврейского заговора?
~~~~~~~~~ На всемирный не тянет, больше похоже на местечковый....
~~~~~~~~~/////Учите ТО, товарищ! Выучив это передовое учение, Вы не только увидите динозавров, но и сможете читать их выступления в поддержку теорий Энштейна.
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Кожинов или Попов (кстати, кто это?)
~~~~~~~~~~~~ПЕТР ПОПОВ, кандидат технических наук.
А про Коженова , кто он и чем занимаеця написано в статье. Если она на вас подействовала как краснаная тряпка на... и глаза застило....то я могу повторить то место в статье, где говориця о Козинове..... Его обнародовал известный русский писатель и публицист Вадим Кожинов.....
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Это что часть всемирного еврейского заговора?
~~~~~~~~~ На всемирный не тянет, больше похоже на местечковый....
27.08.05 07:24
в ответ fotog 26.08.05 14:18
например евреев довоенной Германии невозможно было отличить от немцев, по тем пунктам которые вы написали, просто существует нечто, что всегда их рано или поздно выделяет от других народов, это сложный вопрос.
вот вы и сами выкатили... я же вам про это же... очень сложный вопрос...
вот вы и сами выкатили... я же вам про это же... очень сложный вопрос...
майнер майнунг нах...
27.08.05 07:30
в ответ fotog 25.08.05 23:02
http://www.br-online.de/bayern-heute/thema/juden-in-bayern/nachkrieg-sub3.xml;js...
Entschädigung I: Rechtsanspruch statt Almosen in US-Zone
Die Initiative zur materiellen Wiedergutmachung ging von der alliierten Militärregierung aus. In der US-Zone, also auch in Bayern, wurden die ersten gesetzlichen Regelungen getroffen. Dabei ging man von der Überlegung aus, dass man die Verfolgten des Nazi-Regimes nicht durch gönnerhaft gewährte Fürsorge-Gelder abspeisen konnte, sondern dass sie einen Rechtsanspruch auf Entschädigung hatten. Dazu erließ die US-Zone 1947 das Sonderfondsgesetz, 1949 wurde es vom Entschädigungsgesetz abgelöst. In den anderen westlichen Zonen gab es entsprechende Festlegungen erst Anfang der 50er-Jahre. Sie blieben allerdings weit hinter dem Standard der US-Zone zurück.
Die Entschädigung umfasst etwa 80 Prozent der ausgegebenen Mittel für die "Wiedergutmachung", die Rückerstattung 20 Prozent. Bis heute wurden umgerechnet knapp 60 Milliarden Euro im Rahmen der "Wiedergutmachung" ausgegeben, etwa 40 Prozent davon fallen auf den Staat Israel bzw. Empfänger in Israel.
Und noch ein Tatsache ist in diesem Zusammenhang interessant: Keine einzige deutsche Nachkriegsregierung forderte jemals geflüchtete Juden zur Rückkehr nach Deutschland auf.
Entschädigung I: Rechtsanspruch statt Almosen in US-Zone
Die Initiative zur materiellen Wiedergutmachung ging von der alliierten Militärregierung aus. In der US-Zone, also auch in Bayern, wurden die ersten gesetzlichen Regelungen getroffen. Dabei ging man von der Überlegung aus, dass man die Verfolgten des Nazi-Regimes nicht durch gönnerhaft gewährte Fürsorge-Gelder abspeisen konnte, sondern dass sie einen Rechtsanspruch auf Entschädigung hatten. Dazu erließ die US-Zone 1947 das Sonderfondsgesetz, 1949 wurde es vom Entschädigungsgesetz abgelöst. In den anderen westlichen Zonen gab es entsprechende Festlegungen erst Anfang der 50er-Jahre. Sie blieben allerdings weit hinter dem Standard der US-Zone zurück.
Die Entschädigung umfasst etwa 80 Prozent der ausgegebenen Mittel für die "Wiedergutmachung", die Rückerstattung 20 Prozent. Bis heute wurden umgerechnet knapp 60 Milliarden Euro im Rahmen der "Wiedergutmachung" ausgegeben, etwa 40 Prozent davon fallen auf den Staat Israel bzw. Empfänger in Israel.
Und noch ein Tatsache ist in diesem Zusammenhang interessant: Keine einzige deutsche Nachkriegsregierung forderte jemals geflüchtete Juden zur Rückkehr nach Deutschland auf.
27.08.05 07:37
в ответ fotog 25.08.05 23:02
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/US-Israel/foreign_aid.html
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/US-Israel/U.S._Assistance_to_Israel1...
It is my responsibility to see that our policy in Israel fits in with our policy throughout the world; second, it is my desire to help build in Palestine a strong, prosperous, free and independent democratic state. It must be large enough, free enough, and strong enough to make its people self-supporting and secure," President Truman said in a speech October 28, 1948.
Truman's commitment was quickly tested after Israel's victory in its War of Independence when she applied to the U.S. for economic aid to help absorb immigrants. President Truman responded by approving a $135 million Export-Import Bank loan and the sale of surplus commodities to Israel. In those early years of Israel's statehood (also today), U.S. aid was seen as a means of promoting peace.
In 1951, Congress voted to help Israel cope with the economic burdens imposed by the influx of Jewish refugees from the displaced persons camps in Europe and from the ghettos of the Arab countries. Arabs then complained the U.S. was neglecting them, though they had no interest in or use for American aid then. In 1951, Syria rejected offers of U.S. aid. Oil-rich Iraq and Saudi Arabia did not need U.S. economic assistance, and Jordan was, until the late 1950s, the ward of Great Britain. After 1957, when the United States assumed responsibility for supporting Jordan and resumed economic aid to Egypt, assistance to the Arab states soared. Also, the United States was by far the biggest contributor of aid to the Palestinians through UNRWA, a status that continues to the present.
U.S. economic grants to Israel ended in 1959. U.S. aid to Israel from then until 1985 consisted largely of loans, which Israel repaid, and surplus commodities, which Israel bought. Israel began buying arms from the United States in 1962, but did not receive any grant military assistance until after the 1973 Yom Kippur War. As a result, Israel had to go deeply into debt to finance its economic development and arms procurement. The decision to convert military aid to grants that year was based on the prevailing view in Congress that without a strong Israel, war in the Middle East was more likely, and that the U.S. would face higher direct expenditures in such an eventuality.
Israel has received more direct aid from the United States since World War II than any other country, but the amounts for the first half of this period were relatively small. Between 1949 and 1973, the U.S. provided Israel with an average of about $122 million a year, a total of $3.1 billion (and actually more than $1 billion of that was loans for military equipment in 1971-73) . Prior to 1971, Israel received a total of only $277 million in military aid, all in the form of loans as credit sales. The bulk of the economic aid was also lent to Israel. By comparison, the Arab states received nearly three times as much aid before 1971, $4.4 billion, or $170 million per year. Moreover, unlike Israel, which receives nearly all its aid from the United States, Arab nations have gotten assistance from Asia, Eastern Europe, the Soviet Union and the European Community. Congress first designated a specific amount of aid for Israel (an "earmark") in 1971.
Meeting Israel's Special Needs
Since 1974, Israel has received nearly $80 billion in assistance, including three special aid packages. The first followed the signing of the Israel-Egypt peace treaty and Israel's withdrawal from the Sinai. The redeployment of Israeli forces and rebuilding of air bases in the Negev cost $5 billion. To partially compensate for this sacrifice, Israel received $3 billion ($2.2 billion of which was in the form of high-interest loans) in U.S. aid in 1979.
The second special package was approved in 1985, following a severe economic crisis in Israel, which sent inflation rates soaring as high as 445 percent. The $1.5 billion in emergency assistance-disbursed in two installments, in 1985 and 1986-was provided as part of Israel's economic stabilization program, which was implemented under the guidance of the U.S.-Israel Joint Economic Development Group (JEDG).
The most recent extraordinary package was approved in 1996 to help Israel fight terrorism. Israel is to receive a total of $100 million, divided equally between fiscal years 1996 and 1997.
Regular Economic and Military Assistance
Israel's economic aid changed from the Commodity Import Program (CIP), which provides funds to foreign nations for the purchase of U.S. commodities, to a direct cash transfer in 1979. In return, Israel provided the Agency for International Development with assurances that the dollar level of Israel's non-defense imports from the U.S. would exceed the level of economic assistance granted Israel in any given year. Thus, Israel guaranteed that U.S. suppliers would not be disadvantaged by the termination of Israel's CIP Program.
Starting with fiscal year 1987, Israel annually received $1.2 billion in all grant economic aid and $1.8 billion in all grant military assistance. In 1998, Israel offered to voluntarily reduce its dependence on U.S. economic aid. According to an agreement reached with the Clinton Administration and Congress, the $1.2 billion economic aid package will be reduced by $120 million each year so that it will be phased out in ten years. Half of the annual savings in economic assistance each year ($60 million) will be added to Israel's military aid package in recognition of its increased security needs. In 1999, Israel received $1.08 billion in economic aid and $1.86 billion in military aid. In 2000, economic aid is scheduled to be reduced to $949.1 million and military aid will increase to $1.92 billion.
For several years, most of Israel's economic aid went to pay off old debts. In 1984, foreign aid legislation included the Cranston Amendment (named after its Senate sponsor), which said the U.S. would provide Israel with economic assistance "not less than" the amount Israel owes the United States in annual debt service payments. The Cranston Amendment was left out of the FY1999 and subsequent appropriations bills. At that time Israel received $1.2 billion in ESF and owed only $328 million in debt service so the amendment was no longer needed.
Roughly 26 percent of what Israel receives in Foreign Military Financing (FMF) can be spent in Israel for military procurement. From FY1988 to FY 1990, Israel was allowed to use $400 million in Israel. From FY1991 to FY1998, the amount was increased to $475 million. As U.S. military aid to Israel increased, according to the agreement to cut economic aid, the amout set aside for defense purchases in Israel has increased (but the percentage has remained roughly the same). In FY2004, the figure is $568 million. The remaining 74 percent of FMF is spent in the United States to generate profits and jobs. More than 1,000 companies in 47 states, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico have signed contracts worth billions of dollars through this program.
At the end of 1998, Israel requested an additional $1.2 billion in aid to fund moving troops and military installations out of the occupied territories as called for in the October 23, 1998, Wye agreement. Israel received $600 million of this in military aid in FY1999 and $300 million in each fiscal year 2000 and 2001 (see Wye funding table).
In February 2003, for the first time, Congress voted to cut aid to Israel against the wishes of the pro-Israel lobby and the government of Israel. The 0.65 percent deduction was not aimed at Israel; however, it was an across the board cut of all foreign aid programs for fiscal year 2003. The lobby and government also suffered a defeat when Congress deleted an administration request for an extra $200 million to help Israel fight terrorism. Even while cutting aid to Israel (which still was budgeted at $2.1 billion for military aid and $600 million for economic assistance), Congress included a number of provisions in the aid bill viewed as favorable to Israel, including a provision that bars federal assistance to a future Palestinian state until the current Palestinian leadership is replaced, and that state demonstrates a commitment to peaceful coexistence with Israel, and takes measures to combat terrorism.
The setbacks were also temporary as the Administration approved a supplementary aid request in 2003 that included $1 billion in FMF and $9 billion in loan guarantees to aid Israel's economic recovery and compensate for the cost of military preparations associated with the war in Iraq. One quarter of the FMF is a cash grant and three quarters will be spent in the United States. The loan guarantees are spread over three years and must be spent within Israel's pre-June 1967 borders. Each year, an amount equal to the funds Israel spends on settlements in the territories will be deducted from the loan amount, along with all fees and subsidies.
Altogether, since 1949, Israel has received more than $90 billion in assistance. This includes the three special allocations, the $10 billion in loan guarantees (spread over five years) approved in 1992, and a variety of other smaller assistance-related accounts, such as refugee resettlement ($80 million annually from 1992-1998 and then reduced to $70 million in FY1999 and $60 million in FY2000 because of declining numbers of refugees) and cooperative development programs (a total of $186 million since 1981).
The total does not include funds for joint military projects like the Arrow missile (for which Israel has received more than $1 billion in grants since 1986), which are provided through the Defense budget. President Bush requested $60 million for the Arrow for FY2003 and $136 million in FY2004. The United States also has provided $53 million for the Boost Phase Intercept program and $139 million for the Tactical High Energy Laser program under development in Israel to complement the Arrow.
Though the totals are impressive, the value of assistance to Israel has been eroded by inflation. While aid levels remained constant in total dollars from 1987 until 1999, the real value steadily declined. On the other side of the coin, Israel does receive aid on more favorable terms than other nations. For example, all economic aid is given directly to the Israeli government rather than allocated under a specific program. Also, starting in 1982, Israel began to receive all its economic aid in a lump sum early in the fiscal year instead of in quarterly installments as is done for other countries (for 2000, Israel received $1.37 billion of its military aid in the first month and the remaining $550 million was delayed for budgetary reasons). Israel is not required to provide an accounting of how the funds are used. Israel also receives offsets on FMS purchases (U.S. contractors agree to offset some of the cost of military equipment by buying components or materials from Israel).
As of December 31, 2001, Israel owed the United States government $1.977 billion in direct economic and military loans.
See also the U.S. Assistance to Israel table.
http://www.usaid.gov/policy/budget/cbj2006/ane/il.html
Objective SO Number FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2006
Israel Cash Transfer 271-001 477,168 357,120 240,000
Total (in thousands of dollars) 477,168 357,120 240,000
The Development Challenge: The close bilateral relationship that the United States has with Israel serves the national security interests of both countries. The Government of Israel's (GOI) political and economic stability continues to be a key objective of U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East.
The fundamental USAID objective in Israel is to support the Israeli economy, a task of special importance as the Government of Israel implements a series of ambitious reforms required for financial stability and sustainable growth. Though the U.S. cash transfer is not conditioned on economic policy reform, the United States continues to encourage Israeli efforts to reduce government spending and deficits, improve tax and public wage structures, increase privatization, reform labor markets, and liberalize its trade regime. Over the last year, export competitiveness has improved, and inflation has been reduced. Expanding business investment and governmental infrastructure investment, coupled with current export growth, will help Israel reach its gross domestic product (GDP) growth rate potential. U.S. assistance provides Israel the funds it needs to promote its economic reforms. The United States also supports Israel's economic and political stability and helps relieve the impact of the economic burdens Israel has incurred due to its isolation in the region and the unstable security situation in the Middle East.
Israel's economy responded favorably in the previous decade to the restructuring imposed after the crises and hyperinflation of the mid-1980s. Since 1990 the economy has become increasingly sophisticated and technologically advanced. In FY 1999, Congress began a structured, steady yet gradual reduction of the economic assistance earmark in recognition of this progress.
Israel's economic boom in the 1990s was based on a thriving high-technology sector, sharply increased investment by venture capital firms, the opening of new markets to Israeli exports, and a record level of tourism. With the downturn in the global economy, problems in the high-technology sector, and a worsening security situation in Israel, the period of 2000-2003 saw increasing unemployment and declining tax revenues. In addition to the obvious effect on tourism, the ongoing violence resulting from the Israel-Palestinian conflict impacted foreign investment and overall economic confidence. The end of 2003 provided some positive signs, however. After nearly three years of economic recession (GDP contracted by 0.5% in 2001 and 0.9% in 2002), the economy grew by 1.2% in 2003. Growth reached approximately 3.8% in 2004, although this economic recovery remains vulnerable to global economic developments and Israel's security situation.
The United States Government (USG) strongly supports the GOI's economic reform measures and underscores its support at the U.S.-Israel Joint Economic Development Group (JEDG), which usually meets annually. Beyond maintaining a stable macroeconomic environment, the JEDG provides a forum to encourage the GOI to reform its financial sector, reduce labor market rigidities, proceed with further trade liberalization, and accelerate its privatization program. The provision of $9 billion in loan guarantees over fiscal years 2003 - 2007, with an available rollover provision in 2008, was authorized in the Emergency Wartime Supplemental Appropriations Act of 2003 and the Foreign Operations Appropriations Act of 2004. The provision of the guarantees, which is predicated on the continued implementation of the GOI's reform program and declining government deficits, will further contribute to Israel's economic and political stability.
The USAID Program: The United States, acting through USAID, will provide $240,000,000 in FY 2006 Economic Support Funds (ESF) to Israel as a cash transfer. These funds will be used by Israel to repay debt to the United States, including refinanced Foreign Military Sales debt, and to purchase goods and services, as a general rule, from the United States. The United States will continue to encourage Israel to reduce government spending and deficits, improve tax and public wage structures, increase privatization, reform labor markets, and liberalize its trade regime.
Other Program Elements: In addition to and separate from the cash transfer to Israel, there are a number of programs managed by USAID's Bureau for Economic Growth, Agriculture and Trade that involve Israel. The Cooperative Development Research (CDR) Program is a peer-reviewed, competitive grants program. It funds the collaborative research of scientists from Israel, the United States, and their counterparts in developing countries throughout the world on topics relevant to the needs of the developing countries. The Middle East Regional Cooperation (MERC) Program is a competitive grants program that supports joint research projects between Arab and Israeli scientists on topics relevant to the development of the Middle East region. Both MERC and CDR are directly managed by USAID and involve a wide variety of technical topics and institutions. CDR and MERC are presently funding nearly 100 separate grants, including projects on water resource management for agricultural and other uses, development of new crops, protection against agricultural pests, protection of the environment, development of aquatic resources, and the study of diseases and other health threats common to many developing countries.
Also, the American Schools and Hospitals Abroad (ASHA) program provides assistance to overseas institutions to demonstrate U.S. advances in educational and medical technology and practices in the areas of research, training, and patient care. In Israel, ASHA provides grants, on a competitive basis, to schools, hospitals, libraries, and other academic and medical institutions overseas to upgrade and enhance their research and training facilities.
Other Donors: The United States is the largest bilateral donor to Israel.
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/US-Israel/U.S._Assistance_to_Israel1...
It is my responsibility to see that our policy in Israel fits in with our policy throughout the world; second, it is my desire to help build in Palestine a strong, prosperous, free and independent democratic state. It must be large enough, free enough, and strong enough to make its people self-supporting and secure," President Truman said in a speech October 28, 1948.
Truman's commitment was quickly tested after Israel's victory in its War of Independence when she applied to the U.S. for economic aid to help absorb immigrants. President Truman responded by approving a $135 million Export-Import Bank loan and the sale of surplus commodities to Israel. In those early years of Israel's statehood (also today), U.S. aid was seen as a means of promoting peace.
In 1951, Congress voted to help Israel cope with the economic burdens imposed by the influx of Jewish refugees from the displaced persons camps in Europe and from the ghettos of the Arab countries. Arabs then complained the U.S. was neglecting them, though they had no interest in or use for American aid then. In 1951, Syria rejected offers of U.S. aid. Oil-rich Iraq and Saudi Arabia did not need U.S. economic assistance, and Jordan was, until the late 1950s, the ward of Great Britain. After 1957, when the United States assumed responsibility for supporting Jordan and resumed economic aid to Egypt, assistance to the Arab states soared. Also, the United States was by far the biggest contributor of aid to the Palestinians through UNRWA, a status that continues to the present.
U.S. economic grants to Israel ended in 1959. U.S. aid to Israel from then until 1985 consisted largely of loans, which Israel repaid, and surplus commodities, which Israel bought. Israel began buying arms from the United States in 1962, but did not receive any grant military assistance until after the 1973 Yom Kippur War. As a result, Israel had to go deeply into debt to finance its economic development and arms procurement. The decision to convert military aid to grants that year was based on the prevailing view in Congress that without a strong Israel, war in the Middle East was more likely, and that the U.S. would face higher direct expenditures in such an eventuality.
Israel has received more direct aid from the United States since World War II than any other country, but the amounts for the first half of this period were relatively small. Between 1949 and 1973, the U.S. provided Israel with an average of about $122 million a year, a total of $3.1 billion (and actually more than $1 billion of that was loans for military equipment in 1971-73) . Prior to 1971, Israel received a total of only $277 million in military aid, all in the form of loans as credit sales. The bulk of the economic aid was also lent to Israel. By comparison, the Arab states received nearly three times as much aid before 1971, $4.4 billion, or $170 million per year. Moreover, unlike Israel, which receives nearly all its aid from the United States, Arab nations have gotten assistance from Asia, Eastern Europe, the Soviet Union and the European Community. Congress first designated a specific amount of aid for Israel (an "earmark") in 1971.
Meeting Israel's Special Needs
Since 1974, Israel has received nearly $80 billion in assistance, including three special aid packages. The first followed the signing of the Israel-Egypt peace treaty and Israel's withdrawal from the Sinai. The redeployment of Israeli forces and rebuilding of air bases in the Negev cost $5 billion. To partially compensate for this sacrifice, Israel received $3 billion ($2.2 billion of which was in the form of high-interest loans) in U.S. aid in 1979.
The second special package was approved in 1985, following a severe economic crisis in Israel, which sent inflation rates soaring as high as 445 percent. The $1.5 billion in emergency assistance-disbursed in two installments, in 1985 and 1986-was provided as part of Israel's economic stabilization program, which was implemented under the guidance of the U.S.-Israel Joint Economic Development Group (JEDG).
The most recent extraordinary package was approved in 1996 to help Israel fight terrorism. Israel is to receive a total of $100 million, divided equally between fiscal years 1996 and 1997.
Regular Economic and Military Assistance
Israel's economic aid changed from the Commodity Import Program (CIP), which provides funds to foreign nations for the purchase of U.S. commodities, to a direct cash transfer in 1979. In return, Israel provided the Agency for International Development with assurances that the dollar level of Israel's non-defense imports from the U.S. would exceed the level of economic assistance granted Israel in any given year. Thus, Israel guaranteed that U.S. suppliers would not be disadvantaged by the termination of Israel's CIP Program.
Starting with fiscal year 1987, Israel annually received $1.2 billion in all grant economic aid and $1.8 billion in all grant military assistance. In 1998, Israel offered to voluntarily reduce its dependence on U.S. economic aid. According to an agreement reached with the Clinton Administration and Congress, the $1.2 billion economic aid package will be reduced by $120 million each year so that it will be phased out in ten years. Half of the annual savings in economic assistance each year ($60 million) will be added to Israel's military aid package in recognition of its increased security needs. In 1999, Israel received $1.08 billion in economic aid and $1.86 billion in military aid. In 2000, economic aid is scheduled to be reduced to $949.1 million and military aid will increase to $1.92 billion.
For several years, most of Israel's economic aid went to pay off old debts. In 1984, foreign aid legislation included the Cranston Amendment (named after its Senate sponsor), which said the U.S. would provide Israel with economic assistance "not less than" the amount Israel owes the United States in annual debt service payments. The Cranston Amendment was left out of the FY1999 and subsequent appropriations bills. At that time Israel received $1.2 billion in ESF and owed only $328 million in debt service so the amendment was no longer needed.
Roughly 26 percent of what Israel receives in Foreign Military Financing (FMF) can be spent in Israel for military procurement. From FY1988 to FY 1990, Israel was allowed to use $400 million in Israel. From FY1991 to FY1998, the amount was increased to $475 million. As U.S. military aid to Israel increased, according to the agreement to cut economic aid, the amout set aside for defense purchases in Israel has increased (but the percentage has remained roughly the same). In FY2004, the figure is $568 million. The remaining 74 percent of FMF is spent in the United States to generate profits and jobs. More than 1,000 companies in 47 states, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico have signed contracts worth billions of dollars through this program.
At the end of 1998, Israel requested an additional $1.2 billion in aid to fund moving troops and military installations out of the occupied territories as called for in the October 23, 1998, Wye agreement. Israel received $600 million of this in military aid in FY1999 and $300 million in each fiscal year 2000 and 2001 (see Wye funding table).
In February 2003, for the first time, Congress voted to cut aid to Israel against the wishes of the pro-Israel lobby and the government of Israel. The 0.65 percent deduction was not aimed at Israel; however, it was an across the board cut of all foreign aid programs for fiscal year 2003. The lobby and government also suffered a defeat when Congress deleted an administration request for an extra $200 million to help Israel fight terrorism. Even while cutting aid to Israel (which still was budgeted at $2.1 billion for military aid and $600 million for economic assistance), Congress included a number of provisions in the aid bill viewed as favorable to Israel, including a provision that bars federal assistance to a future Palestinian state until the current Palestinian leadership is replaced, and that state demonstrates a commitment to peaceful coexistence with Israel, and takes measures to combat terrorism.
The setbacks were also temporary as the Administration approved a supplementary aid request in 2003 that included $1 billion in FMF and $9 billion in loan guarantees to aid Israel's economic recovery and compensate for the cost of military preparations associated with the war in Iraq. One quarter of the FMF is a cash grant and three quarters will be spent in the United States. The loan guarantees are spread over three years and must be spent within Israel's pre-June 1967 borders. Each year, an amount equal to the funds Israel spends on settlements in the territories will be deducted from the loan amount, along with all fees and subsidies.
Altogether, since 1949, Israel has received more than $90 billion in assistance. This includes the three special allocations, the $10 billion in loan guarantees (spread over five years) approved in 1992, and a variety of other smaller assistance-related accounts, such as refugee resettlement ($80 million annually from 1992-1998 and then reduced to $70 million in FY1999 and $60 million in FY2000 because of declining numbers of refugees) and cooperative development programs (a total of $186 million since 1981).
The total does not include funds for joint military projects like the Arrow missile (for which Israel has received more than $1 billion in grants since 1986), which are provided through the Defense budget. President Bush requested $60 million for the Arrow for FY2003 and $136 million in FY2004. The United States also has provided $53 million for the Boost Phase Intercept program and $139 million for the Tactical High Energy Laser program under development in Israel to complement the Arrow.
Though the totals are impressive, the value of assistance to Israel has been eroded by inflation. While aid levels remained constant in total dollars from 1987 until 1999, the real value steadily declined. On the other side of the coin, Israel does receive aid on more favorable terms than other nations. For example, all economic aid is given directly to the Israeli government rather than allocated under a specific program. Also, starting in 1982, Israel began to receive all its economic aid in a lump sum early in the fiscal year instead of in quarterly installments as is done for other countries (for 2000, Israel received $1.37 billion of its military aid in the first month and the remaining $550 million was delayed for budgetary reasons). Israel is not required to provide an accounting of how the funds are used. Israel also receives offsets on FMS purchases (U.S. contractors agree to offset some of the cost of military equipment by buying components or materials from Israel).
As of December 31, 2001, Israel owed the United States government $1.977 billion in direct economic and military loans.
See also the U.S. Assistance to Israel table.
http://www.usaid.gov/policy/budget/cbj2006/ane/il.html
Objective SO Number FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2006
Israel Cash Transfer 271-001 477,168 357,120 240,000
Total (in thousands of dollars) 477,168 357,120 240,000
The Development Challenge: The close bilateral relationship that the United States has with Israel serves the national security interests of both countries. The Government of Israel's (GOI) political and economic stability continues to be a key objective of U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East.
The fundamental USAID objective in Israel is to support the Israeli economy, a task of special importance as the Government of Israel implements a series of ambitious reforms required for financial stability and sustainable growth. Though the U.S. cash transfer is not conditioned on economic policy reform, the United States continues to encourage Israeli efforts to reduce government spending and deficits, improve tax and public wage structures, increase privatization, reform labor markets, and liberalize its trade regime. Over the last year, export competitiveness has improved, and inflation has been reduced. Expanding business investment and governmental infrastructure investment, coupled with current export growth, will help Israel reach its gross domestic product (GDP) growth rate potential. U.S. assistance provides Israel the funds it needs to promote its economic reforms. The United States also supports Israel's economic and political stability and helps relieve the impact of the economic burdens Israel has incurred due to its isolation in the region and the unstable security situation in the Middle East.
Israel's economy responded favorably in the previous decade to the restructuring imposed after the crises and hyperinflation of the mid-1980s. Since 1990 the economy has become increasingly sophisticated and technologically advanced. In FY 1999, Congress began a structured, steady yet gradual reduction of the economic assistance earmark in recognition of this progress.
Israel's economic boom in the 1990s was based on a thriving high-technology sector, sharply increased investment by venture capital firms, the opening of new markets to Israeli exports, and a record level of tourism. With the downturn in the global economy, problems in the high-technology sector, and a worsening security situation in Israel, the period of 2000-2003 saw increasing unemployment and declining tax revenues. In addition to the obvious effect on tourism, the ongoing violence resulting from the Israel-Palestinian conflict impacted foreign investment and overall economic confidence. The end of 2003 provided some positive signs, however. After nearly three years of economic recession (GDP contracted by 0.5% in 2001 and 0.9% in 2002), the economy grew by 1.2% in 2003. Growth reached approximately 3.8% in 2004, although this economic recovery remains vulnerable to global economic developments and Israel's security situation.
The United States Government (USG) strongly supports the GOI's economic reform measures and underscores its support at the U.S.-Israel Joint Economic Development Group (JEDG), which usually meets annually. Beyond maintaining a stable macroeconomic environment, the JEDG provides a forum to encourage the GOI to reform its financial sector, reduce labor market rigidities, proceed with further trade liberalization, and accelerate its privatization program. The provision of $9 billion in loan guarantees over fiscal years 2003 - 2007, with an available rollover provision in 2008, was authorized in the Emergency Wartime Supplemental Appropriations Act of 2003 and the Foreign Operations Appropriations Act of 2004. The provision of the guarantees, which is predicated on the continued implementation of the GOI's reform program and declining government deficits, will further contribute to Israel's economic and political stability.
The USAID Program: The United States, acting through USAID, will provide $240,000,000 in FY 2006 Economic Support Funds (ESF) to Israel as a cash transfer. These funds will be used by Israel to repay debt to the United States, including refinanced Foreign Military Sales debt, and to purchase goods and services, as a general rule, from the United States. The United States will continue to encourage Israel to reduce government spending and deficits, improve tax and public wage structures, increase privatization, reform labor markets, and liberalize its trade regime.
Other Program Elements: In addition to and separate from the cash transfer to Israel, there are a number of programs managed by USAID's Bureau for Economic Growth, Agriculture and Trade that involve Israel. The Cooperative Development Research (CDR) Program is a peer-reviewed, competitive grants program. It funds the collaborative research of scientists from Israel, the United States, and their counterparts in developing countries throughout the world on topics relevant to the needs of the developing countries. The Middle East Regional Cooperation (MERC) Program is a competitive grants program that supports joint research projects between Arab and Israeli scientists on topics relevant to the development of the Middle East region. Both MERC and CDR are directly managed by USAID and involve a wide variety of technical topics and institutions. CDR and MERC are presently funding nearly 100 separate grants, including projects on water resource management for agricultural and other uses, development of new crops, protection against agricultural pests, protection of the environment, development of aquatic resources, and the study of diseases and other health threats common to many developing countries.
Also, the American Schools and Hospitals Abroad (ASHA) program provides assistance to overseas institutions to demonstrate U.S. advances in educational and medical technology and practices in the areas of research, training, and patient care. In Israel, ASHA provides grants, on a competitive basis, to schools, hospitals, libraries, and other academic and medical institutions overseas to upgrade and enhance their research and training facilities.
Other Donors: The United States is the largest bilateral donor to Israel.
27.08.05 07:55
в ответ балта 27.08.05 07:43
Пущай Попов или известный публицист разъяснят народу!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Попов и известный публицыст разьяснили народу т.с. политическую подопл╦ку, а если вас интерисует научная сторона , то зайдите на "Мембрану.ру"в раздел науки и техники. Там народ подкованый и во сех тех.тонкостях разбираюця, может и вам обьяснят какое отношение имеет атомная бомба к ТО Ейнштейна.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Попов и известный публицыст разьяснили народу т.с. политическую подопл╦ку, а если вас интерисует научная сторона , то зайдите на "Мембрану.ру"в раздел науки и техники. Там народ подкованый и во сех тех.тонкостях разбираюця, может и вам обьяснят какое отношение имеет атомная бомба к ТО Ейнштейна.
27.08.05 08:03
в ответ -Archimed- 27.08.05 07:55
Так подкованный народ как раз и утверждает, что как раз и имеет и причем непосредственное. А про политическую подоплеку че говорить. Вот говорили, что генетика это лженаука, придуманная евреем Менделем, известный ученый-академик Лысенко между прочим говорил, а теперь оказывается что вроде прав Менднль был. Так кому верить?
27.08.05 08:15
в ответ балта 27.08.05 08:03
Так подкованный народ как раз и утверждает, что как раз и имеет и причем непосредственное.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Так вот этот подкованый нарор разделился на два лагеря - на релятивистов и альтернативистов. И что примичательно, все релятивисты или большинсство из них букву"Р" не выговаривают....
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
а теперь оказывается что вроде прав Менднль был. Так кому верить?
~~~~~~~~~~~~Самому себе
и то не всегда.... 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Так вот этот подкованый нарор разделился на два лагеря - на релятивистов и альтернативистов. И что примичательно, все релятивисты или большинсство из них букву"Р" не выговаривают....
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
а теперь оказывается что вроде прав Менднль был. Так кому верить?
~~~~~~~~~~~~Самому себе
и то не всегда....
27.08.05 08:26
в ответ балта 27.08.05 08:19
Вот один из них...
ЗЗЦЩ
Е-маил: ззцщ@маил.ру
Скрыть 27 мая 2004 г., 00:18
Почти все интересующиеся наверняка в курсе: месяц назад американцы запустили спутник, оснащенный аппаратурой для измерения эффекта Лензе-Тирринга (как прямое следствие ОТО).
Если будет достоверно зафиксирован поворот плоскости свободно вращающегося спутникового гироскопа примерно на 0.05 угл. сек/год (плюс/минус два десятка метрологических процентов) - значит, ОТО успешно выдержала самую серьезную проверку...
Если же нет...последствия для ОТО и особенно е╦ приложений могут быть самыми неблагоприятными. Что может оказаться катастрофой для ряда "научных школ", специализирующихся на этой тематике. И это может проявить себя уже в ходе обработки промежуточных результатов.
Если экспериментальный результат будет существенно разниться с прогнозом ОТО, ситуация может развиваться самым невероятным образом, могут оказаться задействованными самые разнообразные варианты...
http://forum.membrana.ru/forum/scitech.html?parent=1052455778&page=0
ЗЗЦЩ
Е-маил: ззцщ@маил.ру
Скрыть 27 мая 2004 г., 00:18
Почти все интересующиеся наверняка в курсе: месяц назад американцы запустили спутник, оснащенный аппаратурой для измерения эффекта Лензе-Тирринга (как прямое следствие ОТО).
Если будет достоверно зафиксирован поворот плоскости свободно вращающегося спутникового гироскопа примерно на 0.05 угл. сек/год (плюс/минус два десятка метрологических процентов) - значит, ОТО успешно выдержала самую серьезную проверку...
Если же нет...последствия для ОТО и особенно е╦ приложений могут быть самыми неблагоприятными. Что может оказаться катастрофой для ряда "научных школ", специализирующихся на этой тематике. И это может проявить себя уже в ходе обработки промежуточных результатов.
Если экспериментальный результат будет существенно разниться с прогнозом ОТО, ситуация может развиваться самым невероятным образом, могут оказаться задействованными самые разнообразные варианты...
http://forum.membrana.ru/forum/scitech.html?parent=1052455778&page=0