natalie portman body before and after black swan

images tattoo natalie portman black natalie portman body before and after black swan. Natalie Portman Gives Birth To
  • Natalie Portman Gives Birth To

  • buehler
    07-18 07:09 AM
    hi Guys,
    I was thinking over this for quite some time. Why dont we hire one or two immigration attorneys on a full time basis. And lets start am immigration office where we can have all our immigration works (doubtful) but the future immigrant works ata marginally cheaper rates with high quality of service. If we keep a no profit no loss mantra, it would be helpful to everyone and also it will make this organization very strong.
    Lets discuss its relevance? What does the Core think about this.?


    I know how happy you when you came up with this idea, but do you really have to cross post it in so many different threads and forums? In what way is it relevant in this particular thread?

    wallpaper Natalie Portman Gives Birth To natalie portman body before and after black swan. Do you think Natalie Portman
  • Do you think Natalie Portman

  • pasupuleti
    06-21 06:50 PM

    natalie portman body before and after black swan. natalie portman pics lack
  • natalie portman pics lack

  • americandesi
    08-06 02:09 PM
    After making a trip of South India, Santa Singh, his wife and his son were returning to Punjab in Tamilnadu Express.

    Santa Singh was occupying the lower berth, his wife the middle berth and his son the top most berth in the train. When the train stopped at one of the stations on the way back the son requested Santa Singh to bring him a cup of Ice cream to which Santa readily agreed. When Santa and his son returned they found that a South Indian who couldn't understand Hindi had occupied his son's berth.

    Outraged, Santa Singh called the TT and asked him to help. TT requested that he could not understand Hindi/Punjabi so it would be better if Santa Singh explained the whole situation to him in English.

    Santa Singh explained, "That man sleeping on top of my wife is not giving birth to my child."

    2011 Do you think Natalie Portman natalie portman body before and after black swan. lack swan lily
  • lack swan lily

  • punjabi
    08-08 07:53 PM
    hey, this happened right in front of eyes!! I can NEVER EVER forget it!!

    My colleague was getting laid off in a month, so she was trying to find a project elsewhere. She was sitting a few yards away from me when she got a call for an interview. And I saw her coming towards me with a total white face (if there is an expression like this).

    I asked her what happened..

    She said "How can they do that?"
    "This is not good."
    "Don't they know how to talk to a woman?"

    I asked "what happened"

    she said, "might be a prank call, but I'll talk to my employer about it."

    Her next sentence had me rolling over the floor for the next hour.

    She said "After asking some technical questions, they wanted to ask some general ones"
    and he asked "why is a manhole round?"

    She LITERALLY had no meaning for manhole (gutter/sewerage can). And you can imagine her embarassement when I told her!

    Abe.. lets call it "manhole".

    coz these days the environment is no better than that :D:D:D


    natalie portman body before and after black swan. ody It#39;s amazing how quickly
  • ody It#39;s amazing how quickly

  • validIV
    06-05 02:01 PM
    This is your justification for renting? Your 1300 goes to that owners mortgage. You are paying so that he can own the property you live in. I would not be surprised if he has multiple condos renting to others like you.

    Since you cite an example, let me cite one of mine.

    Co-op bought in 2004, Queens NY 2 bedroom: $155,000
    Rented now for $1,350 / month (Wife and I live in another home we also own also in queens)
    Appraised value (Feb 2009) $195,000, Peak market value (my opinion) ~230,000 in 2006 but it seems to be worth more now which is clueless to me.
    Outstanding balance: 60,000
    Current mortgage (15y fixed@4.25): 452 / month (+525 maintenance)
    Monthly cost total: ~1,000
    Comps in area: See for yourself:

    Lets say that person is you renting it. You are paying to stay in my unit, pay my mortgage, pay my monthly, allow me to build equity which i just used to buy another property (thank you) and using standard deductions, allowing me to have a healthy tax return from interest paid based on your money. I dont even need to do any math here to prove I am making money from your rent because believe me I am.

    Renters will never understand why owning a home is better than renting as thus they will continue to make arguments to continue doing so. And I'm sure that giving 1 example or 100 examples will not change your mind in the slightest. Which is why you will always be paying owners like me for a roof to live under.

    I doubt it is as clear cut as you make it to be. Rent vs. buy has two components in each option - the monthly cost and the long term saving/investment. Let me take the example of the apartment I live in. It would cost about 360k (I am not considering the closing cost, the cost to buy new appliances and so on when you move in etc) if we were to buy it as a condo in the market. We rent it for $1300.

    Monthly Cost:
    Interest (very simplistic calculation): 5% on 180k on average over 30 years. i.e. $750 per month. After Tax deduction cost ~$700 (you lose on standard deduction if you take property tax deduction - so effective saving is wayyy lower than the marginal tax rate).

    Property Tax: $400 per month.

    Maintenance/depreciation of appliances: assume $200 per month (easily could be more).
    Total: 1300.
    Long term investment: $360k at 3% per annum (long term housing price increase trend).
    You pay for this saving with leverage and $1000 amortization every month for the loan principal.

    Loss of flexibility/Risk : Not sure how to quantify.

    Monthly cost = $1300.
    Long Term Saving (assuming you put the same $1000 every month in a normal high yeild savings account - a Reward Checking maybe) - you will get a risk free 5%.

    So in this case you are paying the same monthly cost for house purchase vs rent. but you are losing out on the additional 2% per month in investment return.

    Plus - buying gets you into a lot riskier position.

    I have seen the proponents of buying fails to take a couple of factors into account:
    1. Real Estate, historically, is not a good investment. It is even worse than the best savings accounts available. And you could easily save your monthly amortization in better savings vehicles.
    2. Tax deduction from interest means you lose on standard deduction. In the above example - a family of 3 with 1 earner will have NO saving from housing tax deduction. They would be better off using the standard deduction. If there are 2 earners - they could try to work around this by filing separately and one taking deduction for housing interest and the other taking the standard deduction. But even that will probably not save you any money since many other tax rates are stacked up against single filers.

    natalie portman body before and after black swan. pictures natalie portman black
  • pictures natalie portman black

  • kinvin
    02-25 07:41 PM

    Oh, I meant that, the quote is what Lou Dobbs would have said if would not have failed. Sorry about the confusion.


    natalie portman body before and after black swan. dresses natalie portman black
  • dresses natalie portman black

  • hiralal
    06-11 11:19 PM
    Mortgage of $95 dollars in California ????? man, even I would have purchased a house there ..once the honeymoon is over (100 dollar rent), even a kid can guess where this house will end up (and she wants help from govt ???) ..wonder how many such loans were bundled ..and how many houses will end up in foreclosure ?

    Will the coming wave of OptionARM mortgage resets look like the wave of subprime defaults?

    This Bloomberg piece paints a sobering picture of where things are at, and it's clear right off the bat why the resets are going to kill a number of buyers:

    Shirley Breitmaier’s mortgage payment started out at $98 when she refinanced her three-bedroom home in Galt, California, in 2007. The 73-year-old widow may see it jump to $3,500 a month in two years.

    Breitmaier took out a payment-option adjustable rate mortgage, a loan popular during the housing boom for its low minimum payments before resetting at higher costs later.

    We're not sure what the housing market is like in Galt, California, but if we had to guess, Ms. Breitmaier is pretty under water right now, and a refi is probably out of the picture. Now this might not kill the banks -- after all, the chart below is well known and we're guessing that much of their portfolio has been slammed accordingly. But in terms of flooding the market with foreclosed home, slamming prices, it's too early to believe that it's all priced in.

    And generally, the effect that will have on the economy and consumer confidence will be brutal:

    The delinquency rate for payment-option ARMs originated in 2006 and bundled into securities is soaring, according to a May 5 report from Deutsche Bank AG. Over the past year, payments 60 days late or more on option ARMs originated in 2006 have almost doubled to 42.44 percent from 23.26 percent, Deutsche Bank said. For 2007 loans, the rate has climbed from 10.1 percent to 35.25 percent.

    “We’re already seeing much higher levels of delinquencies of these option ARM loans even before you reach the point of the recast,” said Paul Leonard, the California director of the non- profit Center for Responsible Lending.

    The threat of soaring payments has counselors at Housing and Economic Rights Advocates busy.

    “There’s a level of hopelessness to the phone calls now,” said Brown.

    More than $750 billion of option ARMs were originated in the U.S. between 2004 and 2008, according to data from First American and Inside Mortgage Finance of Bethesda, Maryland. California accounted for 58 percent of option ARMs, according to a report by T2 Partners LLC, citing data from Amherst Securities and Loan Performance.

    Shirley Breitmaier took out a $315,000 option ARM to refinance a previous loan on her house.

    Her payments started at 3/8 of 1 percent, or less than $100 a month, according to Cameron Pannabecker, the owner of Cal-Pro Mortgage and the Mortgage Modification Center in Stockton, California, who is working with Breitmaier. The loan allowed her to forgo higher payments by adding the unpaid balance to the principal. She’ll be required to start paying principal and interest to amortize the debt when the loan reaches 145 percent of the original amount borrowed.

    ‘Pick a Pay’

    Such terms aren’t typical for option ARMs, which were also known as “pick-a-pay” mortgages. Interest rates on many payment option ARMS are “typically very low in the first one to three months” and can be as little as 2 percent, according to Federal Reserve data.

    Breitmaier, who has been in the home for 45 years and lives with her daughter, now fears she will lose the off-white stucco house that’s a hub for her family.

    “I wish the government would bail us out like the banks and the car businesses,” she said. “I’d like to go from here to the grave next to my husband.”

    Paul Financial LLC originated the loan and it was sold to GMAC, Pannabecker said.

    “This loan is a perfect example front to back, bottom to top, of everything that has gone wrong over the last five to seven years,” Pannabecker said. “The consumer had a product pushed on them that they had no hope of understanding.”

    2010 natalie portman pics lack natalie portman body before and after black swan. tattoo natalie portman black
  • tattoo natalie portman black

  • trueguy
    08-08 06:13 PM

    Please vote here :

    It will help us determine future VB for EB3-I.



    natalie portman body before and after black swan. Natalie Portman Black Swan
  • Natalie Portman Black Swan

  • xyzgc
    12-20 04:00 PM
    razis dude, I'm probably the most secular person you'll find on IV. Read my previous posts. However I have to disagree with you on this one and that too very strongly. Each of the places you mention Muslims are the Oppressors and not Oppressed.
    I completely support George Bush's doctrine of smokin' em out and ridding the world of Islamofascism. He is one of the best presidents this country has ever had. However he is misunderstood throughout the world. World over - jihadis and islamofascists hate Bush with a vengeance - which tells me only this - He must be doin' somethin' right. As long as we have more leaders like Bush we are in safe hands.

    We shall not tire, We shall not falter and We shall not fail - until Islamofascism is wiped out.
    Just my 2 cents.

    Yes, everybody, all senators, wanted to teach these terrorists a lesson after 9/11.
    Afghan war is good and Iraq war is bad. Why, because Iraqis didn't leave WMDs a.k.a nukes behind.
    (A weapon of mass destruction (WMD) is a weapon that can kill large numbers of humans and/or cause great damage to man-made structures (e.g. buildings), natural structures (e.g. mountains), or the biosphere in general. The term is often used to cover several weapon types, including nuclear, biological, chemical (NBC), and radiological weapons)

    Now, Iraq war went bad, economy went bad (due to main street scamming the banks) and suddenly its all the fault of Mr. Bush.

    hair lack swan lily natalie portman body before and after black swan. natalie portman black swan
  • natalie portman black swan

  • rajarao
    10-01 12:12 AM
    Day after day it seems light for faith in the system seems to be fading away.
    Its frustrating to see a statement from DOS that USCIS projections were not accurate. Are you kidding?. What they have been doing for so long?. I was also disheartened by Murthy's ( update sympathising with USCIS. Thats non-sense.

    USCIS/DOS its time for change. How many visa numbers wasted this year?. Is the information open, why is it not transperent?. FBI name check is no longer mandatory for GC approval?. then whats happening?. Is it worth the wait for a PhD to wait for 10 years in limbo?. There are several questions that are going unanswered.

    When will DOS/USCIS get the CHANGE slogan from OBAMA?. Is Durbin going to be eclipsing this?. He may have lot of push, but I hope OBAMA will not heed to it. Afterall, everyone is free to express their opinions.


    natalie portman body before and after black swan. PHOTOS: See Natalie Portman In
  • PHOTOS: See Natalie Portman In

  • adusumilli
    08-05 02:18 PM
    can some admin close this thread

    hot ody It#39;s amazing how quickly natalie portman body before and after black swan. Natalie Portman Goes Through
  • Natalie Portman Goes Through

  • GCOP
    07-13 01:31 PM
    I agree. We have involved in IV action Item. It is Simply our Hard Luck that, we all (EB3-I)are stuck in this situation. IV has tried for Bill every Single year Since about Last 3 Years, Organized rally. Nothing worked out for us. In the mean time EB-2 moved to 2006 and EB-3 is Still in 2001. I believe it is just our hard luck, that despite of all IV efforts & Our support to IV , No Result for Eb-3 Forward movement. NOW THE QUESTION IS WHICH ACTIONS CAN BRING THE RESULTS FOR EB-3 (I)
    Guys I am getting the impression that EB-3- I did not act on IV action items..that's not true we have been actively involved in IV action items and have been contributing...


    house Black Swan is #3: The 10 Most natalie portman body before and after black swan. Actress Natalie Portman
  • Actress Natalie Portman

  • Macaca
    12-27 08:16 PM
    How Republicans prevailed on the Hill ( By Whitney Blake | The Weekly Standard, 12/27/2007

    THE HOUSE AND SENATE squeezed through last-minute bills in a marathon session last week akin to the final exams period some members' college-aged children just muddled through. A bleary-eyed, sleep deprived House and Senate finally emerged with the passage of some key pieces of legislation on energy, the Iraq war, the alternative minimum tax, children's health insurance, and a massive omnibus spending bill. In the end, Republicans proved to be the more astute bunch, pushing through Bush's lame duck agenda despite their minority status.

    With Democrats emerging victorious just a year ago in the 2006 midterm elections claiming a mandate to drive the country in a new direction, one would have hardly predicted headlines like "Bush, GOP prevail in host of Hill issues" in the Associated Press, "Dems cave on spending" in the Hill, and the Politico's "Liberals lose bigtime in budget battle."

    Leading mainstream publications agreed that Democrats had surrendered to Republican demands, and the left's base was utterly furious at the outcomes. In reaction to the $70 billion Iraq and Afghanistan troop funding vote, comments such as, "You are kidding yourself if you think the Democratic party stands for anything--clearly they do not--This is an outrage," were posted on Daily Kos. Huffington Post entries included, "Democrats lose evey [sic] time becuase [sic] they are a pack of spineless cowards".

    Even Republicans were surprised with the outcome. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell remarked, "If we had been having this press conference last January and I had suggested that a Republican minority in Congress would be able to meet the president's top line, you all would have laughed at me."

    "We couldn't have scripted this to work out better for Republicans they conceded almost every issue," said Rep. Paul Ryan, (R-WI).

    Not only did Democrats eventually meet Bush's required $933 billion appropriations spending level, they also capitulated on unconditional funding for the troops, an energy plan without corporate taxes, a one-year patch to the alternative minimum tax without additional taxes (a $50 billion violation of Democrats' pay-as-you-go principles), and a straight extension of SCHIP without a large expansion.

    At first, the record is baffling, but the explanation for Republican success is simple. Not only was superior "strategery" involved on the part of the minority, to borrow a word from Bush's lexicon, but equally important was Democrats' miscalculations.

    Republicans decided early on to stick together on issues such as taxes and Iraq, said one senior Republican aide. Democrats were much more fractured. One Washington Post headline declared, "Democrats Blaming Each Other for Failures." The article cited House Democrats accusing their Senate counterparts of selling out and folding. In December 2006, Reid said in an interview, "legislation is the art of compromise and consensus building and I'm going to compromise." House Democrats didn't embrace this theme.

    They either failed to realize or didn't want to realize that anything they proposed still had to meet approval in the Senate, where compromise and coalition building are unavoidable, with 60 votes required to move any legislation through. "It took some people 11 months to figure this out," said one senior Republican aide.

    From the beginning, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi set up a structure that didn't emphasize debate and hearings, said Republican California Rep. Kevin McCarthy. The controversial spots were never worked out in the far-left appeasing bills that passed through the House.

    Even after the Senate voted a resounding 88 to 5 in favor of an AMT patch without offsets in the beginning of December, the House passed another version, attached more taxes to make up for the lost revenue, and sent it back to the Senate. The Senate had to vote three times just to show the House Democrats that it did not have the required 60 votes to pass a patch with offsets.

    Democrats were not only divided, they also misjudged the public's perception. The "general aversion to tax hikes" worked to the Republicans' advantage, and the overall success of the war in Iraq also played a key factor, said the senior Republican aide.

    Sen. Majority Leader Harry Reid commented right before the recess, "I share the frustration of the American people who want to see real change." But Republicans argue Reid's idea of change is not in line with that of most Americans.

    They "got the wrong message from the election," which wasn't one of a "repudiation of conservative values," said Ryan. It was a call for "clean and transparent government."

    They "overreached" after the honeymoon period and "frittered away" high expectations "by taking a sharp turn to the left," he added.

    A CNN/USA Today poll taken back in May and June revealed that 57% of Americans favored making permanent the Bush tax cuts, while 37 percent wanted to repeal the temporary cuts. On the broader fiscal topics of taxes, government spending, and regulations for businesses, 41 percent of Americans consider themselves "conservative," 43 percent "moderate," and just 12 percent "liberal," according to a Rasmussen Reports study released about a month ago.

    Some Republicans admit Democrats could have gotten more of what they wanted had they played their cards right. Democrats had a "missed opportunity," said McCarthy, who has experience in a closely divided legislature as a former Republican floor leader in the California State Assembly.

    The majority could have still put forth very partisan bills at the outset, but "come back to where common ground was," said McCarthy. Democrats would have "enjoyed much more success" in the center, said Ryan.

    Some Republicans were reportedly amenable to partial offsets to the AMT. Perhaps if Democrats had not held onto appropriations spending $23 billion above Bush's request for so long, there would have been more time left to avoid axing the entire difference. Or if taxes were not as high as $22 billion for energy companies in the Democrats' version of the energy bill, some taxes may have been part of the compromise.

    But Democrats "were more interested in making a point than making law," said Don Stewart, communications director for Sen. Minority Leader Mitch McConnell. It didn't get them very far: They essentially handed Republicans their agenda on a platter at the eleventh hour to prevent a government shutdown.

    In the end, Democrats were "driven by the clock and not by the product of what's created," McCarthy added. Serious negotiations could have occurred much earlier in the year, instead of holding out stubbornly until the end of the session when all eyes were on several major unresolved bills. Sensible bipartisan compromises in piecemeal over the year look much more authoritative, organized, and productive than the harried disarray that unfolded in the past month.

    Incidentally, according to McConnell, the only truly bipartisan piece of legislation where genuine compromise was part of the equation was ethics reform, signed into law in September. But even Democrats, who heralded the landmark reforms, took advantages of the loopholes in the bill to insert about 300 air dropped earmarks which had not been taken up by either the House or Senate on the floor or as part of a vote.

    Now, with the Democrats' base up in arms, the Democrats' infighting publicly aired, and the minority declaring victory, backed up by the mainstream media no less, the bills don't even appear bipartisan. Democrats came out with the short end of the stick, even though the odds were clearly in their favor after the midterm elections.

    While Hillary is busy wrapping up universal health care, and "bring troops home" presents for potential voters, Democrats won't be able to deliver these or any other promised initiatives this Christmas season.

    tattoo pictures natalie portman black natalie portman body before and after black swan. After Black Swan, I#39;m just so
  • After Black Swan, I#39;m just so

  • senthil1
    04-06 11:24 PM
    Basically the H1b Cap issue should be resolved. Either unlimited H1b or restriction in bodyshopping is needed to resolve the problem to keep H1b system working. Or current broken system will continue. Also gc is completed related to H1b you can take think what will be the impact. Situation is not good for GC seekers. If they increase h1b retrogession will increase. If they restrict H1b same gc seekers will be impacted. Basically this forum members have to ask unlimited H1b and unlimited GC to satisfy everyone. Is that achivable?

    what are you saying? The above post is totally incoherent


    pictures dresses natalie portman black natalie portman body before and after black swan. lack swan natalie portman
  • lack swan natalie portman

  • kaisersose
    04-14 12:00 PM
    No body can predict how much it is going down exactly. But you can predict it is going down considerably.
    My point is that the house price is out of whack with income. I don't see the logic in why it would not go down. The whole mess is started because people started looking at houses as investment. Buying now and seeing the housing value drop won't be fun.
    Whether you sell your house or not, it matters when you buy. You don't buy at the top of the bubble.

    It is not going down everywhere...I am in a location where people are buying houses like mad and the prices are actually better than last year.

    And yet, some people in my location are thinking about nothing but resale. They are not able to see a home as anything other than an investment and I am referring to such people in my earlier post.

    dresses Natalie Portman Goes Through natalie portman body before and after black swan. natalieportmanhighnessdoubl.
  • natalieportmanhighnessdoubl.

  • mallu
    11-12 11:21 PM
    Immigration is a luxury bus. In general , those who got into the bus
    earlier ( i mean , say 100 years ago ) may not like/care the next batch of passengers ( ooo aaa ouch. I can't stretch my leg all the the way, not
    enough oxygen in the bus etc etc ) waiting to board at the next stop.

    Now i remember about my Indian friend who passed through the "H1B turned GC holder" route bad mouthing about US h1 policy ( that time there was an attempt to hike the quota by some 20000 and he was deeply upset by that ).


    makeup Natalie Portman Black Swan natalie portman body before and after black swan. Black Swan is #3: The 10 Most
  • Black Swan is #3: The 10 Most

  • Macaca
    12-30 05:49 PM
    India-China Relations Negotiating a Balance ( By Dipankar Banerjee | Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies.

    Now that Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao�s visit to India in Nov 2010 has ended, it is necessary to reflect on the nature of India-China relations and where it is headed. Kishore Mahbubani, the distinguished Asian thinker from Singapore, described India-China relations as, �the most important bilateral relationship of the 21st Century�. Indeed, historically, civilizationally, from the perspective of economic benefits to the region or from peace and security in Asia and the world; this is a relationship that is likely to shape the global future.

    There is no scope for mistakes. Two large nations that are simultaneously reemerging at a rapid pace, thus this relationship has to be based on carefully balanced enlightened self interests. To achieve this will call for delicate negotiations based on our respective genius, taking account of our differences, yet accommodating the genuine concerns and interests of both. It is important to be clear that tension and conflict, easy to generate in an atmosphere of fear and distrust, can do immense harm to all.


    Historically near neighbours, India and China had very little contact or understanding of each other. Two long but intermittent periods in early history may be considered as exceptions. One was the epoch of the Nalanda University in India, which flourished nearly two millennia ago and brought the world�s scholars to its gates. This was amongst the biggest confidence building measure in the history of Asia. The other was through the Great Silk Routes emanating from China with some branches passing through India and going to the world, enriching both countries. This was an early example of globalized commerce that benefited the entire then known world.

    The absence of recent contact failed to develop in India an understanding of the �Middle Kingdom�. On its part China has never quite grasped the importance of democracy, pluralism and diversity of India, which with all its imperfections, constitute the quintessence of the Indian state and its nationalism.

    Instead, our awareness of each other in modern times can be traced to the 19th Century, where it was coloured by colonial influences with their national interests firmly centred in European capitals. This brief interlude in history was the only period when neither India nor China was a leading nation in the world with neither in a position to shape its own destiny. Yet, it may be argued that spared outright conquest, Beijing secured its national interests somewhat better than Delhi. Many of today�s problems originate from that period, even though goodwill between both nations remained intact. Examples from India were Rabindranath Tagore and Dr Kotnis.

    In his highly controversial first visit to China in 1924 Tagore said at a lecture in Shanghai, �I want to win your heart, now that I am close to you, with the faith that is in me of a great future for you, and for Asia, when your country rises and gives expression to its own spirit -a future in the joy of which we shall all share.� Tagore visited China purely as a poet, yet his words set the tone and trend for India-China relations till the 1950�s. Premier Wen Jiabao hit the right note, when in his first engagement in Delhi in 2010 he visited a school named after Tagore and drew attention to the renewed attention in China today to his humanistic writings.

    Congress Party sent a small medical mission led by Dr Kotnis to help the Eighth Route Army in its War of Resistance in 1938. This team�s dedication and service to the People�s Liberation Army left a deep impression in the minds of the members of the Long March generation. This was the backdrop in which Nehru reached out to China in the 1950�s.

    A rude awakening to the Cold War realities of the 20th Century came about in the deteriorating relations in the end of 1950�s and to the 1962 War. The impact of this was different in the two countries. In China the average citizen had little knowledge of this War. They were in the grip of a totally controlled media. Besides, the population at large was grappling with life and death questions of the consequences of the Great Leap Forward. But, the impact in India was traumatic. Essentially it transformed in to a deep sense of betrayal at several levels, a sentiment that left deep scars.

    This contrast was reflected personally to me in June 1991 in many places in China where as a General Officer of the Indian Army and as the first Indian military guest of the PLA in over three decades, one was repeatedly accosted with the statement; �there are a thousand reasons why we should be friends and none at all why we should be enemies�. This was a sentiment that few would have shared in India at the time. As a first step in reconciliation we need to put this current history firmly behind us. This possibility was brought home to me personally through a brief encounter in Vietnam in the autumn of 2010. Shocked to see the utter devastation caused to innocent Vietnamese civilians in the most massive bombing in world history, in the deep underground bunkers north of Ho Chi Minh city, we asked if it was possible to forgive an enemy that caused these horrors. I was struck by the response of the young Vietnamese guide. He said; �If we were to hate the Americans, then how can we not also hate the French, the British, the Australians and the Chinese? We need to put history behind us if we hope to build a future�.

    Many would object to this idealistic approach to hard issues of national interests and they have a point. But, continuing with historic animosities is not the best foundation for national policy. In the realpolitik world of the 21st Century we will need to carefully craft a balance between our concerns and interests and evolve a cooperative relationship.


    The litany of issues between us is long and complex. A short paper such as this will only indicate broad approaches that India should adopt on some of the more important issues.

    The border issue easily heads any list and is also the most urgent. Even though no shot has been fired in anger across the Line of Actual Control since the last twenty six years, an unresolved border can no longer be �left to the next generation� to resolve. Already more than a generation has passed since Deng Xiaoping�s statement and this generation has not proved wiser. There is too much at stake today to pend this issue for long. Lingering problems tend to fester and often can be brought to light from hidden memories to buttress misgivings on other issues. Political sensitivity of this issue to both India and China however, has to be accepted and haste has to be made even if slowly.

    The fundamental reality about borders in the 21st Century is that none can be changed arbitrarily between two sovereign nations of some consequence without causing great destruction. Copious blood has already been shed over this border and today both nations have substantial nuclear weapons as well as conventional arms capability to persuade us to rule out this option. If that much is accepted, the only option that remains is a negotiated settlement. There is no doubt that each side should be prepared to make substantial compromises. But, the framework of a settlement has already been agreed in 2005 at Premier Wen�s last visit in 2005 under the Agreement on Political Parameters and Guiding Principles for the Settlement of the IndiaChina Boundary Question. This clearly rules out the possibility of exchanging populated areas.

    While there may be concerns today to make the borders porous, access to holy lands and pilgrimage places should have easy though controlled access. This will address so called claims based on religious sentiments. Fortunately most places along our common borders are uninhabited and hence minor changes in lines drawn on maps should have easier chance of acceptance.

    The question of the Kashmir border with China has caused recent concern in India. This need not really be the case. Once again on the Jammu & Kashmir question the position of both India and Pakistan has evolved. An exchange of territory, howsoever desirable to either side is not a realistic and even a desirable option. Hence converting the de-facto to de-jure is the issue between India and Pakistan. This will also have to be the option between India and China. This would require a leap of faith and bold political leadership.

    Admitted that such leaps are not the preferred options for realistic politicians aspiring to return to office a background of trust and friendship has to be created. Which in turn should be based on carefully crafted win-win situations for both. This is where other major approaches become important.

    girlfriend After Black Swan, I#39;m just so natalie portman body before and after black swan. Walking calm: Natalie Portman
  • Walking calm: Natalie Portman

  • vghc
    01-07 04:32 PM
    You asked me and i tell you this. This news article was written by well known journalists around the world. His name is Robert Fisk. Just read this to get some understanding.

    Robert Fisk: Why do they hate the West so much, we will ask. This is not published in any Muslim media but one of the well known in Britain called "The Independent". You won't read such things in CNN or Fox or BBC.

    I don't like either of that 2 sides, they are just a torn on this earth.
    But you know what, don't expect peace if you use violence to obtain it.
    It'll won't work and never will.

    hairstyles PHOTOS: See Natalie Portman In natalie portman body before and after black swan. natalie portman in lack swan
  • natalie portman in lack swan

  • JunRN
    06-06 12:02 AM
    What if a builder offer you a new home with a fixed monthly mortgage that is equal to or lower than your monthly rental on similarly sized home at same zip code, will you take it?

    note: Given that you will get $8k stimulus money to recover your downpayment.

    another one
    09-29 05:14 PM
    I have been here since 1997. An Obama win may just restore my faith (which was severely damaged after Bush relection) in the average intelligence of a voter.

    I know that chances of passing of a bill favorable to skilled immigrants are greater with Republicans, but there are other issues far more important to me. For e.g. with a Republican win, the chances of "collateral damage" (deaths of innocent abroad) increase tremendously. I do not want that to be funded through my tax money. Neither do i want my child to read about "creationism" in school (despite paying for all that private school fees!). These issues are more important to me than tax cuts or getting a green card sooner. just my two thoughts...

    I am an Electrical Engineer by training and I manage and lead an R&D group at an American semiconductor company. We design computer-chips that enable about 50% of the world cellular phones.

    I will definitely be moving out of the US when the Dems get elected as I do not think that they capable of making the politically tough but necessary decisions on immigration. They are beholden to too many populist groups and will make the immigration issue a class-based fight. I've had enough of paying taxes, creating $$ & jobs for US-based companies - I've been waiting since 1999.

    I am of course thankful to the US taxpayer who has paid for my graduate school tuition and board, to the US-companies that have given me opportunities that are equal to native-born Americans, and to my American friends for their friendship and hospitality. But prudence demands that I hedge my bets and I will have to relocate to friendlier shores.

    Thought I'd share my experience. Good Luck to All.

    02-22 08:46 AM
    Dobbsians will fail in establishing anti-immigrant sentiments, because at anytime, general psyche of Americans will always be "US is a nation of immigrants". US is different in this respect compared to european nations.

    Its time we start referring to him as Communist Lou Dobbs because all he spits out is the communist agenda. People cant make more money, corporations cant make money and everything that doesn't fit into his philosophy is war on the middle class.

    and this is the middle class that is spending money like crazy...buying 5000$ television sets and huge SUVs on leases. In the end of course u will not have money if u spend like this. Communist Lou Dobb's philosophy is that there is no personal accountability. Everything that is wrong with people's lives is because of immigrants and corporations. People go berserk with their spending and that comes back to bite them in the bum. then if they are laid off, which happens in every economy across the world, they cannot support their spending habits and all this blame is allotted to corporations and immigrants.

    Of course he will have a large viewership...its people who don't want to be accountable that flock to his show and feel happy when they have someone else to blame for their reckless lives.