Explanation sought of UN chief's reported statement

This plan was never discuss and approve by the UNSC therefore it is meaningless to use it as a reference. UN resolution 1244 remained.

The plan was never disucssed by the UN General Secretary at teh meeting. The Albanians kept on mentioning it but Moon stayed clearly away from teh subject. This is Pristina's BS. It went there but did not get what they wanted so they make up stories.

It is very likely that Ban Ki Mun might have said that.

To our Serbian neighbours to refresh your corrupted memory: Ahtisari was a UN envoy working under the UN Sc mandate. So for the UN Sec Gen to support the work and conclusions of the UN envoy would not be that illogical, would it?

And now we reached the best part of the comedy. After letters sent to Ban Ki Moon complaining about KFOR, EULEX, and everything, there is only one person left to complain about, so letters are being sent to Ban Ki Moon, complaining about Ban Ki Moon.

ben

Up until now you albs did not want anything to do with the UN mission in Kosovo since UN resolution 1244 confirms that Kosovo is Serbia. All of the sudden, after Ban Ki-moon statement, if it is true, you tell Serbs to accept "the wish of the UN".

And now we reached the best part of the comedy. After letters sent to Ban Ki Moon complaining about KFOR, EULEX, and everything, there is only one person left to complain about, so letters are being sent to Ban Ki Moon, complaining about Ban Ki Moon.
(Reader, 20 September 2011 16:40)

Desperation makes people do stupid things. Serbs are feeling the heat.

The plan was never disucssed by the UN General Secretary at teh meeting. The Albanians kept on mentioning it but Moon stayed clearly away from teh subject. This is Pristina's BS. It went there but did not get what they wanted so they make up stories.
(sj, 20 September 2011 12:24)
Then why the letter?
And you have proof to backup your claim? We all know the answer to that.

Then why the letter?
And you have proof to backup your claim? We all know the answer to that.
(doodah, 20 September 2011 18:06)


Its simply politics. The opposition would hound the Tadic government by claiming they surrendered the Serbs in Kosovo. That’s all.

Proof, well if I had posted here 3 days ago that “China State Bank has stopped foreign exchange swaps with UBS, Societe Generale, Credit Agricole, PNB Paribas you would not have believed me, but look at Reuters (20/9/11). I imagine you understand what this means? If not let me know and I’ll draw a nice little picture for you.

If you expect to read it in the Times or New York Post don’t hold your breath because they don’t go against their respective government’s policies.

My proof is there for everyone to see. Everything I have posted has come true – and I mean everything. But if you see that is not the fact please feel free to post it here.



Of course he does have the proof... Most likely his very well informed Malaysian friend knows about this (and that friend has never been wrong before) :)
(icj1, 20 September 2011 21:02)


Here is another Albanian windbag who posts BS by the tonne. He has no idea what is going on except what he see on CNN or Fox.

For the hundredth time please list all of my wrong predictions – you have a clear slate. Please not what you think, but real errors.

Up until now you albs did not want anything to do with the UN mission in Kosovo since UN resolution 1244 confirms that Kosovo is Serbia. All of the sudden, after Ban Ki-moon statement, if it is true, you tell Serbs to accept "the wish of the UN".
(MikeC, 20 September 2011 18:53)

Really ? Kosovo's UDI was in accordance with 1244 and Kosovo is one of the strongest supporters of 1244, even by including it in the UDI and its Constitution. So there is nothing new with Kosovo supporting the UN. Of course, no need to tell that to the Serbs, since, Serbs support 1244 as well (with words, at least).

In FACT it was not adopted by Russia. Let's be clear about it.

(EA, 20 September 2011 23:16)
=========================

Who cares who rejected it, the fact is that it was REJECTED and will remain in the rubbish bin forever.
Simple enough?

It is very likely that Ban Ki Mun might have said that.

To our Serbian neighbours to refresh your corrupted memory: Ahtisari was a UN envoy working under the UN Sc mandate. So for the UN Sec Gen to support the work and conclusions of the UN envoy would not be that illogical, would it?
(ben, 20 September 2011 14:50)

He as actually said it already. I quote:

"Having taken into account the developments in the process designed to
determine Kosovo’s future status, I fully support both the recommendation made by my Special Envoy in his report on Kosovo’s future status and the Comprehensive Proposal for the Kosovo Status Settlement"

As for what "PRO-SERBIA" said that the plan was never discussed or approved by the UNSC, that's irrelevant. Nowhere is written that the plan has to be discussed and/or approved by the UNSC because under the terms of 1244 the UNSC did not reserve for itself the final determination of the situation in Kosovo and remained silent on the conditions for the final status of Kosovo.

(pss, 21 September 2011 21:21)

Since 1947 the IMF head man was from Europe, but the Deputy was an American. Now who do you think was the real boss in this instance? The European or American?
China has pumped billions into the IMF on the understanding that it gets a seat on the board while the IMF is restructured. It has not been completed yet.

The first myth passed on by the US/west is that if you deal with the IMF then you are a basket case. Well during the 2007 financial crises the IMF SPENT ITS MONEY PROPPING UP THE WEST. China was asked to help by placing funds into the IMF and providing some guarantees.

If China did not pump this money into the IMF then there would be no IMF today – I hope you understand this so far. The IMF is being restructure to take on its board Brazil, India and Russia (mind you these countries were not members before). Let me explain to you a little further if the US pissed off China tomorrow and China pulls its money out then there is no US, no IMF and no Western Europe. Taking this into account who do you thinks pulls the strings on the IMF? Your problem is that if CNN or Fox don’t report it then it does not exist. Your financial industry will not talk about it openly because it can have effects on your markets.

Now your gold reserves of 400 billion and student loans were to be sold in case the Congress did not pass the bill to increase the size of US debt. In fact if you recall the dates for these were extended on two occasions and how do you think government continued to function? Through loans based on your gold reserves. The idea was to sell them in case the bill was not passed. It was a matter of a day or two for this to happen but there was a break through and the bill was passed.

Student loans – As the Us Government guarantees these loans it holds the upper hand and they can sell those guarantees on the open market. Everything has a price tag and can be sold. Let me say that it only requires a small change to the way these loans are administered to make a very nice profit. Yes legislation has to pass Congress and the Senate to sell them, and as it turns out they did not sell them for the same reason as I explained above re the gold reserves. Student loans are debt and with a small change can be taken over from banks packaged and sold. Haven’t you people learnt anything from this financial crises? That you can package up and sell on all forms of debt?

"The plan for Kosovo's supervised independence was drawn by a former UN envoy, but was never adopted by the Security Council, and was rejected by Belgrade."

In FACT it was not adopted by Russia. Let's be clear about it. Russia has declared it open support to Serbia with no reservation. They are not ashamed even if they had their representative to President Ahtisari....To cut it short the story and negotiation with Serbia is a waste of time. That is my opinion anyway. Look how Serbia is stirring up the waters in northern Kosovo and....who is to blame? The world of course.

Who cares who rejected it, the fact is that it was REJECTED and will remain in the rubbish bin forever.
Simple enough?
(Peggy, 21 September 2011 11:20)

You know what they say, "One man's trash is treasure for the other" :)

Who cares who rejected it, the fact is that it was REJECTED and will remain in the rubbish bin forever.
Simple enough?
(Peggy, 21 September 2011 11:20)

What was rejected ? When ? How ? What is the UNSC resolution or presidential statement that rejected it ? Any reference ?

For the hundredth time please list all of my wrong predictions – you have a clear slate. Please not what you think, but real errors.
(sj, 20 September 2011 23:48)
Why, because you will just come back and say that we are using sources available to everyone and you have high classified information that the rest of the world is not privy to and the real truth is not available so we should just believe you.

Any predictions you have wrong,
1. The no 2 spot at the IMF is no longer an American, he is Chinese. You tried to even convince us that we should not believe the official IMF site, as you had evidence to the contrary which you were unable to reveal.
2. The US sold off all their gold reserves and student loans. Again something you cannot show one source to prove your point. Plus the fact the US govt does not own student loans only guarantees them. Then you claimed China bought up the guarantees and would go after people in default. However, you missed the part about there are laws that would have to be changed in order for China to pursue repayment of those loans.

I have not encountered a single thing that you say as true. Some of the "predictions" are years down the road so most will never know if they came true when they die or not.

What was rejected ? When ? How ? What is the UNSC resolution or presidential statement that rejected it ? Any reference ?
(icj1, 21 September 2011 20:51)

ICJ1 my friend,
If Serbia has rejected, the world has rejected. Didn't you know that?
Also, didn't you know that Serbia is the author of both resolution 1244 and Kumanovo Agreement drafts? Serbia won the war in 1999, but was so generous that has finally decided to compose the drafts that got her forces out of Kosovo for as long as resolution and Kumanovo agreement are valid. I mean come on man! You have to be more "serious" :)

What was rejected ? When ? How ? What is the UNSC resolution or presidential statement that rejected it ? Any reference ?
(icj1, 21 September 2011 20:51)
=========================

The mere fact that it was NEVER put up for discussion at the UN because it was GUARANTEED by the rejected by Russia is a rejection.
The rejection was never putting it up for discussion.
Is this simple enough for you?

The plan was never disucssed by the UN General Secretary at teh meeting. The Albanians kept on mentioning it but Moon stayed clearly away from teh subject. This is Pristina's BS. It went there but did not get what they wanted so they make up stories.
(sj, 20 September 2011 12:24)
Then why the letter?
And you have proof to backup your claim? We all know the answer to that.
(doodah, 20 September 2011 18:06)

Of course he does have the proof... Most likely his very well informed Malaysian friend knows about this (and that friend has never been wrong before) :)

The mere fact that it was NEVER put up for discussion at the UN because it was GUARANTEED by the rejected by Russia is a rejection.
The rejection was never putting it up for discussion.
Is this simple enough for you?
(Peggy, 22 September 2011 10:37)

That's your speculation and I can write a speculation opposite to yours and go figure out who is correct about what might or might not have happened. What I'm asking are the facts about what actually happened. Isn't this simple enough even for you ?

So, are you able to say when was the plan introduced to the UNSC for a resolution or presidential statement and it was voted down ? Do you have the reference ?

The facts that I have show that the plan was transmitted to the UNSC, but the UNSC never voted about it. Indeed, the vote was not necessary because under the terms of 1244 the UNSC did not reserve for itself the final determination of the situation in Kosovo and remained silent on the conditions for the final status of Kosovo.

Here is another Albanian windbag who posts BS by the tonne. He has no idea what is going on except what he see on CNN or Fox.
(sj, 20 September 2011 23:48)

I did not say I am an Albanian, an windbag or both but, anyway, that's why we are here my friend; to learn from you and your very reliable sources what's going on because news agencies worldwide are hiding the truth from us...



For the hundredth time please list all of my wrong predictions – you have a clear slate. Please not what you think, but real errors.
(sj, 20 September 2011 23:48)

Wrong prediction ?! I think you mean "correct predictions" because I said that your sources were never wrong, so how can I produce a list of your wrong predictions if your sources were never wrong :)

Student loans – As the Us Government guarantees these loans it holds the upper hand and they can sell those guarantees on the open market.
(sj, 22 September 2011 01:09)

Dude, you lack some basic understanding of finance and accounting. If "sale" is defined as A selling something to B and receiving a payment from B in exchange, loans can be sold, because they are an asset, but guarantees can't because they are a (contingent) liability.

If A guarantees something and wants to "sell" that to B, it's not B which pays A for the "privilege" of owning the guarantees. It's A that will pay B to transfer the guarantees to B. B is not stupid to become a guarantor without receiving a payment.

This plan was never discuss and approve by the UNSC therefore it is meaningless to use it as a reference. UN resolution 1244 remained.

It is very likely that Ban Ki Mun might have said that.

To our Serbian neighbours to refresh your corrupted memory: Ahtisari was a UN envoy working under the UN Sc mandate. So for the UN Sec Gen to support the work and conclusions of the UN envoy would not be that illogical, would it?

The plan was never disucssed by the UN General Secretary at teh meeting. The Albanians kept on mentioning it but Moon stayed clearly away from teh subject. This is Pristina's BS. It went there but did not get what they wanted so they make up stories.

The plan was never disucssed by the UN General Secretary at teh meeting. The Albanians kept on mentioning it but Moon stayed clearly away from teh subject. This is Pristina's BS. It went there but did not get what they wanted so they make up stories.
(sj, 20 September 2011 12:24)
Then why the letter?
And you have proof to backup your claim? We all know the answer to that.

The plan was never disucssed by the UN General Secretary at teh meeting. The Albanians kept on mentioning it but Moon stayed clearly away from teh subject. This is Pristina's BS. It went there but did not get what they wanted so they make up stories.
(sj, 20 September 2011 12:24)
Then why the letter?
And you have proof to backup your claim? We all know the answer to that.
(doodah, 20 September 2011 18:06)

Of course he does have the proof... Most likely his very well informed Malaysian friend knows about this (and that friend has never been wrong before) :)

Up until now you albs did not want anything to do with the UN mission in Kosovo since UN resolution 1244 confirms that Kosovo is Serbia. All of the sudden, after Ban Ki-moon statement, if it is true, you tell Serbs to accept "the wish of the UN".
(MikeC, 20 September 2011 18:53)

Really ? Kosovo's UDI was in accordance with 1244 and Kosovo is one of the strongest supporters of 1244, even by including it in the UDI and its Constitution. So there is nothing new with Kosovo supporting the UN. Of course, no need to tell that to the Serbs, since, Serbs support 1244 as well (with words, at least).

And now we reached the best part of the comedy. After letters sent to Ban Ki Moon complaining about KFOR, EULEX, and everything, there is only one person left to complain about, so letters are being sent to Ban Ki Moon, complaining about Ban Ki Moon.

"The plan for Kosovo's supervised independence was drawn by a former UN envoy, but was never adopted by the Security Council, and was rejected by Belgrade."

In FACT it was not adopted by Russia. Let's be clear about it. Russia has declared it open support to Serbia with no reservation. They are not ashamed even if they had their representative to President Ahtisari....To cut it short the story and negotiation with Serbia is a waste of time. That is my opinion anyway. Look how Serbia is stirring up the waters in northern Kosovo and....who is to blame? The world of course.

ben

Up until now you albs did not want anything to do with the UN mission in Kosovo since UN resolution 1244 confirms that Kosovo is Serbia. All of the sudden, after Ban Ki-moon statement, if it is true, you tell Serbs to accept "the wish of the UN".

It is very likely that Ban Ki Mun might have said that.

To our Serbian neighbours to refresh your corrupted memory: Ahtisari was a UN envoy working under the UN Sc mandate. So for the UN Sec Gen to support the work and conclusions of the UN envoy would not be that illogical, would it?
(ben, 20 September 2011 14:50)

He as actually said it already. I quote:

"Having taken into account the developments in the process designed to
determine Kosovo’s future status, I fully support both the recommendation made by my Special Envoy in his report on Kosovo’s future status and the Comprehensive Proposal for the Kosovo Status Settlement"

As for what "PRO-SERBIA" said that the plan was never discussed or approved by the UNSC, that's irrelevant. Nowhere is written that the plan has to be discussed and/or approved by the UNSC because under the terms of 1244 the UNSC did not reserve for itself the final determination of the situation in Kosovo and remained silent on the conditions for the final status of Kosovo.

And now we reached the best part of the comedy. After letters sent to Ban Ki Moon complaining about KFOR, EULEX, and everything, there is only one person left to complain about, so letters are being sent to Ban Ki Moon, complaining about Ban Ki Moon.
(Reader, 20 September 2011 16:40)

Desperation makes people do stupid things. Serbs are feeling the heat.

Who cares who rejected it, the fact is that it was REJECTED and will remain in the rubbish bin forever.
Simple enough?
(Peggy, 21 September 2011 11:20)

You know what they say, "One man's trash is treasure for the other" :)

What was rejected ? When ? How ? What is the UNSC resolution or presidential statement that rejected it ? Any reference ?
(icj1, 21 September 2011 20:51)

ICJ1 my friend,
If Serbia has rejected, the world has rejected. Didn't you know that?
Also, didn't you know that Serbia is the author of both resolution 1244 and Kumanovo Agreement drafts? Serbia won the war in 1999, but was so generous that has finally decided to compose the drafts that got her forces out of Kosovo for as long as resolution and Kumanovo agreement are valid. I mean come on man! You have to be more "serious" :)

Who cares who rejected it, the fact is that it was REJECTED and will remain in the rubbish bin forever.
Simple enough?
(Peggy, 21 September 2011 11:20)

What was rejected ? When ? How ? What is the UNSC resolution or presidential statement that rejected it ? Any reference ?

For the hundredth time please list all of my wrong predictions – you have a clear slate. Please not what you think, but real errors.
(sj, 20 September 2011 23:48)
Why, because you will just come back and say that we are using sources available to everyone and you have high classified information that the rest of the world is not privy to and the real truth is not available so we should just believe you.

Any predictions you have wrong,
1. The no 2 spot at the IMF is no longer an American, he is Chinese. You tried to even convince us that we should not believe the official IMF site, as you had evidence to the contrary which you were unable to reveal.
2. The US sold off all their gold reserves and student loans. Again something you cannot show one source to prove your point. Plus the fact the US govt does not own student loans only guarantees them. Then you claimed China bought up the guarantees and would go after people in default. However, you missed the part about there are laws that would have to be changed in order for China to pursue repayment of those loans.

I have not encountered a single thing that you say as true. Some of the "predictions" are years down the road so most will never know if they came true when they die or not.

(pss, 21 September 2011 21:21)

Since 1947 the IMF head man was from Europe, but the Deputy was an American. Now who do you think was the real boss in this instance? The European or American?
China has pumped billions into the IMF on the understanding that it gets a seat on the board while the IMF is restructured. It has not been completed yet.

The first myth passed on by the US/west is that if you deal with the IMF then you are a basket case. Well during the 2007 financial crises the IMF SPENT ITS MONEY PROPPING UP THE WEST. China was asked to help by placing funds into the IMF and providing some guarantees.

If China did not pump this money into the IMF then there would be no IMF today – I hope you understand this so far. The IMF is being restructure to take on its board Brazil, India and Russia (mind you these countries were not members before). Let me explain to you a little further if the US pissed off China tomorrow and China pulls its money out then there is no US, no IMF and no Western Europe. Taking this into account who do you thinks pulls the strings on the IMF? Your problem is that if CNN or Fox don’t report it then it does not exist. Your financial industry will not talk about it openly because it can have effects on your markets.

Now your gold reserves of 400 billion and student loans were to be sold in case the Congress did not pass the bill to increase the size of US debt. In fact if you recall the dates for these were extended on two occasions and how do you think government continued to function? Through loans based on your gold reserves. The idea was to sell them in case the bill was not passed. It was a matter of a day or two for this to happen but there was a break through and the bill was passed.

Student loans – As the Us Government guarantees these loans it holds the upper hand and they can sell those guarantees on the open market. Everything has a price tag and can be sold. Let me say that it only requires a small change to the way these loans are administered to make a very nice profit. Yes legislation has to pass Congress and the Senate to sell them, and as it turns out they did not sell them for the same reason as I explained above re the gold reserves. Student loans are debt and with a small change can be taken over from banks packaged and sold. Haven’t you people learnt anything from this financial crises? That you can package up and sell on all forms of debt?

Then why the letter?
And you have proof to backup your claim? We all know the answer to that.
(doodah, 20 September 2011 18:06)


Its simply politics. The opposition would hound the Tadic government by claiming they surrendered the Serbs in Kosovo. That’s all.

Proof, well if I had posted here 3 days ago that “China State Bank has stopped foreign exchange swaps with UBS, Societe Generale, Credit Agricole, PNB Paribas you would not have believed me, but look at Reuters (20/9/11). I imagine you understand what this means? If not let me know and I’ll draw a nice little picture for you.

If you expect to read it in the Times or New York Post don’t hold your breath because they don’t go against their respective government’s policies.

My proof is there for everyone to see. Everything I have posted has come true – and I mean everything. But if you see that is not the fact please feel free to post it here.



Of course he does have the proof... Most likely his very well informed Malaysian friend knows about this (and that friend has never been wrong before) :)
(icj1, 20 September 2011 21:02)


Here is another Albanian windbag who posts BS by the tonne. He has no idea what is going on except what he see on CNN or Fox.

For the hundredth time please list all of my wrong predictions – you have a clear slate. Please not what you think, but real errors.

In FACT it was not adopted by Russia. Let's be clear about it.

(EA, 20 September 2011 23:16)
=========================

Who cares who rejected it, the fact is that it was REJECTED and will remain in the rubbish bin forever.
Simple enough?

The mere fact that it was NEVER put up for discussion at the UN because it was GUARANTEED by the rejected by Russia is a rejection.
The rejection was never putting it up for discussion.
Is this simple enough for you?
(Peggy, 22 September 2011 10:37)

That's your speculation and I can write a speculation opposite to yours and go figure out who is correct about what might or might not have happened. What I'm asking are the facts about what actually happened. Isn't this simple enough even for you ?

So, are you able to say when was the plan introduced to the UNSC for a resolution or presidential statement and it was voted down ? Do you have the reference ?

The facts that I have show that the plan was transmitted to the UNSC, but the UNSC never voted about it. Indeed, the vote was not necessary because under the terms of 1244 the UNSC did not reserve for itself the final determination of the situation in Kosovo and remained silent on the conditions for the final status of Kosovo.

Student loans – As the Us Government guarantees these loans it holds the upper hand and they can sell those guarantees on the open market.
(sj, 22 September 2011 01:09)

Dude, you lack some basic understanding of finance and accounting. If "sale" is defined as A selling something to B and receiving a payment from B in exchange, loans can be sold, because they are an asset, but guarantees can't because they are a (contingent) liability.

If A guarantees something and wants to "sell" that to B, it's not B which pays A for the "privilege" of owning the guarantees. It's A that will pay B to transfer the guarantees to B. B is not stupid to become a guarantor without receiving a payment.

What was rejected ? When ? How ? What is the UNSC resolution or presidential statement that rejected it ? Any reference ?
(icj1, 21 September 2011 20:51)
=========================

The mere fact that it was NEVER put up for discussion at the UN because it was GUARANTEED by the rejected by Russia is a rejection.
The rejection was never putting it up for discussion.
Is this simple enough for you?

Here is another Albanian windbag who posts BS by the tonne. He has no idea what is going on except what he see on CNN or Fox.
(sj, 20 September 2011 23:48)

I did not say I am an Albanian, an windbag or both but, anyway, that's why we are here my friend; to learn from you and your very reliable sources what's going on because news agencies worldwide are hiding the truth from us...



For the hundredth time please list all of my wrong predictions – you have a clear slate. Please not what you think, but real errors.
(sj, 20 September 2011 23:48)

Wrong prediction ?! I think you mean "correct predictions" because I said that your sources were never wrong, so how can I produce a list of your wrong predictions if your sources were never wrong :)