Monday, January 26, 2015

Or Landing success for LiveLeak. 1:30-2:00 for the actual crash. Did about $2000 damage to his Hang Glider.



from Liveleak.com Rss Feed - Search results for 'fail' http://ift.tt/1D9c3x2

v

Hang Glider Landing Fail

By: jironde on: 7:53 PM
Aleppo: Fake Symian Army FAIL



from Liveleak.com Rss Feed - Search results for 'fail' http://ift.tt/15Kb9wi

v

Dumb FSA rat doesn't like bullet shell in his face

By: jironde on: 7:08 PM
Cop on motorcycle catches drivers on phones.



from Liveleak.com Rss Feed - Search results for 'fail' http://ift.tt/15Abwsj

v

Busted!

By: jironde on: 7:08 PM
"Thank you for the kind invitation to speak here today. I'm flattered to have the opportunity. I spent a couple of years here studying at Oxford as a younger man, and I have many fond memories. ... My objective in this speech is to speak clearly about what I believe to be America's proper role in international affairs; to speak bluntly about the nature of the threats we face and the recent tragic events in France; and to suggest what I think is the way forward. .......... Today, we face other vicious and implacable threats in the form of radical Islam, a nuclear armed North Korea, possibly a soon-to-be nuclear armed Iran, and a resurgent expansionist Russia. How to face down and neutralize these threats is not a mystery. The tried and true prescription must be employed again: a strong economy, a strong military, and leaders willing and able to assert moral, economic and military leadership in the cause of freedom. I believe that American foreign policy should stand on three basic principles - Freedom, Security, and Truth. Allow me to explain. It starts with Freedom. My parents immigrated to America more than 40 years ago. Just like the pilgrims who migrated from Europe to North America, they were not really coming to a place or to a physical location. They were coming to an idea. And that idea was freedom. So the first tenet of American foreign policy must always be freedom, and the relentless pursuit of freedom for our people, and for all people, regardless of race, creed, religion, ethnicity, or any other artificial divisions, which humans use to divide us one from another. America must always be a beacon of freedom throughout the world. I'm not na"ive enough to suggest that the entire world will ever be free, but I'm also completely opposed to ever giving up on the notion that all people everywhere in the world deserve and desire to be free. In other words, we may never achieve perfection in this world, or in our personal lives for that matter, but that is no reason not to chase after it. What does it mean to be free? Well, it means the ability to conduct commerce both inside and outside your borders, it means the right to speak freely, to publish any cartoons you want, it means the right to worship freely, it means the right to self-determination. The next principle is of course security. America must and will pay any price to defend itself and to defend its allies. No two countries are the same, but those countries that value freedom and democracy and civility and decency must band together, and must defend each other. Those countries that desire security and harbor no ill will toward their neighbors must stick together in an increasingly dangerous world. The third principle that is crucial is truth. We must speak the truth, to each other, and to our own countrymen. When a country or a movement is behaving badly on the international stage, we must not pretend otherwise. You cannot remedy a problem if you will not name it and define it. One of the most prominent examples in our day is ISIS and all forms of radical Islam. These people have no legitimate claim, they have no justification for their cowardly, barbaric, and inhuman behavior, and we must not pretend otherwise. Our former Secretary of State in America recently said that we need to "show respect for our enemies" and "empathize with their perspective and point of view." Well, yes, understanding our enemies as a means of destroying them, I'm all for that. But empathizing with them as if perhaps we can find some common ground, I have no interest in that kind of mindless naivet'e. Let me be blunt about this. I want America's allies to trust us and respect us, and I want our enemies to fear us. Every day our enemies spend their time trying to avoid our justice is a day they are not plotting against us. And I fear that in recent years this has not been the case. The events of the past several years clearly suggest that America's allies are often less than certain that they can count on us, and our enemies too often do not fear us. Of course, as Americans we want all people to live in harmony, and we do not desire to have any enemies. But the simple truth is that we do, but that is not of our doing. There are people in the world who mean us harm, who desire our downfall, and who simply detest us because we stand for freedom. I have no interest in coddling them, or pretending that bad is good. Sugar coating the reality of the situation serves no purpose; we must not be afraid to speak the truth. A wise man once said, "the truth will set you free." Of course, one can easily imagine the critique of my three principles - that they are too general or lofty or not sufficiently specific. But one thing I've found in government service - if you lack defining principles, you will lack coherent policies. If you fail to get the principles right, you will certainly fail in the execution of specific policies. In many ways, that is the problem with American foreign policy today. I cannot stand here today and articulate to you what America's foreign policy is at present. In fact, it increasingly seems as if we do not have one. This must change. Now, let's talk very directly about the elephant in the room...that is, allow me to discuss the recent horrific events in France. I will warn you in advance that I'm going to say some things that are not politically correct, so brace yourselves. To be clear, I have no interest in defaming any religion, nor do I have any interest in assigning the maniacal acts of radical Islamists to millions of Muslims worldwide. I'm interested only in dealing with reality and facts. And the fact is that radical Islamists do not believe in freedom or common decency nor are they willing to accommodate them in any way and anywhere. We need to stop pretending otherwise. We are fools to pretend otherwise. How many Muslims in this world agree with these radicals? I have no idea, I hope it is a small minority. But it is clear that far too many do, and it is clear that they must be stopped. For example, note what radical Islamists do when given the chance in territories they control either in the Middle East or even in Europe. In Iraq, ISIS commits genocide, enslaves women and beheads opponents. And in the West, non-assimilationist Muslims establish enclaves and carry out as much of Sharia law as they can without regard for the laws of the democratic countries which provided them a new home. It is startling to think that any country would allow, even unofficially, for a so called "no-go zone." The idea that a free country would allow for specific areas of its country to operate in an autonomous way that is not free and is in direct opposition to its laws is hard to fathom. Another example is the rise of anti-Semitism in many places, even in continental Europe. Over the last couple of years we have been alarmed to see blatant and astoundingly bold acts of persecution and bigotry against Jewish persons and property, to such a degree that Jewish emigration from Europe is increasing. How does such evil rise again in democratic countries? I believe it is because radical Islamists have been given too wide a berth to establish their own nation within a nation. I am encouraged to see France's Prime Minister speak out against this travesty. In America we are quite happy to welcome freedom loving people, regardless of religion, who want to abide by our laws allowing for freedom of expression and a host of other democratic freedoms. But we will never allow for any sect of people to set up their own areas where they establish their own set of laws. We have to stop pretending that right and wrong do not exist. For example - Sharia law is not just different than our law, it's not just a cultural difference, it is oppression and it is wrong. It subjugates women and treats them as property, and it is antithetical to valuing all of human life equally. It is the very definition of oppression. We must stop pretending otherwise. In my country, Christianity is the largest religion. And we require exactly no one to conform to it. And we do not discriminate against anyone who does not conform to it. It's called freedom. A so-called religion that allows for and endorses killing those who oppose it is not a religion at all, it is a terrorist movement. I do continue to believe and hope that most Muslims oppose these bloodthirsty acts of terror. But that is not the point. Whether they do or not, the point is that radical Islamists do advocate the slaughter of those who reject their views. Free peoples everywhere must not pretend otherwise and must not coddle those who hold these views. And they must have courage. I favor robust debate on everything - on religion, on policy, on politics, on everything. It is called freedom. But when debate stops, and when a movement decides that they no longer want to debate their ideas, but rather they want to simply subdue, silence, and kill those who disagree...that is called terrorism, barbarism, and inhuman behavior, and it cannot and must not be tolerated. Let's be honest here, Islam has a problem. If Islam does not support what is happening in the name of Islam, then they need to stand up and stop it. Many Islamic leaders argue that these are the acts of a radical few. Ok, it is their problem, and they need to deal with it. Muslim leaders must make clear that anyone who commits acts of terror in the name of Islam is in fact not practicing Islam at all. If they refuse to say this, then they are condoning these acts of barbarism. There is no middle ground. Specifically, Muslim leaders need to condemn anyone who commits these acts of violence and clearly state that these people are evil and are enemies of Islam. It's not enough to simply condemn violence, they must stand up and loudly proclaim that these people are not martyrs who will receive a reward in the afterlife, and rather they are murderers who are going to hell. If they refuse to do that, then they are part of the problem. There is no middle ground here. Let's remember what we are talking about here. These terrorists are not soldiers who are fighting nobly on some valiant battlefield against an opposing army. No. These are cowards who are walking up to unarmed civilians-men, women AND children-- in the work place and the grocery store and murdering them with weapons of war. And now that I have been politically incorrect with regard to radical Islam, I might as well go all in and say some less than flattering things about the Western world today. One thing that must be addressed is the notion of assimilation. This is a problem not only in Europe, but in America as well. There is a way of thinking by many on the Left in America, which disturbs me greatly, and unfortunately I can view the fallacy and the folly of this way of thinking when I look at the situation today in much of Europe. There was once a time when it was taken for granted in America that people who came to our country were coming to America to be Americans. They were not coming to be Norwegians who live in America but who do not identify with American values and customs and mores. They were not coming to try to set up regions where native Norwegian laws superseded American laws. They were not coming to try to develop regions where people spoke Norwegian instead of America's language of English. Historians rightly referred to America as the great melting pot...and it was. But over time, a different philosophy has crept in, and that philosophy now dominates the thinking of the American Left, and perhaps even the mainstream of thinking in Europe. This philosophy holds the notion that assimilation is not necessary or even preferable. But it really goes further than that. This philosophy holds the view that it is wrong to expect assimilation, that assimilation is colonialist, assimilation is backward, and assimilation is in fact evidence of cultural bigotry and insensitivity. They think it is wrong to expect that people who chose to immigrate to your country should be expected to endorse and abide by your laws. They think it is unenlightened, discriminatory, and even racist to expect immigrants to endorse and assimilate into the culture in their new country. This is complete rubbish. I'm not here to tell any country in Europe how to handle its own immigration policies. That is your business, not mine. But in America, immigration policy is a matter of very animated debate. As a governor, I am one of 50 men and women who every day deals with both the good and bad effects of our federal immigration policy. It is not a faculty lounge debate for us, but real issues that affect our citizens. It is my view that immigration can make a country stronger, or it can make a country weaker. It really depends on whether the immigrants coming to your country are coming to join your culture, your mores, your laws, and become a part of your history. Or, are they coming to be set apart, are they unwilling to assimilate, do they have their own laws they want to establish, do they fundamentally disagree with your political culture? Therein lies the difference between immigration and invasion. In fact, one can argue that what some immigrants of late desire to do is to colonize Western countries because setting up your own enclave and demanding recognition of a no-go zone are exactly that. In America, I am a big proponent of legal immigration of people who want to come to our country and assimilate into our culture. I am all for people who want to come and embrace freedom, embrace our laws, work hard, learn our language, and pursue what we call the American Dream. These immigrants add to our strength. Let me tell you my personal story. My parents immigrated to America over 40 years ago They had never been to America; there was no such thing as an Internet. All they knew about America was that it was said to be a land of freedom and opportunity. It was said to be a place where you could make your own way, a place where hard work was rewarded, a place where you were not guaranteed success, but you were guaranteed the opportunity to pursue your dreams. My parents came in search of the American Dream, and they caught it. To them, America was not so much a place, it was an idea. My dad and mom told my brother and me that we came to America to be Americans. Not Indian-Americans, simply Americans. If we wanted to be Indians, we would have stayed in India. It's not that they are embarrassed to be from India, they love India. But they came to America because they were looking for greater opportunity and freedom. I do not believe in hyphenated Americans. This view gets me into some trouble with the media back home. They like to refer to Indian-Americans, Irish-Americans, African-Americans, Italian-Americans, Mexican-Americans, and all the rest. To be clear - I am not suggesting for one second that people should be shy or embarrassed about their ethnic heritage. But, I am explicitly saying that it is completely reasonable for nations to discriminate between allowing people into their country who want to embrace their culture, or allowing people into their country who want to destroy their culture, or establish a separate culture within. It is completely reasonable and even necessary for a sovereign nation to discriminate between people who want to join them and people who want to divide them. And immigration policy should have nothing at all to do with the color of anyone's skin. I find people who care about skin pigmentation to be the most dimwitted lot around. I want nothing to do with that. Today, many countries seem to act as if their country is simply a geographic location on a map, a landmass with some borders and a flag with some random colors on it. That is it, and that is all it is. There is nothing else. There is no history, there is no culture, no cultural identity, there is nothing that binds them together, and there are no common beliefs, no accepted social mores, not even agreement on the idea of freedom or the laws of the land. Many of these people don't consider themselves to be citizens of any country, they see themselves as citizens of the world, or citizens of some other land they were born in, or their parents were born in, or their parents' parents were born in. There is a way forward, but it requires boldness, a commitment to human liberty and strong alliances among democratic nations. Now is the time for freedom loving people to wake up. Now is the time for freedom loving people to speak the truth. Now is the time for freedom loving people across the entire world to courageously stand up for freedom."



from Liveleak.com Rss Feed - Search results for 'fail' http://ift.tt/1C3xTow

v

Gov. Bobby Jindal's (R-LA) Speech At Oxford

By: jironde on: 9:46 AM
http://ift.tt/1BaU5Ye Interview with the Chairman of Novorossyia Parliament Oleg Tsarev By Global Research News Global Research, January 25, 2015 Fort Russ By Ivan Volkov Translated from Russian by J.Hawk Arseniy Yatsenyuk already gave orders to conduct an information campaign against the Ukrainian president. Arsen Avakov is collecting compromising information on Poroshenko. A Ridus Exclusive. Chairman of Novorossia Parliament Oleg Tsarev gave an exclusive interview to Ridus. He said why the Kiev US embassy puppetmasters, together with Turchinov, Yatsenyuk, and the odious oligarch Kolomoysky who is always chasing dollars, want to see Poroshenko overthrown with every fiber of their beings. Question: Oleg Anatolyevich, you said that the overseas patrons of Poroshenko are preparing his overthrow. How did he fail to satisfy the US president? There are three groups working on Ukraine in the US embassy. And even though they are competing for influence over policy, just as local elites compete for US approval, they are in agreement that Poroshenko needs to be replaced. First of all, he has good relations with the Russian ambassador Zurabov and a profitable business in Lipetsk. There are also other factors which I don't wish to describe so as not to complicate the situation further. Secondly, Poroshenko is more likely to conclude peace with the Donbass, while the US needs a war. Not because his conscience is bothering due to the innocently murdered children. Poroshenko understands that in peacetime he will have more power. Then he would become the second most important political figure in Ukraine. While the top of the podium is occupied by the US ambassador. During the time of military operations MVD head Avakov has an advantage, and Avakov is a prot'eg'e of Turchinov and Yatsenyuk, who are Poroshenko's competitors. Then there's Kolomoysky, who has formed an entire army in the east of the country out of criminal elements, which does not take Kiev's orders. Poroshenko can deal with his competition only in peacetime. Question: What are the disagreements between Poroshenko and Yatsenyuk, Turchinov, Kolomoysky? Poroshenko has been in conflict with Yatsenyuk and Turchinov since Yatsenyuk became prime minister. Yatsenyuk began to earn a lot of money off that job and did not want to share with anyone. Poroshenko understands that one of them (Yatsenyuk or Turchinov) can occupy the president's seat. He did everything to exclude Yatsenyuk from the political team. But VP Biden flew in and insisted on a big coalition. Games continued up to then. On the one hand Yatsenyuk wanted a coalition without Poroshenko, on the other, Poroshenko wanted a coalition without Yatsenyuk. Kolomoysky needs resources to improve his business, which is in a difficult situation. But Poroshenko did not give him refinancing. He received refinancing only once, after he established his assets in the Crimea. Then he threw means his assets onto the currency market, leading to a jump in national currency. Incidentally, at the moment the hryvnya exchange rate is holding on only because all exchange points have been closed. There is an exchange rate, but dollars can be bought only from "bosses." The actual exchange rate is 30-40% higher than the state acknowledges. Kolomoysky desperately needs money and is not getting them. That's why the conflict with Poroshenko. And, believe me, I know Kolomoysky well. If he thought such conflict were impossible, he would not have entered into it. Kolomoysky considers Poroshenko a very weak figure. And that's all there's to it. Poroshenko has nobody to rely on. Americans don't like him, and neither does the internal competition. So the president is in a critical position. The stakes are very high. His competitors want to carry out another armed overthrow, and might simply kill Poroshenko. So for him what's at stake is not even money, but life. Question: How are Poroshenko's opponents preparing? Arseniy Yatsenyuk already held a closed meeting with Avakov and a few deputies. Yatsenyuk tasked them with organizing an information campaign against Poroshenko. He must be made appear guilty for the economic catastrophe. What's more, they'll blame Poroshenko for the course of the hryvnya, the failure of the military operation on the Donbass, and also appointing foreigners to ministerial posts. Avakov reassured everyone that he will share with the media participating in the attack information from wiretaps on Poroshenko and from collected secret information. Question: There is a version in the internet that at some point Ukraine will suffer an economic collapse, and the current Kiev regime will simply dissolve. How would you comment that? Things don't happen all by themselves. There is no reason for optimism. The US has many scenarios. First of all, they have created a whole slew of loyal politicians. Once the pro-US Poroshenko leaves, he'll be replaced by the pro-US Turchinov or Yatsenyuk. Then the mayor of Lvov Sadovy or someone else. They are all pro-US. There are no non-pro-US politicians capable of coming to power. The bench is well protected and will implement the will of the US. During the Vietnam War, the pro-US authorities of that country changed many times. But the war continued. Every new leader shifted responsibility for earlier failures to the earlier one, and the cycle continued without pause. The war stopped only when the communist North won it. Neither the political situation nor the military nor economic influenced it. Question: Are there also several scenarios for the Donbass? Absolutely. The first scenario is the military confrontation, which is showing its flaws. But the Ukrainian authorities believed they had enough military power to overcome LPR/DPR resistance. They considered two variants: a complete elimination of us-the separatists or, if the worst comes to worst, take three quarters of Donetsk and isolate LPR and DPR from one another. But it didn't work out like that. Novorossia armed forces offered resistance and are now storming Avdeevka and Peski in order to stop the shelling of Donetsk. The Ukrainian army is panicking. The road from Donetsk to Kiev is full of vehicles, nationalists are fleeing with their loot. Something similar is taking place in Mariupol. The second scenario is the economic isolation of the Donbass. LPR and DPR cannot run their economy without support. Russia will be forced to help. Then it faces a choice. If they help, Russia will be punished for military assistance, if no, they'll punish for economic support. Right now none of the Ukrainian politicians are speaking of peace and restoring neighborly relations with Russia. They understand that the US will control the situation for some time to come and therefore are using the anti-Russian slogans just to survive. However, some of my fellow deputies are taking their families out of Kiev abroad or to other cities because they don't want to suffer from the vacuum of power that will occur in the event of a coup. Question: so the Ukrainian tragedy will continue to make headlines for a long time? If nobody shows interest in Ukraine, for a very long time. Russia has not interfered in Ukrainian politics for over 20 years. Americans and Europeans entirely freely worked in the country. They spent billions of dollars. They created 5 thousand of NGOs, 150 thousand workers received their salaries. That's an entire army that obeyed orders and created the Maidan when it was needed. Russia was working with individual members of the elite, not paying attention to the public opinion. And those representatives did not always discharge their responsibilities due to their personal mentality. That was a big mistake. Also, when CIS was formed, Russia undertook not to work on the territory of adjacent states. It meant that Russia for a long time had no ability to influence CIS countries' public opinion. Therefore right now we must not let the situation resove itself. The fascist regimes in Latin America survived for decades with US support. Political opponents were eliminated, death squads were at work, the masses suffered in poverty, the economy was destroyed, but nobody could do anything. Question: So they'll overthrow Poroshenko, but the peaceful citizenry will continue to die...Minsk Agreements are not being implemented, the "Normandy Four" meeting was cancelled... Right now Russia is trying to establish some sort of a relationship with Poroshenko. But if he is overthrown, it will be an entirely different country. Even greater Russophobes will come to power, hard-core US puppets who have no ties to Russia. Poroshenko spoke about his presidency already three years before coming to power. He came to Moscow, met with influential people. Poroshenko, as you may remember, was a minister of foreign affairs, he has excellent contacts. I know that the overthrow is planned for the anniversary of the Maidan. On February 15 there will be a national assembly in Kiev. And it's entirely possible that about 8pm it will transform into an armed assault on the president's administration, as it did when Yanukovych was president. Poroshenko understands the risks perfectly well. He already created a working group to prevent a coup. Its members are highly placed "power ministry" officials and those members of the administration who oversee the power structures. Translator's Note: Tsarev's understanding of the internal Ukrainian politics is certainly second to none. I would take issue with his characterization of the level of US interest and involvement. Clearly, the US government tried to score a cheap geopolitical victory by pulling Ukraine into its orbit. But neither the US nor the EU are showing any interest of paying the cost of maintaining the current regime in power, which is a major difference between the current US approach and the policies adopted during the Cold War, when the USG spent billions of dollars on its fascist puppets. Poroshenko is likely to be overthrown due to lack of US support rather than a US plot. Moreover, one has to keep in mind that should Poroshenko be overthrown, it will be difficult for the US to justify subsidizing yet another Ukrainian government that came into power through violence. There are no indications the US is planning to open the spigots once Poroshenko leaves, and there is no anti-Poroshenko campaign in the Western media, which would be a sure sign of an impending overthrow. The people who are likely to be doing the overthrowing, the Right Sector et al., do not follow orders from the US or anywhere else-they are merely reacting to the weakness of the current system, including not only Poroshenko but also Yatsenyuk, Turchinov, and everyone else, who are as vulnerable as Poroshenko, if only because it's Yatsenyuk whose face is associated with the "shock therapy", not Poroshenko.



from Liveleak.com Rss Feed - Search results for 'fail' http://ift.tt/1GUK1eq

v

Divisions within the Kiev Regime. Will President Poroshenko Be Overthrown?

By: jironde on: 7:09 AM
Christian militia in Central African Republic have carried out ethnic cleansing of the Muslim population during the country's ongoing civil war, but there is no proof there was genocidal intent, a United Nations commission of inquiry has determined. The final report of the inquiry, which was submitted to the U.N. Security Council on Dec.19, 2014 said up to 6,000 people had been killed though it "considers that such estimates fail to capture the full magnitude of the killings that occurred."The mostly Christian or animist "anti-balaka" militia took up arms in 2013 in response to months of looting and killing by mostly Muslim Seleka rebels who had toppled President Francois Bozize and seized power in March the same year.The U.N. Security Council established the commission of inquiry in December 2013. "Thousands of people died as a result of the conflict. Human rights violations and abuses were committed by all parties. The Seleka coalition and the anti-balaka are also responsible for war crimes and crimes against humanity," the inquiry said."Although the commission cannot conclude that there was genocide, ethnic cleansing of the Muslim population by the anti-balaka constitutes a crime against humanity," it found.The report said "the existence of the necessary element of genocidal intent" had not been established. In September 2014, the International Criminal Court opened an investigation into allegations of murder, rape and the recruiting of child soldiers in the Central African Republic. Some 5,600 African Union peacekeepers, deployed in December 2013, and about 2,000 French troops have struggled to stem the violence in the impoverished landlocked country of 4.6 million people.The United Nations took over the African Union peacekeeping mission in September and is mandated by the Security Council to double its size to nearly 12,000 troops and police.The U.N. commission of inquiry said the deployment of the African Union peacekeepers, French troops and then the U.N. peacekeeping mission (MINUSCA) had "been primarily responsible for the prevention of an even greater explosion of violence."



from Liveleak.com Rss Feed - Search results for 'fail' http://ift.tt/1EkU1vm

v

UN Report: Christian Militia Attacks on Muslims Not Genocide

By: jironde on: 5:53 AM
Islamabad: An apparent rebel attack on a key power line plunged around 80 per cent of Pakistan into darkness on Sunday, the latest reminder of the country's crippling energy crisis. The power failure, one of the worst Pakistan has experienced, caused electricity to be cut in major cities nationwide, including the capital Islamabad, and even affected one of the country's international airports. It came as a fuel crisis grips the country, forcing Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif to cancel his trip to the World Economic Forum in Davos. Consumers often fail to pay already low state-mandated power prices in Pakistan, meaning state utilities lose money and cannot upgrade infrastructure. The latest power failure began after midnight when a transmission line connected to the national grid was damaged in an explosion, officials said, apparently carried out by a separatist group in restive Baluchistan province. A senior official at the national grid station in Islamabad said around 80 per cent of the country was hit by the power outage, while an AFP reporter in the eastern city of Lahore said the city's international airport also suffered a blackout, though flights were not affected. "The fault in the system was caused by a main transmission line being blown up in Baluchistan," Minister of State for Water and Power Abid Sher Ali said. Ali apologised for the outage, and blamed rebels in Baluchistan's Naseerabad district, in the country's southwest. Electricity was later restored across the country, a spokesman for the national power company said, with all power grids online except for two nuclear power plants which would be fully operational by the end of the day. "The blowing up of two power pylons in Naseerabad last night created a backward surge which affected the system," the spokesman said. "It was an act of sabotage." Pakistan's electricity distribution system is a complex - and delicate - web and a major fault at one section often leads to chain reactions and breakdowns of power generation and transmission. Younas Dhaga, the top bureaucrat in the water and power ministry, said the power lines were also blown up on January 13 and January 22, but the department had kept the grid functioning on those occasions. Dhaga added the government was investing in improvements in the distribution system to avoid future blackouts, but it would take up to three years to complete the task. "We have increased the generation, but did not invest in transmission nor developed any alternate system to divert the load," Dhaga said. In addition to chronic infrastructure problems, the energy sector is also trapped into a vicious cycle of "circular debt" brought on by the dual effect of the government setting low electricity prices and customers failing to pay for it. State utilities therefore lose money, and cannot pay private power generating companies, which in turn cannot pay the oil and gas suppliers, who cut off the supply. The fuel crisis began last week when Pakistan State Oil was forced to slash imports because banks refused to extend any more credit to the government-owned company, which supplies 80 per cent of the country's oil. The shortfall led to long queues of angry motorists at petrol stations, though these have since dissipated as fuel supplies have reached the pumps. Solving Pakistan's energy crisis was a key campaign pledge for Sharif in the run-up to the 2013 general election, and the shortage is heaping fresh pressure on his government. Islamabad signed agreements with long-term ally Beijing last year to pave the way for Chinese state-owned companies to help build at least four new power stations in Pakistan, but US sanctions against Tehran over its nuclear programme and Pakistan's own lack of cash have hampered the completion of a multi-billion-dollar gas pipeline from neighbouring Iran. For more news from Khaleej Times, follow us on Facebook at http://ift.tt/1h22cPf, and on Twitter at @khaleejtimes



from Liveleak.com Rss Feed - Search results for 'fail' http://ift.tt/1EkEhbM

v

Pakistan Plunges into Darkness as 80% without electricty

By: jironde on: 4:53 AM

 

Our Team Members

Copyright © All right? | Designed by Templateism.com | WPResearcher.com