BBC News | News Front Page | World Edition

Saturday, August 28, 2010

from Victoria Scott

Hello,

Greetings to you and your familly, My name is Miss Victoria Scott,the Sales Manager of Hatton Jewellery Company at Hatton Garden London. The company has been recognized for manufacturing high quality Golden and Silver Earrings,Pendants,Necklace and Rings Jewelries.

As a specialist jewellery manufacturing company,we needs raw material by name diamond mixture which we used for the manufacturing of our company products we buy a gram of Diamond Mixture $780 from dealers here in London, recently I discovered a supplier in Middle East that offered me a gram $365 and quality is the same, I offered my company $500 per gram and they are very happy to buy 5kg.


My personal profit in 5kg is $700.000.00 (Seven hundred thousand US Dollars).I am contacting you because my manager will be traveling to UAE for the purchase of this materials in few days time.


Now I want You to act as the middle marketer between the main Dealers of this product in UAE and our company here in London in the sense that you will buy this product from the main dealers at the rate of US$365/per gram and sell to our company at the rate of US$500/per grams after I might have introduced you to our company as the main dealer, and also given you the main dealer's contact in Middle East for you to contact them to know the availability of the product in their stock.


You will met our purchasing manager on his arrival to Middle East and purchase from the main dealer, bring the product to his hotel, collect cash from him, finish. You extract our profit and take your money back to where you bring it. It's a day transaction.


My Company is presently running out of stock of this product. If you are interested and promise your honesty in this business please do get in touch with me so that we can reach into an agreement on how to share this $700.000.00 (Seven hundred thousand US Dollars) profit.


I only want you to assure me that you will be honest with me, and also keep this business secret between both of us, so that our company will not realize that I connived with you to inflate the price of the product for my own interest because if they do, as I say, I will loss my job and also my career will be jeopardized. I will tell you more things about this business if I find you are interested to do the business and I will also guide you to the success of it.


Best wishes,
Miss.Victoria Scott
United Kingdom.
Tel:+447024027808
+447546687299

Friday, August 20, 2010

On Standing Committee Report on Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Bill


Protecting Foreign Suppliers

Clause 17 of the Bill currently reads as follows:
17. The operator of a nuclear installation shall have a right of recourse where -
(a) such right is expressly provided for in a contract in writing;
(b) the nuclear incident has resulted from the wilful act or gross negligence on
the part of the supplier of the material, equipment or services, or of his employee;
(c) the nuclear incident has resulted from the act of commission or omission of
a person done with the intent to cause nuclear damage.

The Standing Committee has recommended that Clause 17 should now be amended as follows (changes in bold):

17. The operator of a nuclear installation shall have a right of recourse where -
(a) such right is expressly provided for in a contract in writing; and
(b) the nuclear incident has resulted as a consequence of latent or patent defect, supply of sub-standard material, defective equipment or services or from the gross negligence on the part of the supplier of the material, equipment or services.
(c) the nuclear incident has resulted from the act of commission or omission of
a person done with the intent to cause nuclear damage.

By adding "and" in sub-clause 17 (a), the right of the operator to claim damages from the supplier of nuclear equipment and material (right of recourse) has now been made entirely contingent on whether such right is explicitly provided in the private contract between the operator and supplier. In the likely scenario of the foreign suppliers not agreeing to provide for right of recourse in the contract, they cannot be held liable for any nuclear damage, even if they have supplied defective equipment. What is more dubious is that this significant weakening of Clause 17 has been done under the guise of strengthening the right of recourse against the foreign suppliers.

The US administration and the American nuclear industry lobby have objected to sub-clause 17 (b). They are not prepared to accept the right of recourse for the Indian operator vis-à-vis American suppliers. The Standing Committee recommendation is fully in line with the demand of the American lobbies. This amendment linking 17 (a) and 17 (b) will make it worse than what is there in the original Bill.

Liability Cap Unacceptable

The recommendation to enhance the operator's liability cap from Rs. 500 crore to Rs. 1500 crore is hardly significant, since total liability for each nuclear incident remains capped at 300 million SDRs (Rs. 2122.40 crore or $ 455 million) as per Clause 6 (1). This amount is less than even the Bhopal settlement of $ 470 million, which has been acknowledged as grossly inadequate by the Government itself.

It is noteworthy that none of the international nuclear liability conventions set any cap on total liability, but only set a floor. Countries like South Korea and Sweden have set operator's liability at 300 million SDRs, not total liability. The operator's liability in the US is $ 11.9 billion. Countries like Japan, Russia and Germany do not have any cap on total liability. In contrast, the Indian bill seeks to cap total liability to 300 million SDRs, displaying scant regard for the lives and security of the Indian people.

Further Objections

The Standing Committee report has failed to take on board several more objections to the Bill, especially regarding the extant provisions protecting the operator and suppliers from facing litigation and the ambiguities regarding nuclear accidents in defence installations and the jurisdiction of the AERB. It has also made an objectionable suggestion to create a liability fund to reduce government liability by levying additional charges on electricity.

The recommendations of the Standing Committee does not alter the fact that the intent behind the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Bill, as well as its provisions, are meant to facilitate India's joining the Convention on Supplementary Compensation (CSC), which was explicitly committed by the UPA-I Government to the US in 2008, during the nuclear deal negotiations. Other than the US, no other country having a substantial number of nuclear plants have signed or ratified the CSC. None of India's neighbours who could be affected by a trans-boundary impact of a nuclear accident are signatories to CSC and its funds cannot be used for augmenting trans-border compensation for settlements. India gains nothing from joining the CSC.

Monday, August 16, 2010

Advertisement for Employment opportunity


Please be guided by the attachment


Thursday, August 05, 2010

Sunday, August 01, 2010

and now BlacMail !

http://www.blacmail.in/


What is BlacMail?
BlacMail is a software that allows you to receive and send emails on your mobile phone instantly. And the best part- it doesn't require a fancy phone or even GPRS!

What makes BlacMail different?
» Get mails instantly, anywhere and anytime
» No GPRS or smart phones required
» You don't need to depend on GPRS connectivity to receive mails, it works anywhere in India!
» Use Whitelist to filter out spam and get mails from selected people only
» BlacMail is a separate application so your inbox isn't cluttered with both messages and emails.
    The emails are stored in a separate inbox meant only for them

Do I need GPRS on my mobile to use BlacMail?
No! GPRS isn't a necessity for using BlacMail.


--

The Hindu - Breaking News