Dog Brothers Public Forum
Return To Homepage
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
April 25, 2014, 04:15:02 AM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
Welcome to the Dog Brothers Public Forum.
79267 Posts in 2227 Topics by 1037 Members
Latest Member: DCoutinho
* Home Help Search Login Register
+  Dog Brothers Public Forum
|-+  DBMA Espanol
| |-+  Espanol Discussion
| | |-+  Argentina
« previous next »
Pages: [1] Print
Author Topic: Argentina  (Read 1179 times)
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 29669


« on: June 04, 2013, 08:29:23 AM »

https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.381734021946664.1073741859.100003302088830&type=1
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 29669


« Reply #1 on: June 20, 2013, 05:29:07 AM »

Let the Howl go forth:

New DBMA Training Group Leaders

Dog Brothers Martial Arts DLO / KALI TUDO Studio – Buenos Aires – Argentina
Guillermo Walter Tabares – DBMA Training Group Leader
E mail : dogbrothersdlostudio@outlook.es
Tel: 54 (011) 15-3-899-5769

Guillermo is what Argentina calls a "Special Forces" LEO.  His group will be focusing on DLO and Kali Tudo.

Hernan Sevaine
Kombat Eskrima; buenos Aires, Argentina
eskrimakombat@gmail.com

Hernan's group will be focusing on Real Contact Stickfighting and Kali Tudo.

Nicolas Wachsman's group, in place for some six years now, continues in action as well.

Buenos Aires is a big city and having three groups, each in a different area of the city, will allow for good synergy and make it possible for me to go to BA every year.
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 29669


« Reply #2 on: July 02, 2013, 10:17:03 AM »

http://www.accionmarcial.com/revista-14-junio-2013/
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 29669


« Reply #3 on: July 22, 2013, 12:52:32 PM »

A New Twist in Argentina's Bid to Dodge Its Debts
Now the International Monetary Fund may aid an effort to stiff creditors.
By JAMES K. GLASSMAN

The long-running drama of Argentina's attempts to dodge its creditors has taken a weird turn. On Wednesday, it was widely reported that the International Monetary Fund may file a legal brief with the U.S. Supreme Court—backing the South American country against its lenders.

This is the same IMF that, after years of warnings, issued a "declaration of censure" against Argentina in February for reporting phony economic data, such as an inflation rate 15 points lower than reality. Unless it cleans up its statistical act, Argentina risks becoming the only nation since 1954 to be expelled from the organization.

The IMF's chief, Christine Lagarde, has not explained why the fund may intervene on behalf of Argentina. But several months ago an IMF report raised the issue that if Argentina is forced to pay up, minority creditors in the future will have too much power to determine how sovereign debts in default are restructured.

But Argentina's $100 billion default is far from typical. For one thing, the country has the money to pay. For another, when it borrowed in the 1990s, Argentina gave special protections to its lenders that other debtor nations usually do not.

The really important principle in the Argentine case that needs defending is not about minority creditors and a deadbeat government. At stake is New York's status as the top destination for sovereigns to issue bonds.

Some $420 billion in sovereign debt subject to New York law is outstanding, and this market cannot operate smoothly unless creditors are able to enforce contracts. If Argentina gets away with stiffing creditors, one consequence will be that lenders in the future will demand higher rates for their higher risk; another is that they won't make loans.

Argentina's sordid tale began in 2001 with the largest default in history. Many exasperated creditors have since settled, but others—including countries such as Germany and private lenders from Italian pensioners to American hedge funds—have held out, demanding that the nation live up to its promises. But Argentina's president, Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner, has ignored more than 100 court orders to pay up and snubbed the World Bank's arbitration panel. Once the world's 10th-richest country per capita, Argentina has gone rogue, flouting international law and tradition.

Recently the legal noose began to tighten. A federal district court in New York ruled in favor of creditors last year, ordering Argentina to settle with all the parties, not just some of them. Argentina appealed, telling judges it wouldn't abide by a decision it didn't like. After an appeals court upheld the district court ruling, Argentina asked the U.S. Supreme Court to hear the case, claiming that the 1976 Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, or FSIA, prevents the U.S. from ordering a transfer of Argentine property.

This is the defendant that the IMF—charged with keeping the global monetary, trade and credit system stable—may choose to support. The U.S. government has decided otherwise. After a meeting on July 12 with lawyers from both sides, the Justice Department informed parties that it would not file an unsolicited friend-of-the-court brief to back Argentina's new appeal.

The U.S. has sent mixed signals in the past. In 2011, the Treasury Department announced that, because Argentina had ignored rulings to pay creditors, the U.S. would no longer vote in international organizations to approve new loans to the country. (The U.K. followed suit earlier this year.) But the Justice Department did file an amicus brief before the federal appeals court on Argentina's side in the most recent legal go-round. One U.S. concern: By upholding the district court decision, the appeals court could "undermine long-standing U.S. efforts to promote orderly resolutions of sovereign debt crises." Another was that a ruling favorable to Argentina's creditors may contravene FSIA.

By insisting that Argentina abide by the rule of law, however, the U.S. will encourage the resolution of debt crises by putting sovereign debtors on notice that they cannot act with impunity. As for FSIA, it is irrelevant in this case.

With its long history of previous defaults, Argentina had to give lenders significant incentives to put their money at risk. This included a waiver of sovereign immunity, an agreement to have disputes settled in New York courts, and a so-called pari passu clause that required all creditors to be treated equally.

The IMF, meanwhile, deserves an Academy Award for cynicism. After the default in 2001, the fund pressed Argentina hard to resolve its debts, including the billions it owed the IMF itself. Its pressure suddenly eased at the end of 2005 when Argentina paid the IMF in full.

If the executive board of the IMF joins Argentina in the Supreme Court, ignoring its long-standing policy of neutrality in debt disputes, it will be sending exactly the wrong message to other countries that might be encouraged to welch on their debts.

Mr. Glassman served as U.S. undersecretary of state for public diplomacy and public affairs from 2008-09.
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 29669


« Reply #4 on: July 24, 2013, 10:06:00 AM »

A High-Stakes Legal Battle for the IMF
Geopolitical Diary
Wednesday, July 24, 2013 - 00:47 Text Size Print

The board of the International Monetary Fund on Tuesday rejected a plan to file a petition urging the U.S. Supreme Court to take up the case of Argentina against holdout bondholders. The possibility that the IMF would even consider taking part in the decade-long fight between Argentina and investment firms holding outstanding debt from the country's 2001-2002 economic crisis poses many ironies. This is because the IMF helped tip Argentina into the crisis and continues to have hostile relations with the country. The motivations of IMF Managing Director Christine Lagarde in pushing for the case had little to do with Argentina, however, and everything to do with the future management of the European Union's ongoing political and financial crisis.

Argentina's debt default of December 2001 was the largest in history at the time. The country managed to restructure 93 percent of the total debt in two tranches, first in 2005 and then in 2010. The remainder is under litigation by bondholders who are suing to receive the full sum of the debt owed, plus interest. The case has been ongoing for years, and through a variety of legal means Argentina has made clear that it has no intention of paying off the bonds at face value. To do so would almost certainly make it harder for Argentina to restructure debt in the future by demonstrating to lenders that Argentina could be pressured into accepting a settlement. The case took a new turn in February 2012 when New York District Judge Thomas Griesa issued an injunction ordering Argentina to treat all bondholders equally, essentially preventing Argentina from paying creditors holding current debt unless they at the same time paid creditors holding outstanding debt.


Griesa's order would, in sum, force Argentina into technical default if the country persisted in its refusal to pay the holdouts. The District Court's decision was upheld by the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, and after a year and a half of legal wrangling the court is expected at some point in the next few weeks to issue a final decision on exactly how it will require Argentina to pay holdout creditors. The only way Argentina could still challenge or delay the decision is to persuade the Supreme Court to intervene. Argentina has filed its petition, and the court has given bondholders until August 26 to submit their side of the story. If the court refuses the case or if it rules against Argentina, nothing in the country's temperament and history points to a willingness to settle up with the holdouts. Absent that option, the country may be forced to restructure current debt outside of the United States, perhaps by pulling its current bonds back to Buenos Aires. Such a process would not be without serious challenges, as Argentine assets in the United States and other countries would be vulnerable to seizure.

But Argentina has long been an international financial pariah, and this story rises to geopolitical importance only because, if the district court's decision is upheld, it threatens to limit Europe's crisis management options. Many large European countries face intractable financial situations that may eventually require a partial debt default. Meanwhile, in the short term, the debate over a possible second restructuring of Greek debt continues to rage. If U.S. courts uphold Griesa's decision, it will lend credibility to creditor holdouts, making it more difficult for sovereign countries to restructure current debt. It will also raise big questions about whether sovereign countries will continue to issue bonds in the United States or in other countries that pose similar legal risks.

Because of this threat to Europe, Lagarde stated publicly that she would urge the IMF to issue a brief to the Supreme Court in support of Argentina's case. Though the IMF has made it clear it will not interfere in what amounts to a U.S. domestic issue, the fact that leading members within the organization considered the possibility is notable for its rarity. It comes on the heels of a major mea culpa issued by the IMF just last month stating that the austerity measures promoted by the IMF have done considerable damage to the Greek economy. The admission reflects the position of France and of southern peripheral countries in Europe, which calls attention to the harmful effects of austerity. These countries have instead urged a shift toward measures designed to stimulate growth for heavily indebted countries. Germany, as the EU's biggest creditor nation, has nervously acceded to softer deficit targets and a relaxation of austerity measures in the interest of maintaining its alliances in the union and in preserving the eurozone market.

Pulling these threads together, we see a struggle within a major institution that has an enormous impact on global economic policies. The IMF is facing a continent-wide crisis that may very well result in defaults. Sovereign countries must have the ability to default on their debts -- they have in fact been doing so for centuries. For the IMF and for international markets, the best possible outcome is that sovereign countries are able to default in an orderly and controlled manner. In this case, the IMF has decided to back down. However, in the long run, even if the court decision is upheld, sovereign countries will find ways to access capital markets, even at higher prices or in different markets that help to accommodate a range of risks to creditors and borrowers. But that is cold comfort to the leaders of Greece, whose debt may have to be restructured, and the other leaders in Europe whose goal is to postpone a true political and social crisis as long as possible. They need every financial tool at their disposal to prevent the threat of chaotic default from once again panicking international markets.

Read more: A High-Stakes Legal Battle for the IMF | Stratfor

Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 29669


« Reply #5 on: August 30, 2013, 07:32:07 AM »

She Fought the Law

Argentina's president offers still another plan to break contracts.

It seems like the government of Argentina is trying to ruin sovereign debt for everybody. Last weekend we told you that Argentine President Cristina Kirchner had lost again in U.S. federal court in her effort to violate her country's bond contracts. This week she is floating a new idea to undermine the rule of law.

After Argentina defaulted on its debt in 2001, the government offered restructuring deals at about 30 cents on the dollar. Most investors accepted, having lost hope of collecting the face value of their bonds from the deadbeats down south. But holdouts owning about $4 billion of debt didn't accept and the Argentine government has refused to pay them a nickel of the more than $1.3 billion owed so far. Last week the U.S. Second Circuit Court of Appeals upheld earlier rulings that, under Argentina's bond contracts, the Kirchner government can't discriminate among creditors and so must also pay the holdouts.

Instead of accepting the court's judgment, Ms. Kirchner is now promoting a new evasion. On Monday she suggested swapping the old bonds for new debt issued in Argentina. Her government originally borrowed the money under New York law. And a big reason investors lent Argentina the money is because they had confidence that bonds issued in New York would allow them to uphold their rights in U.S. courts. So she's now essentially saying to those who accepted the restructuring that if they participate in a scheme to get around a U.S. court order, she'll pay them and continue to stiff the holdouts.

There's little detail on the swap offer beyond Ms. Kirchner's Monday remarks. We suppose it's possible that lawyers could somehow craft a debt swap that doesn't violate the Second Circuit ruling. But most of the bondholders are large institutions that aren't interested in aiding or abetting an Argentine plan to mock U.S. law and undermine the integrity of New York as a world financial center. They might also wonder how likely they are to collect even a fraction of the money lent once they're relying on the kindness of the Argentine judicial system.

As for investors who never lent to Argentina, they don't have to wonder. Now they know that only a fool would do business with Ms. Kirchner.
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 29669


« Reply #6 on: September 02, 2013, 04:21:01 PM »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=MeHmo5FIKe4#t=2138

Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 29669


« Reply #7 on: September 18, 2013, 10:16:13 AM »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iJ5GBqrWEnw
Logged
eskrimakombat
Newbie
*
Posts: 3


« Reply #8 on: September 18, 2013, 12:03:57 PM »

Hola,

Este es el video de la categoría Medianos Full Contact Stick Fighting, el torneo tuvo a lugar el Domingo 15 de Septimebre de 2013 en el Luna Park.



Para mayor información de entrenamiento en Argentina.

DBMA Group
http://www.eskrimakombat.com
Logged
eskrimakombat
Newbie
*
Posts: 3


« Reply #9 on: September 18, 2013, 02:21:10 PM »

Marc,

El chico que gano, Emmanuel, entreno Kali Tudo contigo en Buenos Aires.

Logged
For_Crafty_Dog
Newbie
*
Posts: 23


« Reply #10 on: September 24, 2013, 01:20:22 PM »














Logged

Posted on behalf of Crafty Dog
by Spartan Dog
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 29669


« Reply #11 on: October 16, 2013, 12:27:15 PM »



http://esgrimacriolla.blogspot.com.ar/2013/10/grip-variedades-y-diferentes-tipos-de.html
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 29669


« Reply #12 on: December 16, 2013, 11:55:04 AM »

 Argentina, Territorial Power and the Meaning of Lootings
Geopolitical Diary
Thursday, December 12, 2013 - 19:02 Text Size Print

The power of mass public discontent has always played a critical role in Argentine politics, as we were reminded Thursday when the Argentine government announced that it would deploy additional security in the province of Buenos Aires to confront expected riots and lootings Dec. 19 and 20. The announcement came along with reports that shop owners are buying weapons in anticipation of having to defend their stores.

Power in Argentina has a strong territorial element. From presidents and governors to union leaders and protest groups, power is measured in the number of people political actors can take to the streets. To a large extent, this phenomenon is the natural heir of Peronism, one of the most significant populist movements in the modern era. Peronism has its roots in the process of mass migration from the countryside to the city, the product of industrialization in the first half of the 20th century. Peronism presented itself as a movement of inclusion in the political life for the masses of people who had traditionally been neglected by the political system.

What is a Geopolitical Diary? George Friedman explains.

It is no coincidence that the founding myth of Peronism focuses on the events of Oct. 17, 1945, when several thousand people rallied in Buenos Aires to demand the release of then-Labor Minister Juan Peron, who was put in prison by the military regime in Argentina. This event established a direct connection between territorial power and political power that marked Argentina's politics for the next six decades. Indeed, the current government of President Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner has built its foundation of the legacy of Peron.

In modern Argentina, territorial power is still a key feature of political power. The most powerful political leaders are those who can organize the largest rallies -- which in turn means that they can lead the largest number of people to polling stations when necessary. For this reason, the heart of political power in Argentina is located in the province of Buenos Aires, the wealthiest and most populous province of Argentina. Particularly important are the areas of the province that surround the city of Buenos Aires. These are vastly populated and relatively poor areas, which means that their populations are particularly susceptible to the patronage-based system that defines Argentine politics.

In this context of territorial power, lootings have political significance. Together with rallies, lootings are an effective way to undermine political groups in power. Lootings have a psychological impact because they instill an image of anomie and lack of control by the government. Lootings particularly frighten the middle and upper classes because they create an impression that private property and street safety are at risk.

Looting is not uncommon, but sustained periods of looting riots are. And in two cases in the past 25 years, looting preceded the fall of presidents. In 1989, the first president since the return of democracy in Argentina, Raul Alfonsin from the Radical Civic Union party, resigned amid hyperinflation and lootings. In 2001, another president from the Radical Civic Union, Fernando de la Rua, resigned after a week of lootings and protests in several cities across the country.

Both resignations had a lasting political impact in Argentina and generated a very strong connection in the public mind between lootings and political crises. In 1989 and 2001, the Radical Civic Union accused the Peronists of orchestrating the lootings. Certainly, lootings do not happen without social unrest. In 1989 and 2001, Argentina was going through severe economic crises, and people were extremely upset with the government. But while the accusations against the Peronists were never confirmed, countrywide lootings need some degree of political incentives or organization.

The current wave of lootings finds its immediate origin in a police strike, but it has deeper roots, as it occurs in a context of a growing economic and political crisis. Inflation is very high, which particularly affects the income of the lower class. The middle class, hurt by growing fiscal pressure, has to a large extent withdrawn its support for Fernandez's government. For its part, the upper class is affected by the increasing distortions in exchange rates and is concerned about rising crime.

December is a special month for Argentines, because it is when Christmas and vacation bonuses are paid. It's also the month when people want to purchase holiday gifts and their economic situation becomes more palpable. The economic crisis of 2001 reached its highest point in December, when some 20 people were killed during lootings and protests against the government. After December, the summer begins and the political and economic tensions often unwind. For this reason, the next two weeks are crucial for the stability of the Argentine government.

But even if the current wave of lootings subsides, it is only the beginning of two very intense years for Argentina. Fernandez lost congressional support in the midterm elections, cannot be re-elected and lacks a clear successor. She still has two years in office, but Peronists within and outside her close factional allies have begun to look for her successor. Much of that search will take place in meetings among mayors, governors, lawmakers and union leaders. But as with many times in the past, the bid for power will also take place in the streets.

Read more: Argentina, Territorial Power and the Meaning of Lootings | Stratfor
Follow us: @stratfor on Twitter | Stratfor on Facebook
Logged
Pages: [1] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!