Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : VOLTAIRE'S PORCH-MODERATED -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (45568)	12/22/2001 5:11:23 PM
From: Mannie	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 65232

Each year the Washington Post's Style Invitational asks readers to take any word from the dictionary, alter it by adding, subtracting, or changing one letter and supply a new definition. Here are the 2001 winners: Intaxication: Euphoria at getting a tax refund, which lasts until you realize it was your money to start with. Reintarnation: Coming back to life as a hillbilly. Foreploy: Any misrepresentation about yourself for the purpose of getting laid. Giraffiti: Vandalism spray-painted very, very high. Sarchasm: The gulf between the author of sarcastic wit and the person who doesn't get it. Inoculatte: To take coffee intravenously when you are running late. Hipatitis: Terminal coolness. Osteopornosis: A degenerate disease. (this one got extra credit) Karmageddon: It's like, when everybody is sending off all these really bad vibes, right? And then, like, the Earth explodes and it's like, a serious bummer. Glibido: All talk and no action. Dopeler Effect: The tendency of stupid ideas to seem smarter when you have been smoking marijuana. And, the pick of the literature: Ignoranus: A person who's both stupid and an asshole.

To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (45568)	12/23/2001 2:06:50 AM
From: stockman_scott	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 65232

An Opinion piece from latest Dawn... dawn.com Things can fall apart 12/22/01 By Kuldip Nayar India and Pakistan are coming too close to confrontation for anyone's comfort. One chilling example is New Delhi's demarche to Islamabad after the attack by terrorists on the Parliament House and the latter's curt reply that it was a stage-managed show. The two have traded similar accusations in the past - whether it was an attempt to blow up the state assembly building at Srinagar, the intrusion into the Red Fort or the killing of Sikhs at Chitapura in Kashmir. What is alarming is the heightening of shrillness and exasperation in and counter-statement. The Pervez Musharraf government is probably not conscious of the wide support the Atal Behari Vajpayee government would have if it were to pursue the terrorists inside Pakistan territory. People in India find New Delhi "ineffective" and want it to act. Voices for restraint and caution are getting feeble. Pakistan gives an impression of turning over a new leaf after being an accomplice of the Taliban in Afghanistan. The government's fight against fundamentalists may also have a ring of authenticity because it has silenced the big guns of religious organizations by putting them behind bars. The action against the madressahs has some credibility. Yet there is no doubt that Pakistan is the breeding place for terrorist organizations like the Lashkar-i-Taiba, Jaish- i-Mohammed, Harkat-ul-Ansar and Hizb-ul-Mujahideen, particularly the first two, which have killed people in India and attacked different places. They operate from Pakistan, their headquarters. America may have been able to put pressure on President Musharraf to close down training camps. But their operation is over in Afghanistan, not in other countries. Some training camps are reportedly operating from new sites. And then there is the omnipresent ISI (Inter-Services Intelligence). The five terrorists who attacked the parliament are not only Pakistani nationals but also belong to one of the organizations functioning from Pakistan. In fact, the general atmosphere in that country is so anti-India - from schools to the highest institutions - that the liberals have become a rare commodity there. Musharraf, if he is serious, has to change the very environment. But he looks like using the terrorists for one purpose and denouncing them for another. On top of it comes Islamabad's statement that New Delhi has stage-managed the attack. Was the number of casualties pre- determined, both on the side of the armed terrorists and the unarmed watch and ward staff? The allegation is too ridiculous for words. Stories cannot be concocted to cover up their crime. Pakistan's military spokesman Rashid Qureshi, who was irresponsible in his immediate reaction, sounds better when he says that India should not jump to conclusions "without even a preliminary inquiry." New Delhi's report is that it was a joint operation by the Jaish-i-Mohammed and the Lashkar-i-Taiba at the behest of the ISI. A detailed report, supported by evidence, must have been sent to Pakistan and other countries which are watching the situation with concern. One should wait for more on the subject. The unkindest remark by Musharraf is that India was out for a misadventure. As an unelected head of the state, he has to play to the gallery. But his warning of "dire consequences" sounds jingoistic. As a military man, he should know more than anyone else what war means, particularly for the countries which are so poor and so under-developed. His condemnation of the attack on the Parliament is welcome but it makes little sense when he has not uttered a word against the Jaish-i-Mohammed and the Lashkar-i-Taiba. If he has really turned his back against them, he should not be afraid of them. He should cultivate in his country the liberal lobby which would be strengthened if he denounced the terrorist groups. Even otherwise, how un-Islamic were those who planned and participated in the December 13 attack, which was during the Ramazan, a holy month. The fast of Ramazan is the most carefully observed of all religious duties by the Muslims. Not only must they refrain from all food and drink between dawn and dusk, but they must not commit any unworthy act. One lie can make a day's fast meaningless. How does the killing of nine innocent men of watch and ward and police fit into what the terrorists and their mentors did? Musharraf lacks popular support. He lacks the electoral backing which every ruler cherishes. The test may come next year when Pakistan has to return to democracy under the orders of the Supreme Court. Pakistan may not turn into a democratic polity. The army has too much stake in the policy Pakistan pursues. Even otherwise, the army in a Third World country seldom returns to the barracks if it once tastes power. It is worse in Pakistan because there authoritarianism is woven deeply in the warp and woof of society as it is organized on the basis of Bonapartism and feudalism. Pakistan must face the fact that things can go out of hand if it connives at the activities of such terrorists who are working against India and find a way out to deal with them in their own territory. The supply of arms, training or money in the name of religion is divisive. Former prime minister Benazir Bhutto saw the point during her recent visit to India and she said she would stop cross-border terrorism if she were to return to power. Washington's reaction to the attack on the parliament is obvious but it does not come as a surprise to those who have followed its political history in the last few decades. It has always talked of democracy but has supported and sustained the most undemocratic regimes for its temporary gains. America has done more harm to democracy than all the undemocratic countries put together. As if it is a laid down rehearsal, it condemned the attack. But when it came to standing up and be counted, secretary of state Collin Powell warned India against taking any action. Within hours of the carnage in New York and Washington on September 11, President Bush announced war against terrorism throughout the world. He said that all those who sheltered terrorists, supported them or even indirectly helped them would not be spared. America's or, for that matter, the West's fight was confined to Afghanistan - the Taliban and their guide, Osama-bin Laden. The surrender of the Taliban has more or less ended the job of America and its allies. They are now concentrating on locating Osama. That ends their war against terrorism, although they continue to go over the exercises and say that the war would go on. Washington has not lifted even a finger to follow up the attack on the parliament. What has happened to the resolve? Does terrorism have different connotation for the Americans and the Indians? It is a pity that Islamabad, which has been let down by Washington many a time, does not understand that the latter's support is for selfish reasons. It is interested only in itself, how to ensure that the world stays unipolar. See how it has withdrawn unilaterally from the 1972 anti-ballistic missile treaty? Pakistan should have tried to span the distance with India. Instead, Islamabad is doing its best to stay close to Washington. It is a temporary gain because in the process America is extending itself in the region, much to the dislike of China and Russia. In the immediate future, Pakistan's attitude may spoil the possibility of talks between the two sides at the time of the SAARC summit in the first week of January. The bitterness between the two countries may not allow any leeway. Still a dialogue between the two may clear the dirt a bit. Even a bit is much needed in an atmosphere which is fraught with danger.