SI
SI
discoversearch

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.
Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: MSI who wrote (267017)6/26/2002 4:33:56 AM
From: Raymond Duray  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 769667
 
AND IT'S ONE, TWO, THREE... WHAT ARE WE FIGHTING FOR? WHOOPEE I DON'T GIVE A DAMN, NEXT STOP IS... KABUL??

MSI,

We wupped ass over in the Hindu Kush. And what did we get?
Plentiful poppy fields and popular pipeline routes.

Why, it's a dang-nabbed twofer, shure as shinola!

nytimes.com

The Warlords Win in Kabul
By OMAR ZAKHILWAL and ADEENA NIAZI

ABUL, Afghanistan — On the final night of the loya jirga, more than 1,500 delegates gathered for the unveiling of the new cabinet. Our hearts sank when we heard President Hamid Karzai pronounce one name after another. A woman activist turned to us in disbelief: "This is worse than our worst expectations. The warlords have been promoted and the professionals kicked out. Who calls this democracy?"

Interim government ministers with civilian rather than military credentials were dismissed. Mr. Karzai did not announce the minister for women's affairs, prompting speculation that Sima Samar, the popular current minister in that post, will be removed once international attention shifts elsewhere.

Meanwhile, the key ministries of defense and foreign affairs remain in the hands of Gen. Muhammad Qasim Fahim and Abdullah, both from the dominant Northern Alliance faction based in the Panjshir Valley. Yunus Qanooni, of the same faction, was switched from the interior ministry to education, though he is reportedly resisting the move. Three powerful Northern Alliance commanders — Mr. Fahim, Haji Abdul Qadir and Kharim Khalili — have been made vice presidents, surrounding Mr. Karzai. These are the very forces responsible for countless brutalities under the former mujahedeen government.

There are a few glimmers of hope in the appointments of professionals like Ashraf Ghani as finance minister and Juma Mohammed Mohammadi as minister of mines. But will they be able to accomplish anything within a government of warlords?

As the loya jirga folded its tent, we met with frustration and anger in the streets. "Why did you legitimize an illegitimate government?" one Kabul resident asked us.

The truth is, we didn't. While the Bonn agreement and the rules of the loya jirga entitled us to choose the next government freely, we delegates were denied anything more than a symbolic role in the selection process. A small group of Northern Alliance chieftains led by the Panjshiris decided everything behind closed doors and then dispatched Mr. Karzai to give us the bad news.

This is not what we had expected when we first gathered in Kabul to participate in one of the most extraordinary events in Afghan history. Delegates from all backgrounds — Pashtuns, Tajiks, Hazaras and Uzbeks; urban and rural; Sunni and Shiite — sat together under one roof as if we belonged to a single village. Men and women mingled openly and comfortably. In tolerant and lively exchanges, we discussed the compatibility of women's rights with our Islamic traditions. Women played a leading role at these meetings. We were living proof against the stereotypes that Afghans are divided by ethnic hatreds, that we are a backward people not ready for democracy and equality.

Within a day we had developed a common wish list focused on national unity, peace and security. We also emphasized access to food, education and health services in neglected rural areas. But the one issue that united the delegates above all others was the urgency of reducing the power of warlords and establishing a truly representative government.

This sentiment quickly grew into a grass-roots movement supporting the former king, Mohammed Zahir Shah, as head of state. The vast majority of us viewed him as the only leader with enough popular support and independence to stand up to the warlords. But our democratic effort to nominate Zahir Shah did not please the powers that be. As a result, the entire loya jirga was postponed for almost two days while the former king was strong-armed into renouncing any meaningful role in the government.

After that announcement, the atmosphere at the loya jirga changed radically. The gathering was now teeming with intelligence agents who openly threatened reform-minded delegates, especially women. Access to the microphone was controlled so that supporters of the interim government dominated the proceedings. Fundamentalist leaders branded critics of the warlords as traitors to Islam and circulated a petition denouncing Women's Affairs Minister Samar as "Afghanistan's Salman Rushdie."

Aware that in our country political intimidation can turn quickly into violence, many delegates lost the will to demand their democratic rights. A leading activist for women's rights, who prefers to remain anonymous due to these threats, explained: "Today we are loya jirga delegates, but tomorrow we go home as individuals. Who will protect us if we continue to express our views and fight for our rights?"

Of course we are discouraged that our experiment in grass-roots democracy was suppressed. We are disappointed that our leaders are not willing to recognize women's rightful participation. Above all, we regret that they and the international community abandoned any commitment to democratic rights as soon as we sought to exercise those rights.

Yet we still believe that this is the beginning and not the end, that the seeds of democracy planted by the loya jirga will take root and flourish. We saw at the opening of the loya jirga that it is possible to forge new friendships and alliances across regional, ethnic and gender lines.

Even without modern communications, word travels fast in Afghanistan. As loya jirga delegates return home, every town and village will gather to discuss and debate what happened. The initial experience of democracy we had in Kabul can be replicated and developed into new forms of political expression and organization.

The course of the loya jirga demonstrated that powerful forces inside and outside the country remain categorically opposed to democratic accountability. The dangers of challenging the power of the gun, especially in the absence of genuine international support for the rule of law, are substantial. But the reactions we saw on the streets of Kabul showed that the popular will of Afghans will not tolerate a retreat into the past.

Omar Zakhilwal, an economics professor at Ottawa University, and Adeena Niazi, president of the Afghan Women's Association of Ontario, Canada, were delegates to the loya jirga in Afghanistan. Mr. Zakhilwal co-wrote a recent human rights report on Afghanistan for the Center for Economic and Social Rights.

""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Whoopie! I don't give a damn, next stop is Viet Nam......



To: MSI who wrote (267017)6/26/2002 4:53:28 AM
From: Raymond Duray  Respond to of 769667
 
ENRON INVESTIGATION EXPANDS..... BUSH JUST OUT OF THE CROSSHAIRS, FOR NOW...

nytimes.com

Enron Criminal Investigation Is Said to Expand to Bankers
By KURT EICHENWALD and DAVID BARBOZA

Criminal investigators examining the Enron debacle have expanded their inquiry to focus on activities at the commercial banks that provided billions of dollars in loans and other financial services to the company, according to current and former Enron executives and others involved in the investigation.

Federal prosecutors are investigating whether individual bankers illegally benefited from deals involving Enron-related entities, potentially at the expense of their employers, people involved in the case said. A number of bankers have been questioned about such self-dealing, lawyers said, and the government is said to be weighing whether to bring charges in one such matter.

The government has also stepped up its examination of an Enron-related partnership called Chewco. The financing for the partnership included loans from Barclays Bank structured in ways that hid them from Enron's auditors, according to Congressional testimony. The discovery of the hidden loans ultimately played a central role in the financial crisis last fall that led to Enron's collapse.

The Manhattan district attorney's office, meanwhile, working independently of the federal Enron task force, has opened its own inquiry into an array of transactions and financial institutions tied to Enron. According to current and former Enron executives who have been questioned by the Manhattan investigators, these include a series of deals between Enron and J. P. Morgan Chase that have been described in private lawsuits as disguised loans to the energy company.

While investigators for the district attorney, Robert Morgenthau, have begun interviewing witnesses in Houston, where Enron is based, and overseas, the Manhattan prosecutors do not appear to be close to bringing any charges, people involved in the case said. There is no indication that the banks themselves are targets of the inquiry.

Combined with the recent conviction of Enron's former accountant, Arthur Andersen, these latest lines of inquiry signal that investigators are putting the conduct of the company's financial advisers under a harsh light, even as they consider bringing charges of fraud and related crimes against Enron's former top executives.

Banks had complex financial relationships with Enron, and the full details of those only began to emerge amid the debris of the collapsed company. Like most companies, Enron borrowed money to finance its operations. But banks also provided cash for the company's off-the-books partnerships and for outside investors in those entities. Some financial institutions and bankers were themselves investors in the partnerships.

Major New York banks, meanwhile, engaged in circular trades with Enron that allowed the company to obtain billions of dollars in loans without disclosing them to shareholders, according to trading records and court documents.

The federal investigation of banking matters related to Enron stepped up in recent weeks, even as much of the Justice Department's task force on the scandal was occupied with the long-running criminal prosecution of Andersen.

According to people involved in the case, some of that effort was handled behind the scenes by William Kimball, a task force prosecutor who specializes in securities-related cases. Mr. Kimball, an assistant United States attorney in San Francisco, has long worked with Leslie Caldwell, the head of the Washington-based task force.

Mr. Kimball was said to be focusing on matters related to Chewco, which was formed by an Enron financial executive in 1997 to engage in transactions with Enron. Under accounting rules, at least 3 percent of Chewco's capital had to come from independent investors for Enron to keep the partnership's financial results off the company's books.

At least part of the outside equity for Chewco purportedly came from Barclays through an entity called Big River, whose sole member was another entity called Little River. But Andersen learned that the money from Barclays was actually a loan secured by $6.6 million in cash collateral.

Since the supposed equity investment was actually a loan, Andersen insisted that Chewco failed the 3 percent test and its finances had to be consolidated with those of Enron — a decision that was a big factor in a huge restatement of Enron's financial results last November.

In recent weeks, Mr. Kimball, the prosecutor, was said to have been interviewing numerous participants involved in the structuring of the Chewco transaction, including bankers from Barclays. Telephone calls to a bank spokesman went unanswered late yesterday. However, a spokesman for the bank had previously said that it did not believe that there was "any basis" for a claim against it. Bank officials have also said there was no personal investment by Barclays executives in the deal.

Separately, according to people involved in the case, bankers interviewed by the government have repeatedly been pressed about whether they enriched themselves in dealings with people or entities related to Enron.

In an instance involving at least one American bank, these people said, prosecutors have discovered evidence of such self-dealing, and were said to be deciding whether to bring indictments. The identity of the bank and the employees involved could not be immediately determined.

The investigation by the Manhattan district attorney's office has been proceeding for at least several weeks. Witnesses said that they had been questioned about transactions between Enron and Morgan that involved an off-shore entity known as Mahonia Ltd. In addition, at least two witnesses were asked by investigators about a transaction that involved Citigroup and an off-shore entity called Delta.

Kristin Lemkau, a spokeswoman for Morgan, declined to comment, as did Daniel Noonan, a spokesman for Citigroup.

Mr. Morgenthau, who has a long-established reputation for fierce independence, has frequently investigated both banking matters and cases involving off-shore financial maneuvers. At this stage, people involved in the case said, his investigation appeared to be completely independent of the federal inquiry.

In the Mahonia deals, according to records of the transactions and energy industry experts, Enron appears to have used natural gas trades with a series of offshore companies linked to Morgan to move hundreds of millions of dollars in loans off its books.

The gas-trading transactions have led to charges in bankruptcy court that Enron and Morgan intentionally misrepresented the nature of the deals to obtain surety bonds from insurance companies. With Enron's collapse, the insurers, including the St. Paul Companies and Liberty Mutual, are balking at making payment.

The transactions involved a web of corporations — several of them based in the Channel Islands — including Mahonia and Stoneville Aegean Ltd. that at first blush seem independent but whose records show are linked companies with ties to Morgan.

The companies traded gas in a circle, with Enron both being required to deliver the commodity on a future date and being owed the same amount of gas for delivery on the same date at the same price.

The transactions involving Citigroup and Delta, which is based in the Cayman Islands, functioned in a similar way, according to a lawsuit filed by Enron shareholders. According to that suit, Citigroup used Delta to carry out $2.4 billion of financial "swaps" with Enron that "perfectly replicated loans and were, in fact, loans," but were not disclosed on Enron's books.

One current Enron official who reviewed the deal said that it was done to improve the company's cash flow through a transaction that appeared on the books as a trading liability rather than as debt. That helped Enron in its dealings with the rating agencies, the official said.

The Manhattan investigators have obtained documents related to both the Mahonia and Delta transactions, according to current and former Enron executives who have been interviewed.

Some of those witnesses have also recently been interviewed by investigators from the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations.



To: MSI who wrote (267017)6/26/2002 9:02:21 AM
From: gao seng  Respond to of 769667
 
Heretical? She is just plain crazy.



To: MSI who wrote (267017)7/2/2002 5:42:24 AM
From: Raymond Duray  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 769667
 
ANTHRAX: FBI STALLS, WASTES TIME, YAWNS, SCRATCHES AN ITCH....

MSI,

Reading this Kristof piece, I'd swear he knows exactly who the anthrax terrorist is. And the speculation about Zimbabwe is chilling.....

nytimes.com

Anthrax? The F.B.I. Yawns
By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF

he F.B.I.'s bumbling before 9/11 is water under the bridge. But the bureau's lackadaisical ineptitude in pursuing the anthrax killer continues to threaten America's national security by permitting him to strike again or, more likely, to flee to Iran or North Korea.

Almost everyone who has encountered the F.B.I. anthrax investigation is aghast at the bureau's lethargy. Some in the biodefense community think they know a likely culprit, whom I'll call Mr. Z. Although the bureau has polygraphed Mr. Z, searched his home twice and interviewed him four times, it has not placed him under surveillance or asked its outside handwriting expert to compare his writing to that on the anthrax letters.

This is part of a larger pattern. Astonishingly, the F.B.I. allowed the destruction of anthrax stocks at Iowa State University, losing what might have been valuable genetic clues. Then it waited until December to open the intact anthrax envelope it found. The F.B.I. didn't obtain anthrax strains from various labs for comparison until March, and the testing is still not complete. The bureau did not systematically polygraph scientists at two suspect labs, Fort Detrick, Md., and Dugway Proving Ground in Utah, until a month ago.

Perhaps it's a cheap shot for an armchair detective to whine about the caution of dedicated and exceptionally hard-working investigators. Yet months pass and the bureau continues to act like, well, a bureaucracy, plodding along in slow motion. People in the biodefense field first gave Mr. Z's name to the bureau as a suspect in October, and I wrote about him elliptically in a column on May 24.

He denies any wrongdoing, and his friends are heartsick at suspicions directed against a man they regard as a patriot. Some of his polygraphs show evasion, I hear, although that may be because of his temperament.

If Mr. Z were an Arab national, he would have been imprisoned long ago. But he is a true-blue American with close ties to the U.S. Defense Department, the C.I.A. and the American biodefense program. On the other hand, he was once caught with a girlfriend in a biohazard "hot suite" at Fort Detrick, surrounded only by blushing germs.

With many experts buzzing about Mr. Z behind his back, it's time for the F.B.I. to make a move: either it should go after him more aggressively, sifting thoroughly through his past and picking up loose threads, or it should seek to exculpate him and remove this cloud of suspicion.

Whoever sent the anthrax probably had no intention of killing people; the letters warned recipients to take antibiotics. My guess is that the goal was to help America by raising preparedness against biological attacks in the future.

So it seems fair to ask the F.B.I. a few questions:

Do you know how many identities and passports Mr. Z has and are you monitoring his international travel? I have found at least one alias for him, and he has continued to travel abroad on government assignments, even to Central Asia.

Why was his top security clearance suspended in August, less than a month before the anthrax attacks began? This move left him infuriated. Are the C.I.A. and military intelligence agencies cooperating fully with the investigation?

Have you searched the isolated residence that he had access to last fall? The F.B.I. has known about this building, and knows that Mr. Z gave Cipro to people who visited it. This property and many others are legally registered in the name of a friend of Mr. Z, but may be safe houses operated by American intelligence.

Have you examined whether Mr. Z has connections to the biggest anthrax outbreak among humans ever recorded, the one that sickened more than 10,000 black farmers in Zimbabwe in 1978-80? There is evidence that the anthrax was released by the white Rhodesian Army fighting against black guerrillas, and Mr. Z has claimed that he participated in the white army's much-feared Selous Scouts. Could rogue elements of the American military have backed the Rhodesian Army in anthrax and cholera attacks against blacks? Mr. Z's résumé also claims involvement in the former South African Defense Force; all else aside, who knew that the U.S. Defense Department would pick an American who had served in the armed forces of two white-racist regimes to work in the American biodefense program with some of the world's deadliest germs?

What now? When do you shift into high gear?