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.

Politics : DON'T START THE WAR -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Raymond Duray who wrote (12307)	2/24/2003 6:06:06 AM
From: stockman_scott	Respond to of 25898

Enron: Under Cover of Dark and the War By Matt Bivens The Daily Times Pakistan There's not much doubt left today that the California energy crisis was an Enron esque game. Just 10 days ago, a fifth former Enron exec entered a federal guilty plea The Enron scandal has all but disappeared from view. Let's check in on it, shall we? You remember Enron: It claimed to be making and holding onto lots more money than it really was; it suckered people, including its own employees, into believing it was a success; its top executives paid themselves lavishly and then, when the pyramid shuddered, cashed out early. That's the usual chronology, but the 800-pound gorilla it omits is the summer of 2001 in California when "energy traders'' like Enron created a phony "energy crisis'' in which, for the third summer in a row, they could ransom their energy for eye-poppingly outrageous sums. There's not much doubt left today that the California energy crisis was an Enron esque game. Just 10 days ago, a fifth former Enron exec entered a federal guilty plea. He admits he and his colleagues intentionally defrauded Californians intentionally brought about those lucrative power outages. Enron, of course, wasn't alone. Traders over at Reliant Energy (just renamed Center point) have been caught on tape laughing about being the cause of power failures across the West Coast, and then under cover of dark sneaking away with the public's hard-earned money it was "cool'' and "fun.'' So, game over, right? There's a consensus that 55 million Californians were ripped off by the Fraudster 500; now it's just a matter of doling out the jail time and the public shame, collecting what money can be recovered, and ordering regulators to prevent it recurring, right? Uh, no. For starters, Americans have forgotten Enron. We're too busy duct-taping our windows shut against the possibility of a chemical, biological or nuclear attack. The press derides the new government civil defence advice as "duct and cover'' a joking reference to the old "duck-and-cover'' Cold War drills, in which school kids would hide under their desks from Comrade Stalin but that hasn't stopped hoarders from buying up all the flashlights and bottled water in my hometown. With no one watching, it's back to business as usual and the Bush administration is eager to do the bidding of the oligarchy sorry, wrong country, of its favourite "campaign contributors.'' So those Reliant traders who thought themselves so "cool'' earned their company a playful wrist slap: Their $13.8 million fine equals 0.03 percent of Reliant's (rape-of-California) 2001 revenues of $40.8 billion. If Reliant had jacked a Mercedes, this would be equivalent to a judge ordering it to keep the car but return any change found behind the seat. The fine was set by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, or FERC and for anyone who missed the point, the White House just appointed a new FERC commissioner: Joseph Kelliher, a former aide to Vice President Dick Cheney. Kelliher was the Enron go-to guy he was once handed Enron's "dream list'' of government policies and dutifully relayed it to Boss Cheney. Meanwhile, the man who used to run Enron's corrupt energy trading division is not only not in trouble, he's secretary of the US Army that, incredibly, makes him the man in charge of the Army budget. Ken Lay, the former Enron chief, is also doing well. He's having a day in court soon because he's suing the US government. He and his wife think the US tax authorities owe them $130,000 from the mid-1980s. So this is why they say the first casualty of war is truth. truthout.org

To: Raymond Duray who wrote (12307)	2/24/2003 6:31:14 AM
From: stockman_scott	Respond to of 25898

The Hypocrisy of the Humanitarian Case for War by Amin Saikal Published on Monday, February 24, 2003 by The Age (Melbourne, Australia) The American, British and Australian Governments are pressing for an invasion of Iraq to overthrow Saddam Hussein's regime "for the sake of humanity". It is a pity the same standard is not applied to end the plight of the Palestinian people. No wonder the humanitarian argument is not persuasive, especially among Arabs and Muslims. The leaders of "the coalition of the willing" are right to highlight the brutal aspects of Saddam's regime. His regime is indisputably abominable. But it is unfortunate they remained silent on this issue for so long. Saddam has been in power for nearly 35 years. Despite his repressive measures at home and aggression against Iraq's neighbors Iran and Kuwait, no leader in the West had until the past few weeks firmly invoked the Iraqi dictator's inhumanity as the reason to get rid of him. Even after Saddam's August 1990 invasion of Kuwait and the successful US-led military campaign against that invasion six months later, Washington, London and Canberra never issued a policy statement identifying considerations of humanity, or "liberation of the Iraqi people" as a principal basis for action. Humanity and ethics did not enter their calculations in doing lucrative trade with Saddam's regime. They essentially adhered to an old and crudely "realist" dictum - "no morality in world politics". They showed little leniency towards those victims of Saddam's repression who ended up on their shores in search of asylum. Their sudden emphasis on humanity tallies neither with their past behavior towards the Iraqi dictator nor with the fact that they have close relations with many other dictatorships. None of the members of the coalition of the willing has had much to say about massive human rights violations in Saudi Arabia or Pakistan or Libya. Indeed, Libya's Colonel Muammar Gaddafi has recently been rehabilitated by Canberra and London. The condemnation of Saddam on humanitarian grounds is also in stark contrast with the silence the governments of the coalition of the willing have maintained over Israel's brutalities against the Palestinian people. None of these governments has ever forthrightly condemned Israel's colonial occupation of Palestinian lands and use of military power against mostly unarmed and defenseless Palestinian people. They have often expressed abhorrence at Palestinian suicide bombings, but have never matched this with an expression of disgust at Israel's widespread and often indiscriminate brutalities, subjecting the Palestinian people to individual and collective punishment. The excuse often advanced is that Israel is, after all, a democracy. But it is never admitted that democracies do not always produce good leaders. Israeli democracy has produced Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, who has never deviated from his long-held goal of suppressing the Palestinians and humiliating the Arabs. While Sharon has come under investigation for war crimes against the Palestinians, President George Bush has declared him to be "a man of peace". Arabs and Muslims in particular, and the international community in general, have reason to remain very skeptical of the recent emphasis on humanity as a base for acting against Saddam. There are many peoples other than Iraqis who are also crying for freedom against oppressive regimes. But they should not expect their cries to be answered unless they either have economic and geostrategic importance, like Iraq, or become a direct menace to the US and its willing allies, as Afghanistan did under the Taliban. __________________________________________________ Amin Saikal is professor of political science and director of the Center for Arab and Islamic Studies at the Australian National University in Canberra. Copyright © 2003 The Age Company Ltd commondreams.org