no comment
from SLATE'S survey of what's in US magazines: Harper's, June 2000 An essay by Tom Wolfe decries the political correctness foisted on us by "Rococo Marxists" such as Judith Butler and Stanley Fish. Since World War I American intellectuals have been telling Americans their society is cancerous, and now that society is doing better than ever, they fall back on ever-more ridiculous charges. Atlantic Monthly, June 2000 The cover story asks if Harvard turned Ted Kaczynski into the Unabomber. When he arrived there in the late 1950s, he encountered an intellectual "culture of despair" in which professors taught that science would destroy civilization and that science rendered morality meaningless. Kaczynski also participated in a social experiment in which he was subjected to intense stress and criticism. His Unabomber manifesto may be the rational outgrowth of his Harvard experience. Vanity Fair, June 2000 A piece recounts the Christie's and Sotheby's auction house price-fixing scandal. Former Christie's CEO Christopher Davidge may have turned over smoking-gun evidence in order to ruin the art-collecting blue bloods who never accepted his middle-class roots. Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] & http://liberalarts.lmu.edu/~JDevine
[PEN-L:6706] No comment
USIA 10 May 1999 U.S. ENVOYS TO CASPIAN BASIN TOUT INVESTMENT PROSPECTS (Say financial payoff requires long-term commitment) (900) By Phillip Kurata USIA Staff Writer Washington -- U.S. ambassadors assigned to energy-rich countries surrounding the Caspian Sea are offering "gold key" service to U.S. businesses considering investing in Central Asia. "We offer gold key service We will help you get started. We'll help you make appointments. We'll rent you a car. We'll rent you an interpreter. We'll make hotel reservations -- all kinds of things like this," U.S. Ambassador to Azerbaijan Stanley Escudero said at a May 7 business forum in Washington. The U.S. embassies in Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan offer similar services to help U.S. companies capitalize on potentially enormous opportunities in the Caspian Basin, which has huge oil and gas reserves. The U.S. government has opened a business center in Ankara, Turkey, staffed by trade promotion officials to help U.S. business people to establish contacts in Turkey and points east. The U.S. Caspian diplomacy is pegged to two proposed pipelines. One would carry crude oil from Baku, Azerbaijan, through Georgia to Turkey's Mediterranean port at Ceyhan. The second would pump natural gas from Turkmenistan, under the Caspian Sea, through Azerbaijan and Georgia to Turkey. The United States and its NATO partner Turkey have embarked on a policy to bring democracy, stability and prosperity to the Caucasus and Central Asia by encouraging foreign investment in the region's fledgling free market economies. Ambassador Escudero said business, not aid, fosters development. "What develops a nation is business activity. What develops a nation is the new wealth which is created and the new knowledge that is created and the multiplier effect of successful activities Azerbaijan is ready for that. It's ripe for it," Escudero said. Speaking at the same forum with Escudero were U.S. Ambassador to Armenia Michael Lemmon, U.S. Ambassador to Georgia Kenneth Yalowitz, U.S. Ambassador to Kazakhstan Richard Jones, U.S. Ambassador to Turkmenistan Steve Mann, U.S. Ambassador to Uzbekistan Joseph Presel, and U.S. Ambassador to Turkey Mark Parris. With the exception of Parris, the ambassadors also spoke to business conferences in New Orleans and New York to publicize the investment opportunities in the Caucasus Basin. The three main U.S. trade agencies -- the Trade and Development Agency, the Export-Import Bank, and the Overseas Private Investment Corporation -- are offering incentives and guarantees to U.S. companies willing to risk investment in the former Soviet republics. Jones, the U.S. envoy to Kazakhstan, voiced a theme common to all the ambassadors. "Kazakhstan is not a market for the faint hearted. It's a high-maintenance business environment that will require financial strength and a significant amount of executive time and energy to make your business profitable," he said. Costly customs delays, bureaucratic red tape to obtain work permits, inconsistent application of the tax code and lack of respect for contracts are a partial list of pitfalls facing U.S. businesses in Kazakhstan, Jones said. Nevertheless, more than 100 U.S. companies have opened offices in Almaty, the commercial capital of Kazakhstan, in sectors such as oil and gas, consumer goods, power generation and telecommunications, Jones said. The ambassador has a doctorate in business and said he was chosen for the Kazakhstan assignment because he could be instrumental in helping the country's conversion to a Western-style economy. "I met with President (Nursultan) Nazarbayev just prior to my departure from Kazakhstan for this tour to stress our concerns in commercial issues. In this meeting, he reiterated his strong desire for more U.S. direct investment in Kazakhstan. He also reiterated his wish to diversify Kazakhstan's economy, create more jobs and spur economic growth," Jones said. Turkmenistan, possessing the world's fourth largest proven reserves of natural gas and large oil deposits, is hampered by a lingering addiction to central planning, Ambassador Mann said. President Saparmurat Niyazov personally supervises political affairs, even at the local level, Mann said. "With Turkmenistan, the question is, When is this energy potential going to be exploited? Will it be? I think the answer is, yes, it will be. I think the time is now," Mann said. Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan are progressing toward a resolution of their territorial dispute over the delineation of the Caspian Sea. The ambassador said he is encouraged by the competence of Niyazov's advisers and ministers in the energy sector who have convinced the Turkmen leader to approve the construction of a trans-Caspian natural gas pipeline. Turkmen gas is a crucial element in Turkey's development plans. Within a decade, natural gas is projected to account for a quarter of Turkey's energy needs. At present, the clean-burning fuel satisfies ab
[PEN-L:556] re-no comment, II (investing in defense)
I watched the Leher report last night. Lots of discussion about a lot of things I can't remember now, but nothing about this. My only prior awareness of it came from reading Tom Kruse's Pen-l554 message. The following report is from the English Electronic Telegraph www://telegraph.co.uk Frank US boosts defence spending by £165bn By Hugo Gurdon in Washington Other nations will come under pressure to follow Pentagon AMERICA began its biggest peacetime military build-up since 1985 yesterday after President Clinton and Congress agreed to increase its defence budget by 10 per cent to $280 billion (£165bn). The turn-round after years of cuts will include a doubling of spending on missile defence. It was welcomed by critics who believe that Washington has for too long spent "the peace dividend" on civilian programmes while turning a blind eye to national security threats left behind by the collapse of communism. The Joint Chiefs of Staff recently complained that the country was $15 billion short of appropriate defence spending. The switch from cuts to extra spending, comes amid mounting concern that American capabilities have dwindled dangerously, leaving the country ill-prepared to meet dangers posed by rogue states, weapons proliferation and rising instability in the post-Cold War era. In the $1.7 trillion (£1 trillion) overall 1999 budget settled on Thursday, Republican negotiators secured an extra $9 billion of military spending on top of the $270.5 billion agreed in negotiations with the White House a month ago, which would have increased defence spending by less that six per cent. Newt Gingrich, Speaker of the House of Representatives, who once complained that military cuts meant that the Pentagon, the Defence Department's five-sided building in Virginia, should become the Triangle, welcomed the agreement to reverse the armed forces' recent decline. He said: "This is the first time since 1985 that in peacetime we have increased defence spending, because our young men and women in uniform deserve the support of the United States of America." Defence spending rose in 1991 to finance the Gulf war. Republicans want annual military spending boosted quickly above $300 billion. President Reagan's build up, which is now credited by many with winning the Cold War, reached its peak in 1985, when he spent $287 billion, which after adjusting for inflation is equivalent to $485 billion today. Of the extra money agreed on Thursday, $1 billion will be used to more than double research on a missile defence shield, a scaled down version of Ronald Reagan's Star Wars project. North Korea, Iran, Pakistan and India are acquiring sophisticated ballistic systems, and Iraq is not thought to have abandoned its hopes either. India's Agni missiles are extending their range beyond 1,250 miles, and Iran's Shahab-3 will have a range of 1,000 miles or more. North Korea's Taepo Dong-2 missile, with a range of over 3,700 miles, will allow the unstable Stalinist tyranny in Pyongyang to hit Hawai
[PEN-L:561] Re: re-no comment, II (investing in defense)
Michael Perelman wrote, >Somehow there has to be a logical thread here . . . "In this game (which is called 'defense') proportions are lost to the public mind (can the mind resist) An 'economy' of permanent warfare is called 'peace' and 'preparedness' -- every person and thing is upheaved in its fury and those who once were call 'Americans' are now merely tourists at or around empty sites of peace while those who are called 'the Americans' give dictation to the world." >From 'Bread and Wine' Charles Watts (1947-1998) Regards, Tom Walker ^^^ #408 1035 Pacific St. Vancouver, B.C. V6E 4G7 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (604) 669-3286 ^^^ The TimeWork Web: http://www.vcn.bc.ca/timework/
[PEN-L:559] Re: re-no comment, II (investing in defense)
Let's see if I understand this correctly. The CIA fails to predict the Indian nuke test -- even though early reports of it were in the press -- so they deserve more money. The towering regime of N. Korea threatens to bomb Hawaii -- yes, I remember when Reagan spoke of the immanent danger of the Sandinistas coming to Texas. We could also throw in the destruction of the TWA flight and the Olympic bombing as a need to protect ourselves against Arab terrorism -- so we got our wonderful anti-terrorism law. By the way, is anybody suspicious that the "wayward" cruise missle landed in Pakistan. Could it have been a form of a payoff to Pakistan -- landing an unexploded missle -- so that they would not protest our bombing of their client state? Somehow there has to be a logical thread here or is logic as imaginary as the peace dividend? -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[PEN-L:553] no comment, II (investing in defense)
On defense sector stocks: About $9 Billion Is Added to Pentagon Budget NYT, today By TIM WEINER WASHINGTON -- The White House agreed with congressional negotiators Thursday to add about $9 billion to the military budget, including about $2 billion for intelligence programs and about $1 billion for missile defense, congressional staff members said. Republican leaders in Congress hope to return Pentagon spending to levels approaching the historic highs of the Reagan administration, when military budgets exceeded $300 billion a year. The House and Senate agreed last month to authorize $270.5 billion for fiscal 1999. Tom Kruse / Casilla 5812 / Cochabamba, Bolivia Tel/Fax: (591-4) 248242 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[PEN-L:547] Re: no comment
Tom Kruse wordlessly delivers this > >From a Salomon Smith Barney blurb: > "Given worldwide economic turmoil and our outlook for slowing profits > growth, we have been recommending that investors focus on defensive names > with topline growth and strong earnings visibility. Stocks within the > defense industry have typically provided a haven from such slow-downs, as > government defense spending is largely immune to economic influences... [Etc.]..." Why be speechless, Tom; aren't they the guys who make money "...the old- fashioned way"? Well, they certainly mean it, don't they? What can have a longer track record than the commerce of war?! As for the sickeningly amoral literalism: it's good, assuring that Madame LaFarge over there won't miss a single stitch. valis
[PEN-L:545] no comment
>From a Salomon Smith Barney blurb: "Given worldwide economic turmoil and our outlook for slowing profits growth, we have been recommending that investors focus on defensive names with topline growth and strong earnings visibility. Stocks within the defense industry have typically provided a haven from such slow-downs, as government defense spending is largely immune to economic influences. If the economic situation becomes too severe, they can lead to instability and actually benefit the defense companies, as was the case in Indonesia earlier in the year. As investors remain concerned about the economic outlook, we expect the defensive nature of the defense industry to further benefit stocks within this group. Over the longerterm, we expect the group to benefit from rising defense procurement spending and continued restructuring toward higher-growth niches." Tom Kruse / Casilla 5812 / Cochabamba, Bolivia Tel/Fax: (591-4) 248242 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[no comment]
Clinton Honors Chile's Restored Democracy By Thomas W. Lippman Washington Post Staff Writer Saturday, April 18, 1998; Page A16 [snip] Clinton, accompanied by first lady Hillary Rodham Clinton, Secretary of State Madeleine K. Albright and senior White House officials, was effusively welcomed by Senate President Andres Zaldivar Larrain and his applauding colleagues. "Nothing was unhappier for our people than the interruption of democracy," Zaldivar said, "and nothing more gratifying than its restoration." He thanked the United States for its "support in those difficult moments." Tom Kruse / Casilla 5812 / Cochabamba, Bolivia Tel/Fax: (591-42) 48242 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
No comment
Reuters January 28, 1998 POPE HOPES FOR POLISH-STYLE CHANGE IN CUBA By Philip Pullella VATICAN CITY - Pope John Paul said Wednesday he hopes his recent visit to Cuba will bear fruit similar to his 1979 trip to Poland when he helped influence events that led to the fall of communism in his homeland. "My visit to Cuba reminded me a lot of my first visit to Poland in 1979," the Pope, speaking in Polish, said at his weekly general audience. "I hope for my brothers and sisters on that beautiful island that the fruits of this pilgrimage will be similar to the fruits of that pilgrimage to Poland," he added. Historians credit the Pope's first visit home a year after his election in 1978 with injecting Poles with the courage to form the Solidarity free trade union. Nine years later, it was the Pope's homeland that began the domino effect that toppled communism in Eastern Europe. During the historic five-day trip, which ended Sunday, the Pope brought an unprecedented whiff of freedom to Cuba. He defended human rights, criticized Cuba's one-party system, called for greater freedom for the Catholic Church and drew attention to the plight of political prisoners. In his main address, read in Italian, he said the trip was a "great event" of spiritual, cultural and social reconciliation. The Pope also said the trip showed that the island's culture had remained at heart Christian despite four decades of Marxism. "The pastoral visit was a great event of spiritual, cultural and social reconciliation that will not fail to produce beneficial fruits on other levels," the 77-year-old Pope said. "It must be recognized that this visit took on an important symbolic value because of the unique position Cuba has had in this century's history," he said. The Pontiff also several times condemned the U.S. economic embargo against the island but said Cubans could not blame it for all their problems. He told the pilgrims he was happy to have been able to preach the Gospel there, giving Cubans "a message of love and true freedom," and thanked President Fidel Castro for making the trip possible. Recalling his address at Havana University, the Pope said Cuban culture had undergone many influences in the five centuries since Christopher Columbus discovered it, including four decades of "Marxist materialistic and atheist ideology." "Deep down, however, it (Cuban culture)...has remained intimately marked by Christian inspiration, as shown by the numerous men of Catholic culture throughout its history," he said. "The Papal visit gave voice to the Christian soul of the Cuban people." "I am convinced that this Christian soul is for Cubans the most precious treasure and the surest guarantee of integral development marked by authentic freedom and peace," he said. Hundreds of thousands of Cubans attended the Pope's four open-air Masses, which were transmitted live on state-run television -- a first for religious events.
Re: No comment
> Rakesh Bhandari wrote: > > >Tom, there has been a lot of talk about this odd coalition against US > >participation in the IMF bail-out of South Korea, Indonesia, etc. Aside > >from labor dinosaurs and eco-freaks, so rudely brushed aside by Rubin, who > >are some of the powerful members this odd coalition? What are they so > >angry about? > > The "eco freaks" include quite a few mainstream organizations, who used to > be pro-NAFTA. The "labor dinosaurs" probably wouldn't take this position; > it's New Labor, whose days may be numbered, that's taking it. There are > about 50 members of the Congressional "progressive" (or in Alex Cockburn's > word, pwogwessive) caucus.And don't forget the right-wing Republican > back-benchers. All of them agree that this is a bailout of irresponsible > financiers at the expense of people who work for a living. Didn't Max > Sawicky say the other day that only 1/3 of Congress is behind the $18 > billion IMF appropriation now? Yes I said it. I was relaying the view of an authoritative source who works on the Hill. It's not a backbench thing. It's a matter of the core political leadership of the nation, or the real 'executive committee of the capitalist class' -- the Administration (as of two weeks ago, at least) and Gingrich's cabal -- having the burden of selling the bailout to a dubious Congress which has no compelling reason to support it and a good many to oppose it. I would suggest this underlines the fundamentally representative nature of U.S. democracy, deformed though it is by the inordinate influence of capital. "Labor dinosaurs" and "eco-freaks"? I don't know whether to run out of my house screaming or transmit RB's address to the Unabomber. Politics is an interesting and important subject. I would commend it to you all. The " for Dummies" books seem to be quite popular. MBS == Max B. Sawicky Economic Policy Institute [EMAIL PROTECTED] Suite 1200 202-775-8810 (voice) 1660 L Street, NW 202-775-0819 (fax) Washington, DC 20036 Opinions here do not necessarily represent the views of anyone associated with the Economic Policy Institute. ===
Re: No comment
Rakesh Bhandari wrote: >Tom, there has been a lot of talk about this odd coalition against US >participation in the IMF bail-out of South Korea, Indonesia, etc. Aside >from labor dinosaurs and eco-freaks, so rudely brushed aside by Rubin, who >are some of the powerful members this odd coalition? What are they so >angry about? The "eco freaks" include quite a few mainstream organizations, who used to be pro-NAFTA. The "labor dinosaurs" probably wouldn't take this position; it's New Labor, whose days may be numbered, that's taking it. There are about 50 members of the Congressional "progressive" (or in Alex Cockburn's word, pwogwessive) caucus.And don't forget the right-wing Republican back-benchers. All of them agree that this is a bailout of irresponsible financiers at the expense of people who work for a living. Didn't Max Sawicky say the other day that only 1/3 of Congress is behind the $18 billion IMF appropriation now? Doug
Re: No comment
On Fri, 23 Jan 1998, Tom Walker wrote: > 11:18 W. HOUSE OFFICIAL DENIES MARKET RUMOR OF TREASURY'S RUBIN TO RESIGN. Tom, there has been a lot of talk about this odd coalition against US participation in the IMF bail-out of South Korea, Indonesia, etc. Aside from labor dinosaurs and eco-freaks, so rudely brushed aside by Rubin, who are some of the powerful members this odd coalition? What are they so angry about? Rakesh
No comment
11:18 W. HOUSE OFFICIAL DENIES MARKET RUMOR OF TREASURY'S RUBIN TO RESIGN. Regards, Tom Walker ^^^ Know Ware Communications Vancouver, B.C., CANADA [EMAIL PROTECTED] (604) 688-8296 ^^^ The TimeWork Web: http://www.vcn.bc.ca/timework/
