Mumbai: What Follows?
by Debs is Dead
lifted from a comment
Going on from what Giap wrote about State actors in many large 'terrorist' operations, it seems from where I sit that the states most likely to benefit from the action in Mumbai are USuk/BJPIndia/Israel.
The prez elect of America has given a firm commitment to move troops from Iraq where he imagines they are no longer needed, to Afghanistan where they are required, he claims. The problem is that the people America has declared war on the Pashtu, are spread across two nation states so war in Afghanistan of itself cannot truly subjugate these people and turn them away from the ancient culture into dumbed down consumerists.
Therefore USuk must wage war against those Pashtu who live in Pakistan as well but the Pakistani government stands ready and willing to do that themselves, repeatedly advising USuk that their presence on Pakistan soil is not required, not wanted and certainly not gonna be tolerated.
That dichotomy of belligerence could have worked with the BushCo administration who had no interest in the Pashtu other than shooting or bombing any head which appeared over the parapet, but Obama appears to want more.
As I said the total subjugation of the Pashtu seems to be the primary aim of the new American administration. Obama and his crew of washed up dem party hacks (on sale now - two wars for the price of one - highest bid not necessarily accepted - must check with AIPAC) have spoken about the need to take the war into Pakistan.
As shanks pointed out above if India moves all it's forces up to the Pakistani border, Pakistan will have no choice other than to respond by moving the bulk of it's forces down to the India/Pakistan border. If they don't India will almost certainly launch so called 'punitive raids' into Pakistan killing Pakistani citizens.
So the Pakistani military war against the Pashtu will stop for the time being and that will create the perfect excuse for USuk to invade Pakistan from the north.
It will be presented to western eyes much as shanks is trying to present it comments here. That Pakistan would have some sort of a choice in whether or not they went eyeball to eyeball with the Indian forces on their Southern border. There could be no choice, if Pakistan fails to man their southern border sufficiently India who as one can see here is forever getting into boundary disputes with it's neighbours, will at the very least re-kindle one of the many border disputes between the two nations claiming back some territory that they have previously agreed was Pakistan.
More likely the new BJP controlled government will decide Pakistan needs to be 'punished' for Mumbai. Read some of the comments in the piece shanks linked to and you will see a thirst for blood on the part of the usual loons, rednecks and crazies that every country has and which the BJP panders to.
If India mans up it's border, Pakistan must do the same in which case Obama will have the perfect excuse (in his eyes and the eyes of the somnolent American people) to invade Pakistan.
If war is like chess and this particular conflict is playing out like a chess match, I would be interested to see what strategy Pakistan could construct where the Mumbai attacks were instigated by them and they benefited from the attacks.
I can't think of one maybe someone else can.
There may be several intermediate steps in the invasion of Pakistan which I outlined above. The Pakistan strategists aren't fools and they may be persuaded to try to spread their forces between the NW frontier and the Indian border. Or even attempt a counter strategy of not fronting down South.
If they don't go South or even split their forces to cover both fronts, you can be sure that India will be receiving 'advice' from it's new ally amerika, to initiate some conflict, perhaps to settle the Kashmir 'problem once and for all, by moving the border further into Pakistan thereby cutting off the 'terror supply line'.
If Pakistani forces do move South as conventional strategy suggests they will have to since the danger to the Pakistani state from an Indian invasion is far worse than anything the Pashtu who are basically just reacting to provocation, could cook up, then we can be sure that American special forces plus drones, will provoke the Pakistani Pashtu.
They will probably react, of course understanding the danger they may be disciplined enough not to do anything at first, but the provocations with be ramped up until the the Pashtu do hit back. Whereupon USuk have the 'excuse' to invade. Game over.
Posted by b on November 29, 2008 at 23:39 UTC | Permalink | Comments (56)
Afghanistan: Merging News and Psy-Ops
This will likely get lost in future news from Afghanistan, so let us make sure we note it:
Press And "Psy Ops" to Merge At NATO Afghan HQ: Sources
KABUL (Reuters) - The U.S. general commanding NATO forces in Afghanistan has ordered a merger of the office that releases news with "Psy Ops," which deals with propaganda, a move that goes against the alliance's policy, three officials said.
The move has worried Washington's European NATO allies -- Germany has already threatened to pull out of media operations in Afghanistan -- and the officials said it could undermine the credibility of information released to the public.
...
U.S. General David McKiernan, the commander of 50,000 troops from more than 40 nations in NATO's International Security Assistance Force (ISAF), ordered the combination of the Public Affairs Office (PAO), Information Operations and Psy Ops (Psychological Operations) from December 1, said a NATO official with detailed knowledge of the move."This will totally undermine the credibility of the information released to the press and the public," said the official, who declined to be named.
...
The new combined ISAF department will come under the command of an American one-star general reporting directly to McKiernan, an arrangement that is also against NATO policy, the NATO official said.
Unfortunately the unnamed 'official' is wrong. This will not 'undermine the credibility of the information released to the press and the public'. The public will not take note of this.
Sure, while news from Afghanistan was already often propaganda, spoon fed to embedded journalists, this will make absolutely sure that nothing will be believable unless it comes from multiple independent sources.
But the mainstream media will continue to report from Afghanistan whatever that new combine operation will feed them. They will soon forget to mention the above, if they will mention it at all. They will deliver "The TruthTM" straight from McKiernan's propaganda shop without flagging its dubiousness.
"What we are seeing is a gradual increase of American influence in all areas of the war," the NATO official said. "Seeking to gain total control of the information flow from the campaign is just part of that."
NATO troops as auxiliaries of the U.S. empire - what is not to like with that?
Posted by b on November 29, 2008 at 10:00 UTC | Permalink | Comments (15)
Mumbai And The War Of Terror
by Debs is Dead
lifted from a comment
The only interesting part of this horror of people killing each other for entertainment, for that is what this sort of attack aimed at generating publicity must be considered as, is the inability of the mainstream media to construct a durable, credible meme on the fly. Oh they will eventually decide that this is 'Muslim terror' whatever the real causes were, but in the meantime it is interesting to watch them make a mess of out of their hastily constructed collection of sparse facts, half truths and outright lie.
The bitter and twisted man/woman that was screeching about the ultra-orthodox Jewish centre missed a great piece of reportage on the BBC last night. The BBC showed one commentator who was enthusing about the cheers from the crowd as the Israeli commandos arrived and how pleased the audience was to see the Israelis arrive, that the commandos despite their masked faces were giving deprecating waves to the crowd.
The reporter emphasised several times about how pleased the people of Mumbai were to see help from the elite Israeli anti terror unit. That must have been recorded some time earlier because then we cut to another beeb reporter mournfully describing that at least 5 hostages possibly more had died in the 'liberation' of the centre by an "Indian Anti Terror Squad" and this morning (NZ time) the papers said:
Israel's ambassador to India, Mark Sofer, said they believed there were up to nine hostages inside. Their fate was not clear. Sofer denied reports that Israeli commandos were taking part in the operation.
That was the interim line later we learn that all the hostages are dead. The two year old child which we were told was released by the hostage takers, before the attack, is now deemed to have been 'rescued'. And the denials of Israeli commando involvement have become considerably more emphatic.
Oh well shit happens can't cheapen the brand by having it associated with fuck-ups. Remember Entebbe, not Munich.
All night the BBC commentators were harping on about the Pakistan
connection and the Pakistani authorities were denying that Pakistan
either officially, or 'unofficially' had anything to do with it. The
BBC commentators completely ignore what is said and then hammer on as
if the Pakistani Foreign Minister has claimed responsibility for the
attack.
Pakistan officials' comments like, "Sadly India now knows first hand
the type of horror we confront daily" are treated with contempt by the English paid liars.
Later on it surfaces that one of the dead fighters may have a Pakistani connection whatever than means - perhaps his great uncle moved to Karachi in 48. The bulk of those identified thus far are Indian nationals. Then we cop the kicker.
Some of the dead fighters hold english passports. Oops!
What can that mean?
The BBC quickly skip over the implication that if one dead fighter having vague links to Pakistan is a possible trigger for an Indo-Pakistani war, does that mean some of the dead being English is going to trigger the great retribution for the Raj?
Of course not - England is one of India's biggest markets for their mass produced crap. Still the look of a rabbit caught in the headlights from senior BBC liar and propagandist Nik Gowing was about the only light moment in the hours of tedious anti-Pakistan innuendo.
There are insufficient facts to speculate on the real source of the attacks but one thing we can be sure of is that the inevitable result of this will that by invasion or 'invitation', big mobs of foreign troops are gonna be occupying Pakistan by the end of '09.
Silly silly India hasn't thought this through. This war on terror spreads in a manner much like the fallacious 'domino theory' America claimed would cause all of IndoChina to 'go communist' in the 1960's.
The invasion of Pakistan by America, England, Nato or even some mercenary outfit out of a tame Islamic regime will inevitably lead to increase violence by some of India's Muslim population.
As I said in another post India has 140 million Islamic citizens, if even a tiny percentage of them decide that they must help save Pakistan, India would descend into a chaos that would make Mumbai 09 seem minor in comparison.
Posted by b on November 28, 2008 at 20:27 UTC | Permalink | Comments (72)
Konsumterrorism
A German word with no real English equivalent is Konsumterror. The verbal translation is consuming-terror. A English definition of the sense might be: a fear that one is missing out by not buying something.
This person then could be called a casualty of Konsumterrorism:
A worker died after being trampled and a woman miscarried when hundreds of shoppers smashed through the doors of a Long Island Wal-Mart Friday morning, witnesses said.
The unidentified worker, employed as an overnight stock clerk, tried to hold back the unruly crowds just after the Valley Stream store opened at 5 a.m.
...
"He was bum-rushed by 200 people," said Jimmy Overby, 43, a co-worker. "They took the doors off the hinges. He was trampled and killed in front of me. They took me down too...I literally had to fight people off my back."
Ain't there laws against inciting terrorism? Who should be punished for this?
Posted by b on November 28, 2008 at 15:42 UTC | Permalink | Comments (22)
The Attack in Mumbai II
The cleanup operation in Mumbai are still ongoing as the police and army search and fight through two big hotels that were attacked. The latest casualties numbers are 125 dead, 327 injured.
As said before, there is something weird about these attacks.
There was no clear target.
The major attacks were on a railway station, two big hotels, a multiplex movie theater and a bar. Two taxis were blown up. Two terrorists allegedly were at a hospital.
Of the dead only 6 were foreigners, of the wounded 7. While those hotels and the bar frequently have foreigners those numbers and the attack on the railway station and the cinema do not fit to an "attack on foreigners" scheme.
There also seams to be no special religious anti-Muslim or anti-Hindi scheme in this as no place of worship was attacked.
The attacks, even while there were a lot of casualties, seem not designed to cause the maximum number of dead. One would do that with explosives within the crowded railway station. Not by shooting into the masses or by blowing up a random taxi.
There were no suicide bombings. Apparently there was no hostage taking either. But the attackers did not care or prepare to get away either. Instead they waited for the police and then had a shootout at each place.
The group that allegedly claimed the attack has never been heard of. For maximum international media attention thanksgiving is not a good day.
This coordinated attack brought out all anti-terror units in Mumbai. That, I think, might have well been the intended aim. The attacks seem to have been designed to do and to create direct battle situations with the anti-terror forces.
Here is my conspiracy theory:
The right-wing, Hindu-nationalist BJP party is competing with the ruling Congress party for upcoming elections. A big election theme is Islamic terrorism.
On September 28 a bomb blast in Malegaon, some 150 miles north of Mumbai, killed four and injured 80.
Two years before in a series of bombings at a Muslim cemetery in Malegaon 31 were killed and over 100 wounded. Most were Muslim, but the local police then pointed to some people from the Student Islamic Movement of India as the culprits.
The investigation of this years blast in Malegaon was carried out by the Anti Terrorism Squad from the state capitol Mumbai under its chief Hemant Karkare. It figured that a right-wing nationalist Hindu groups, which included some former higher ranking military and had some ties to the BJP, was the culprit.
It is an ongoing huge investigation which has had loud echoes in the parliament and the election campaigns.
A week ago Hemant Karkare was in a tussle with the nationalist BJP:
The Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS) on Thursday invoked the stringent Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA) against the ten accused arrested so far in the September 29 Malegaon blast case.
One more suspect would be arrested soon, ATS chief Hemant Karkare said at a press conference.
...
Rebutting senior BJP leader L K Advani's charge, Maharashtra Anti-Terrorism Squad said there was no political pressure on it in handling the Malegaon blast probe nor was there any substance in the charge that accused Lt Col P S Purohit was tortured in custody."There is zero political pressure and we are working professionally. Purohit has said in open court that ATS has not ill treated him," ATS head Hemant Karkare said.
Two days ago Karkare received death threats:
The Pune cyber cell officer on Tuesday received a call from an unknown caller who issued death threat to Mumbai's Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS) chief Hemant Karkare, TV channels reported.
Yesterday Hemant Karkare was killed when he responded to the attack on the Taj hotel (video showing him preparing to go in).
All together four top anti-terror policemen were killed.
Mumbai Police Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS) chief Hemant Karkare was among the dead. Two Indian Police Service (IPS) officers, additional police commissioners Ashok Kamte and Sadanand Date, were killed in separate gun battles with terrorists, the authorities said.
Mumbai Police "encounter specialist" Vijay Salaskar were also shot dead in another gun battle. Karkare was heading investigations into several recent cases of terrorist attacks here.
All four were in the first response wave against the attacks. Salaskar was a Mumbai top response officer with 75 criminals killed on his list. Kamte was the key officer in the state police and known to be 'in the thick of it'.
Karkare died when he tried to enter the Taj hotel. Kamte and Salaskar died at the multiplex.(I could find out about Date.)
In total 14 police were killed and 26 wounded.
These are high numbers. How many of them were ambushed?
With Karkare dead, the investigation into the Malegaon explosions and their backers will likely be postponed until after the election.
Meanwhile BJP leader Advani is milking the attacks as good as he can:
The BJP's prime minister-in-waiting's remarks makes it clear that the party is going to ratchet up its "soft-on-terror'' campaign against the Manmohan Singh government in the coming days. While the latest serial attacks are likely to boost its prospects in the ongoing assembly polls, it is expected to add more strength to its anti-terror tirade. The party is certain to spare no effort to bring the issue towards the centre of the country's political discourse in the run-up to the general election.
...
While the party stated that the priority was "to bring the seize to a close with the least amount of casualty", the larger questions were not far behind. "Such a well-orchestrated attack could not have taken place without a long and large scale conspiracy, we hope that the political establishment, security agencies, and the country as a whole would draw the right lessons from the incident. We need to strengthen our intelligence network and have a strong legal and security mechanism to fight terror," BJP general secretary Arun Jaitley stated.
From asking "Qui bono?" I arrive at the BJP's door.
The attack, designed to created fight-outs with police, killed the man who was the biggest danger for the BJP as he was revealing Hindu terrorism and made the BJP campaign against Muslim terrorism seem bigot. The current attack, which will reliably be charged on some Muslim entity, will help the BJP win against the Congress party.
But me arriving at that door does not mean that the BJP really is responsible here, I only find it possible to likely.
Posted by b on November 27, 2008 at 18:04 UTC | Permalink | Comments (62)
The FT's Understanding of Beggar Thy Neighbour
What does beggar thy neighbour mean?
After reading yesterday's Financial Times editorial, Fiscal fairness, not fiscal prudence, I was in serious doubt over that. I looked it up:
Beggar thy neighbour, or beggar-my-neighbour, policies are those that seek benefits for one country at the expense of others.
That is exactly what I thought it would mean. But somehow the FT has a different concept of that phrase.
According to the FT, you are a serious beggar-thy-neighbour case when you are unwilling to pay down the debt your neighbor made by spending too much. That is, if your neighbor can not live off your expense. Seriously:
Europe finds itself at a crossroads. The economic malaise will not only test institutions of the European Union, but more importantly the commitment of member states.
...
A substantial fiscal stimulus is needed across the continent and particularly in Germany, the EU’s largest economy, to counter an economic crisis. Announcements made so far by the European Commission and individual states do not go far enough.
...
EU officials should name and shame countries not pulling their weight, such such as Germany and the Netherlands.Without serious contributions from these governments it is not obvious where more money could come from.
Maybe London and others should raise serious taxes on banker bonuses and FT editorial writer income? But no:
Most major member states entered the downturn with large budget deficits, ... Several, such as Italy and Greece, cannot afford much extra spending without risking concern about national solvency.
Yes, some countries have over-spend and under-taxed for far too long. But why are the countries who managed to achieve a positive balance of payment supposed to pay up for that?
Europe’s political institutions are not ideally suited to managing economic crises. They are useful platforms for exchanging views, but remain weak relative to individual countries. In negotiating monetary union, Germany advocated political union. That would have provided the eurozone with institutions equipped to push co-ordinated responses and burden-sharing.
Ironically, it is Germany that is effectively engaged in beggar-thy-neighbour policies, waiting for other less well-placed countries to do most of the work and reaping the benefits once exports pick up. But if Germany does not uphold ideals of European unity, who will?
Political union was pushed for by Germany and would have equipped the EU with some valuable institutions. But such institutions would then have regulated far stricter than was done without them. They would have prevented the big housing bubble in Spain and Ireland and the totally irresponsible borrowing and flat-tax lunacies in Eastern Europe. But unfortunately such European political institutions were opposed by the FT's editorial staff and there likes.
Still - political union is not what the FT is now calling for. The only 'ideal of European unity' the FT seems to knows, is that the Germans have to pay. If they do not, they beggars their neighbors.
Germans will be hit hard by this crisis. Others might get hit even
more because they banked on the financial industry like Great Britain,
bought overvalued London real estate like some FT editors, or did not take care
of their deficits in better times.
Why should German taxpayer money now be invested in some more or less senseless spending programs? To pull the irresponsible people out of their mess?
I certainly do not like the German chancellor's policies, but once a while she has a thing right:
"Excessively cheap money in the US was a driver of today's crisis," the chancellor told the German parliament. "I am deeply concerned about whether we are now reinforcing this trend through measures being adopted in the US and elsewhere and whether we could find ourselves in five years facing the exact same crisis."
It does not make sense to simply throw money at the problem.
But for the sake of European unity, let me make an an offer to the FT.
Germany will pay $50 billion into a European alternative energy investment program if the FT and Britain support an all-mighty independent European Financial Regulator that will be headed by the most prudent German we can find.
Oh, and Germany will pay his/her earnings. If only to not get accused to beggar its neighbors.
Posted by b on November 27, 2008 at 14:28 UTC | Permalink | Comments (10)
The Attack in Mumbai
Somewhat weird.
This seems to be a botched attack on a target we yet do not know.
There have been shootings at a police station, a main railway station, a multiplex cinema, a hospital, a bar and two luxury hotels. Only the last three have some concentration of foreigners. Additionally two taxis blew up in different locations. Over a hundred people are dead and many more wounded.
Which of these diverse places were real targets?
The attackers are said to have come by boat. My first hunch is that they separated into several groups on their way to some place. Some of these smaller groups were then challenged by security forces and then went on a rampage. The locations and high number of random victims do not make any sense. If so many attackers were involved, a real operation with one or two targets would be much more likely to lead to some 'success'.
So what was the real target?
As for who they are. They could be from any group. As Debs is Dead remarks:
Funny the papers here which have been reporting it since about 8.00pm Wednesday GMT initially put the attacks down to Assamese separatists, but it could just as easily have been Gorkhaland separatists, Sikh separatists or any of the myriad other nationalist movements within India known to have used violence against citizens and tourist spots.
The phone call from a previously unknown 'muslim terror group' is as convenient as it is unlikely to be genuine.
Additional possible groups are Kashmiris, Thais in revenge of the Indian attack on a Thai trawler near Somalia (though I think that is unlikely) or Hindu rightwingers near to the BJP party in a false flag operation. I would not exclude any Muslim group with official, unofficial or no Pakistani support, but it is just one of many possibilities.
Posted by b on November 27, 2008 at 5:29 UTC | Permalink | Comments (39)
OT 08-41
Comment or perish ... another open threat ...
Posted by b on November 26, 2008 at 20:16 UTC | Permalink | Comments (37)
Georgia: Coming Clean on Saakashvili's War
The former Georgian ambassador to Russia and once follower of Saakashvili, Erosi Kitsmarishvili, testified in front of a Georgian parliament commission. Major points:
# In the second half of April, 2008, I have learnt from the President's inner circle that they have received a green light from the western partner to carry out a military operation;
# When asked to specify “the western partner” Kitsmarishvili said: after a meeting with the U.S. President George W. Bush [the meeting between Bush and Saakashvili took place in Washington on March 19], our leadership was saying that they had the U.S. support to carry out the military operation;
...
# The military operation should have been undertaken in direction of Abkhazia; military instructors from Israel were brought here in order to prepare that military operation;# [Defense Minister] Kezerashvili also said at that meeting that the operation should have started in early May, or at least before the snow melted on the mountain passes;
# This decision was not materialized;
...
# On August 7, at 4pm I again had a phone conversation with Saakashvili; he told me that war was starting; I do not want to go further into details of that conversation;
This account is, of course, much more believable than Saakashvili's lies.
At 6:10pm local time on August 7 Saakashvili announced a ceasefire in skirmishes with South Ossetia. But as Kitsmarishvili confirms, his troops had already orders to attack and were moving into place.
How long will it take until the Georgians finally take this guy to the prison where he belongs?
Posted by b on November 26, 2008 at 15:47 UTC | Permalink | Comments (16)
Three SOFA Versions - But What About The SFA?
There are now several version available of the Status of Force Agreement (SOFA) the U.S. is pursuing with Iraq.
There are two translations from the Arab version. One from Iraq blogger and activist Raed downloadable here. The other one is by McClatchy's Baghdad Bureau available here. So far the U.S. keeps the official English version secret. But McClatchy obtained a copy (pdf). Its team reports:
The Bush administration has adopted a much looser interpretation than the Iraqi government of several key provisions of the pending U.S.-Iraq security agreement, U.S. officials said Tuesday — just hours before the Iraqi parliament was to hold its historic vote.
These include a provision that bans the launch of attacks on other countries from Iraq, a requirement to notify the Iraqis in advance of U.S. military operations and the question of Iraqi legal jurisdiction over American troops and military contractors.
To illustrate the differences lets compare the three editions. For obvious reasons we pick article twenty four.
Raed's translation:
Article Twenty Four
Withdrawal of U.S. forces from IraqRecognizing the improvement of the Iraqi security forces and their increased capabilities, and the fact that they are in charge of all security operations, and based on the strong relationship between the two sides, both sides have agreed on the following:
1- All U.S. forces must withdraw from all Iraqi territories no later than December 31st 2011.
2- All U.S. combat forces must withdraw from all cities, towns, and villages as soon as the Iraqi forces take over the full security responsibility in them. The U.S. withdrawal from these areas shall take place no later than June 30th, 2009
Raed marked the changes from an earlier version he obtained. The "all"s marked above were added in the more recent one. The "must" in 1 was changed from "shall" the "must" in 2 was changed from "will".
The English version obtained by McClatchy seems to include most of the changes Raed marked throughout the agreement text. But article twenty four is different in the English version:
Article Twenty Four
Withdrawal of the United States Forces from Iraq.Recognizing the performance and increasing capacity of the Iraqi Security Forces, the assumption of full security responsibility by those Forces, and based upon the strong relationship between the Parties, an agreement on the following has been reached:
1 - All the United States Forces shall withdraw from all Iraqi territory no later than December 3, 2001.
2 - All United States combat forces shall withdraw from Iraqi cities, villages and localities no later than the time at which Iraqi Security Forces assume full responsibility for security in an Iraqi province, provided that such withdrawal is completed no later than June 30, 2009.
Notice that the English version still includes "shall" where the Arabic one included "will". In 2 the English version seems a bit more ambivalent too.
The English translation of the Arabic text as provide by McClatchy reads:
Admitting to the performance of Iraqi forces, their increased capabilities and assuming full responsibility for security and based upon the strong relationship between the two parties the two parties agreed to the following:
All U.S. forces are to withdraw from all Iraqi territory, water and airspace no later than the 31st of December of 2011.
All U.S. combat forces are to withdraw from Iraqi cities, villages, and towns not later than the date that Iraqi forces assume complete responsibility of security in any Iraqi province. The withdrawal of U.S. forces from the above-mentioned places is on a date no later than the 30 June 2009.
I
will let you decide how important these differences are. I for one
believe that some lawyers could argue a lot about them. There are also,
likely false, rumors of secret SOFA articles. How would those pass the Iraqi parliament?
What still bothers me the most is that the Strategic Framework Agreement (SFA) that was signed by Maliki and U.S. ambassador Crocker together with the SOFA has still not officially been made public and that everyone is mute about it. Imad Khadduri provides a link to an Arabic version. At his site Badger translates a short part of that in a comment and muses:
Notice that according to this (1) the close cooperation in defence and security arrangements has been inserted into the long-term strategic framework agreement; and (2) while the cooperation is in defence and security arrangements, what is contemplated at the end of this section is the takeover by the Iraqi forces of full responsibility for security, the word defence being missing there. It is enough to make you wonder, and particular in the light of the fact that the final version of this seems to be something of a secret.
I continue to believe that The Iraq SOFA Is A Shiny Object that is supposed to keep our eyes away from the problematic text of the SFA.
How much sovereignty does Iraq have when the U.S. is issuing solicitations for ammunition for the Republic of Iraq? What does the SFA say about that? Will the U.S. keep control over Iraqi arm purchases?
Posted by b on November 26, 2008 at 11:09 UTC | Permalink | Comments (16)
World Trade Collapse
Last month I reported on ships laying idle in Hamburg harbor: Visually Noticing The Downturn
The Baltic Dry Index measures cost for cargoes of raw materials by sea. It was around 2,000 points in the beginning of 2006. It jumped to 12,000 in mid 2008. Since then it fell to 925. That is an unprecedented collapse of freight rates.
It is now down to 824.
Oversea goods from and to the Americas and Asia go to Rotterdam, Felixstowe, Bremerhaven and Hamburg on ships carrying up to 10,000 standard 20 feet container (teu). From there smaller ships of mainly two cooperatives service northern Europe. Unifeeder (~38 vessels) and Teamlines (~30 vessels) ships have 500 to 900 teu. They 'feed' the oversea ships with goods to and from all of northern Europe, including the Baltic countries and Russia.
As I was told today Unifeeder now has eight ships idle, more than 20 percent of its total capacity, and is planing to idle more. I do not know the total Teamline numbers but at least three of their ships were laying in idle mooring in Hamburg harbor today.
The news from the big shipping lines is even worse:
Coscon, K Line, Yang Ming and Hanjin Shipping had already announced cuts on 13 November, but are now swinging the axe again to cope with the “traditional slack season” from early December to the end of March next year.
...
These cuts will slash existing capacity to northern Europe by 30% or 16,000 teu.
It is a worldwide problem as trade is collapsing even without the disastrous protectionist measures we can still expect to be legislated soon:
It had already suspended its AWE (All Water East Coast) China to US central loop from early October and reduced the total capacity in the trade by around 18.5%.
Earlier this month it also suspended the EMX (East Med Express) service in the Asia-East Mediterranean trade from the middle of October.
And it decided on reducing capacity by 18% in its TAS -1 (North Trans Atlantic) service connecting the US and Europe from the middle of this month. Port calls will be unchanged, but smaller ships will be used.
Capacity on its PSW (Pacific South West) trade will also be chopped and it will scrap the MAP (Mediterranean – Asia – America Pendulum) service connecting Mediterranean, Asia and the US from early 2009, cutting capacity in this trade by 13% to 15%.
Hyundai Heavy Industries, the biggest shipbuilder in the world, has 57% less orders than a year ago. A lot of jobs in transport and all related industries will be lost. It will take many years to revive the trade.
Like a month ago I want to ask you:
What are signs of a downturn you see in your area? What are they? Are the signs getting worse or better?
Posted by b on November 25, 2008 at 19:43 UTC | Permalink | Comments (30)
Auto Industry Bailout Scam
by Debs is Dead
lifted from a comment
Well I was interested by Mike Whitney's comments
on the seeming dissonance on the support the banks and financials are
getting and the complete lack of support for the auto industry bailout.
Yeah yeah I know the American auto industry is a basket case completely
captured by the myth of infinite and cheap hydrocarbons, their
inability to change has stranded them on the beach like an old whale
who doesn't realise he will die before a tide big enough to float him
off comes again.
But the same can be said of the banks and all the rest of Wall St. They
used outmoded inflexible solutions to an ever-changing environment and
consequently got beached too.
Whitney maintains that the auto industry will be bailed out alright
but not until the big two have been chapter 11'd and the unions broken
along with worker's entitlements:
So why would GMAC want to become a bank holding company if General Motors is headed for the chopping block? Could it be that the government is working out a secret deal with management to put the company through Chapter 11 (reorganization) just so it can crush the union and eliminate their pension and health care benefits in one fell swoop?
You bet. Car workers will be reduced to slave wages just like they are in sunny Alabama where sharecropping has moved indoors. And--no surprise--the Democrats are right on board with this labor-busting charade. The auto industry isn't going to be shut down. That's just more fear-mongering like the blather about martial law and WMD. Detroit is going to be transformed into a workers gulag; Siberia on Lake Michigan, which is why Paulson is withholding the $25 billion. It's plain old class warfare.
The ultimate sellout by the dems. Those of us who live in nations where a 'leftist' party finally won government during the great depression where government then introduced the safety nets and Keynsian economics and a more friendly attitude towards labour unions; are probably unaware of the horrors introduced by the likes of Ramsay McDonald as a labour PM in England when the depression hit.
A roundabout way of saying many of us have been brought up to believe that the pale pink leftish political parties that appeared to be aligned with ordinary workers during the depression, only became so aligned against their natural instincts. After they had seen ersatz socialist political parties like the English labour party crack down on workers just as bad if not worse than the right wing conservative parties, but the great recovery promised by the capitalist mouthpieces never eventuated. So the likes of FDR and Mickey Savage had no choice but to go left, as much as it went against their natural instincts.
Barack Obama and Joe Biden are not the workers' friends. Neither are any of the other pseudo working class champions in Congress. They may have come from the working class although really both Biden and Obama are products of the bourgeoisie, and even those dem pols who did come outta housing projects or other extreme poverty, couldn't wait to get away from it.
They wear the title "champions of the ordinary people" simply because the sort of petite bourgeois scaredy cats who hang round the lower echelons of the rethug party would have chased them off had the 'working class heroes' tried to get ahead with the party of one man against the world (ie extreme selfishness) that more properly suited their personal ethos, the rethugs. Sure the rethugs do let a few tokens in but only if the tokens touch their forelocks and don't scare them, and don't try and push Johnny Governorson offa his reserved spot.
Shit sorry bout the digression - the dem party hacks mostly have the values of the class enemy and will destroy American workers' entitlements in a heartbeat while claiming this is necessary to keep the auto industry 'globally competitive'.
Complete lies- utter bullshit - total distortion - check out how well car company employees are looked after in Germany or Japan. Even Korea where auto industry wages rose an average of 15% a year for the 15 years between 87 and 02 and where Kia attempted the same sort of Chapter 11 scam, the auto workers are much better looked after than other similar industries. They have strong unions in the other car manufacturing nations too. Why? Because these fork tongued under snakes belly high jumpers will never admit it but the success of such a complex industry such as vehicle manufacturing depends upon a good working relationship between management and workers. A good formalised relationship. Formalised by using the democratic structure of the labour union to facilitate effective consultation.
The lack of competitive car products outta Detroit has nothing to do with pension plans or dental benefits and everything to do with shit-house management.
The auto industry executives and their lackeys in Congress along with old school chums in treasury, figure if they can scare the workers, then slice and dice their working conditions, while paying off key unionists with cash or political favours to ensure the auto industry unions have the balls of a gelded racehorse, then management will be able to stay in it's nice little comfort zone safe from the exigencies of peak oil reality because American auto industry workers will be the cheapest on the planet.
Who cares if Detroit can only make 'yank tanks' if the much lower labour costs mean the ignorant can justify the relatively high cost of gas due to inefficient energy usage by offsetting it against the cheaper purchase price.
Everyday we see items that have a much higher running cost outsell far cheaper to maintain items. This by citizens who consider themselves value oriented, because the initial upfront cost of the expensive to run item is lower than that of the more efficient product.
That is the 'niche' the marketers hope to be steering Detroit product into.
Only if ordinary Americans, particularly ordinary members of the dem party, let their representative 'freckle punch' them.
Posted by b on November 25, 2008 at 10:04 UTC | Permalink | Comments (25)
The Value of the Financial Industry
Yves Smith has some good remarks on how Finance Has Lost Sight of Its Role
In 1980, financial firms accounted for 8% of S&P earnings. During the peak of our last stock market cycle, their profits were over 40% of the total.
Now consider: finance is a necessary function, but is represents a tax, a drain on the productive economy, just as defense and lawyers do ...
Instead being a utility that supports the real productive industry, the financial industry has turned into a cult.
Willem Buiter has chastised the Fed for what he calls "cognitive regulatory capture," that is, that they identify far too strongly with the values and world view of their charges. But it isn't just the Fed. The media. and to a lesser degree, society at large has bought into the construct of the importance, value, and virtue of the financial sector, even as it is coming violently apart before our eyes. Why, for instance, the vituperative reaction against a GM bailout, while we assume Citi has to be rescued?
Why indeed? Why this?
The U.S. government is prepared to lend more than $7.4 trillion on behalf of American taxpayers, or half the value of everything produced in the nation last year, to rescue the financial system since the credit markets seized up 15 months ago.
As I wrote last month:
Where is the social benefit?
Can we please have a plan for a financial system that is a service to the economy and not a drag - not a monster that depends on over-leveraged quant strategies nobody really understands?
While now bank after bank gets nationalized, possibly all of them within the next 12 month, we get the once in a lifetime chance to cut the financial system back to the boring utility service that it should be: Collecting savings and distributing them as loans for productive means while maybe making a small profit.
That is the only social and economic value the financial industry has. Everything else is obfuscation of robbery driven by greed.
Posted by b on November 24, 2008 at 14:56 UTC | Permalink | Comments (28)
Rubin's Citigroup Bailout
The U.S. taxpayer will now take most losses on a $300 billion package of bad debt Citigroup is holding:
Under the agreement, Citigroup and regulators will back up to $306 billion of largely residential and commercial real estate loans and certain other assets, which will remain on the bank’s balance sheet. Citigroup will shoulder losses on the first $29 billion of that portfolio.
Any remaining losses will be split between Citigroup and the government, with the bank absorbing 10 percent and the government absorbing 90 percent. The Treasury Department will use its bailout fund to assume up to $5 billion of losses. If necessary, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation will bear the next $10 billion of losses. Beyond that, the Federal Reserve will guarantee any additional losses.
In the deal the government will get some likely worthless equity in Citigroup.
The question I don't see anybody touching is for what percentage of the notional value of the loans this deal was done. The deal terms (pdf) say:
Up to $306 bn in assets to be guaranteed (based on valuation agreed upon between institution and USG).
So who will set those values? Who will supervise those who set these values? There are billions of taxpayer dollars at risk in each percentage difference of these evaluations. Where is the reporting on that?
Instead we are subjected to such nonsense:
Government officials fear taking over Citigroup would create a precedent: Unlike AIG, Citigroup's balance sheet is relatively healthy, with relatively strong levels of capital particularly compared to most of its competitors.
Ahem, does the Citigroup official balance sheet matter at all?
In addition to $2 trillion in assets Citigroup has on its balance sheet, it has another $1.23 trillion in entities that aren't reflected there. Some of those assets are tied to mortgages, and investors have worried they could cause heavy losses if they are brought back on the company's books.
Citigroup is dead. There is no way the company can survive without a massive default. It will not be the only one. Others are lining up:
Government officials could face requests from other banks for similar help shoring up their balance sheets. Banks, hedge funds, and private equity firms have urged Capitol Hill and government officials to restart the asset-purchase program in recent weeks.
"The problem is that other banks would want to get in line" for such government support, says Thomas B. Michaud, a vice chairman of investment bank Keefe, Bruyette & Woods Inc. "Is there enough money to do that?"
Only if you print it ...
And who is pulling the strings behind all this?
Inside Citigroup’s Park Avenue headquarters, the mood was tense. Through the weekend, Robert E. Rubin, the former Treasury secretary and an influential executive and director at Citigroup, held several discussions with Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson Jr.
Still hoping for change in the next administration?
It is testament to former Treasury Secretary Robert E. Rubin’s star power among many Democrats that as President-elect Barack Obama fills out his economic team, a virtual Rubin constellation is taking shape.
The president-elect’s choices for his top economic advisers — Timothy F. Geithner as Treasury secretary, Lawrence H. Summers as senior White House economics adviser and Peter R. Orszag as budget director — are past protégés of Mr. Rubin, who held two of those jobs under President Bill Clinton. Even the headhunters for Mr. Obama have Rubin ties: Michael Froman, Mr. Rubin’s chief of staff in the Treasury Department who followed him to Citigroup, and James P. Rubin, Mr. Rubin’s son.
All three advisers — whom Mr. Obama will officially name on Monday and Tuesday — have been followers of the economic formula that came to be called Rubinomics: balanced budgets, free trade and financial deregulation, a combination that was credited with fueling the prosperity of the 1990s.
The correct version of the last sentence would have been: "a combination that was credited with fueling busts and bailouts of 2008, 2009 and 2010".
With this Citigroup bailout and the prospect of the incoming team of Wall Street gangsters, the chance of a default of the U.S. government on its debt are now higher than ever.
Posted by b on November 24, 2008 at 8:47 UTC | Permalink | Comments (13)
Obama Change Is Unchanged Policy
Obama announces a big infrastructure program:
With the worsening economic turmoil certain to mark Mr. Obama’s first year in office, his advisers say they are intent on trying to use the crisis as an opportunity to act on many of the issues he emphasized in his campaign, including tax cuts for lower- and middle-class workers, addressing neglected public infrastructure projects like roads and schools and creating new “green jobs” through federal business incentives for energy alternatives and environmentally friendly technologies.
That is a pretty standard Keynesian reaction in a recession.
But the program lacks real initiatives. Why spend on roads when better public transport would be much more effective in reducing dependency on hydrocarbons?
The best policy for energy alternatives is to make carbon-energy more expensive by introducing a gas tax and to guarantee an (over time decreasing) extra amount per kilowatt for wind energy.
These are recipes known to work. Federal business incentives will simply end up as pork.
So far I have yet to see any change from standard U.S. policy approches.
As Jereme Scahill points out (h/t r'giap), the Obama team looks more and more like a Clinton team sprinkled with some CIA torture advocates and arch-republicans like Gates in important position.
Why was there such a long primary at all when the people who lost that ride end up in the front seats of the presidency?
Posted by b on November 22, 2008 at 20:44 UTC | Permalink | Comments (40)
Jana Shakarian or How to Bomb for a Ph.D.
Some weird terror scare is constructed in this: Somali Pirates' Successful Business Model, Trade with Terrorists: UM Researcher
The Somali pirates are growing their business - expanding their area of operation, managing public relations, reinvesting in the enterprise - and appear to have a growing relationship with militant Islamic groups, says University of Maryland researcher, Jana Shakarian, who monitors political, social and security conditions in Africa.
...
Al-Shabaab is suspected to entertain relations with Al-Qaeda. ... Al-Shabaab seems to profit from the piracy business ...
Shakarian makes up a six degree relation between the Somali coast guard/pirates and Al-Qaeda. But there is not one tiny bit of proof for any of the those relations.
David Axe, who has at least been on the grounds in Somalia, finds such relations very unlikely.
b real points us to the real news:
MOGADISHU (Reuters) - Dozens of Somali Islamist insurgents stormed a port on Friday hunting the pirates behind the seizure of a Saudi supertanker that was the world's biggest hijack, a local elder said.
and:
MOGADISHU (AFP) — A hardline Islamist alliance controlling Somalia's main southern port of Kismayo on Wednesday promised tough measures to protect ships and traders from marauding pirates.
The pirates/Somali coast guardians have so far only demanded money for returning the ships they captured. They have no political demands and use as little violence as possible. The have no connection to any of the Islamic movements there.
So who is this Jana Shakarian who is asserting this nonsense relation between the pirates and terrorists?
Her sole academic record is (scroll down) a master in sociology and ethnology from a German university. In 2005 she was several weeks in Ethiopia. Certainly a great place to learn about the sociological configuration of Ethiopia's archenemy Somalia.
Jana Shakarian is now working at the Laboratory for Computational Cultural Dynamics at the University of Maryland. What is that lab doing ?
The purpose of the laboratory is to develop the theory and algorithms required for tools to support decision making in cultural contexts.
The 'Computational Cultural Dynamics' tool:
Will_cultivate_poppies(F):[0.7,1] if debt-level(F,D) & D > d.
(hostile_foreigners(F) and Will_cultivate_poppies(F)):[0.6,1] if debt-level(F,D) & D > d.
Great stuff! Guess who is interested in such 'quant' nonsense form of social science. Yes. Since 2006 the laboratory is working on a $6 million contract/grand project for the U.S. Air Force.
The lab's 'latest news' list shows two of its members' publications in Science. It also shows three publications by them in National Review Online, one in the New York Sun and one publication as a Wall Street Journal Op-Ed.
A right-wing oriented, military financed pseudo-research shop.
Shakarian must be a recent acquisition as she is not on the staff list which was last updated in February. She seems to have been hired fresh from her master thesis as the 'expert' on the Horn of Africa to expand the labs 'expertise' from Pakistan/Afghanistan to the next area where it can make a nice profit and earn some additional pseudo-science credentials.
Now the first task for the new lady is to construct a threat where none is. That is a hard task when the facts, Reuters and AFP are refuting that construct the very same day. But it may well work. She will only need to 'build' the story a bit more scary and repeat it over and over. Publish it on National Review Online? Sure, eventually someone might use it.
When that 'threat' is established, her next task will be to convince some military dudes to chip over a seven digit amount of money to lab to forecast group behavior in Somalia. With a bit of personal commitment and some ambition, the young lady should have no problem with that task.
She can then work on her well financed Ph.D. thesis by computing some senseless stochastic probability model on group behavior in Somalia which, in reality, is driven by a myriad of factors she does not know and has never experienced in her own life. To test her thesis the Air Force will drop some bombs on the vigilantes her false models will reliably identify as Al-Qaeda affiliates.
Her professor will rake in some money, Jana Shakarian will get her Ph.D. and some people in Africa will die.
"Isn't that the way it should be?" she may ask.
Posted by b on November 21, 2008 at 20:17 UTC | Permalink | Comments (52)
Next Steps on Tibet
There is currently a meeting of Tibetan exiles in Dharamsala, India, to discuss the future of their movement.
In March several Han Chinese were killed by violent Tibetan protesters in Lhasa. As the 'western' media misrepresented the issue, I wrote a small piece on the history of the Tibet conflict:
After he won control over most of China Mao Tse Tung in 1950 reasserted Chinese rule over Tibet, but allowed the local religious aristocracy and government to carry on.
Then most of the Tibetan people were still working as serfs for the big land owners. These were the thousands of monasteries controlled by various lama lineages, feudal religious ruler clans. Despite the peaceful image of Buddhism the various lamas and monasteries regularly fought over territory and economic benefits.
...
During the 1950s the Chinese implemented land reform and secular schooling in Tibet. The lamas fought against the loss of their economic, social and political power by sending their monks into the streets. With the active help of the CIA the lamas had some success against the communists, but the movement was crushed when in 1959 the Chinese again occupied the capital and the seat of the Dalai Lama, Lhasa. Financed by the CIA, the Dalai Lama fled to India to set up an exile government.
The people behind the uprising in March were trained in 'color revolution' techniques and are financed with million dollar grands from the U.S. government.
Under international public relation pressure due to the Olympics and to avoid further strife, the Chinese government agreed to more negotiation with the Tibetan exiles. It asked them to write down their demands.
The exiles did so and a memorandum was presented to the Chinese officials. The demands therein were rejected as going much too far. The public relation fight about these demands and their rejection is now made in English language.
The exiles' MEMORANDUM ON GENUINE AUTONOMY FOR THE TIBETAN PEOPLE is quite expansive. It assures that the demands therein can be fulfilled within the current Chinese laws and constitution - if those are bend and some changes are applied (emph. added):
To a very considerable extent Tibetan needs can be met within the constitutional principles on autonomy, as we understand them. On several points, the Constitution gives significant discretionary powers to state organs in the decision-making and on the operation of the system of autonomy. These discretionary powers can be exercised to facilitate genuine autonomy for Tibetans in ways that would respond to the uniqueness of the Tibetan situation. In implementing these principles, legislation relevant to autonomy may consequently need to be reviewed or amended to respond to the specific characteristics and needs of the Tibetan nationality.
The Chinese will not change their constitution and laws to appease the Tibetan elite that fled in the 1960s. It would open a can of worms for them as other minorities would come up with similar demands.
The Chinese news agency Xinhua's Tibet writer is one Yi Duo. He today published a 'signed article', which can be read as the official Chinese refutation of the Dalai Lama's memorandum.
Yi Duo writes that the demands in the memorandum are not, as claimed, supported by the Chinese constitution, but are contrary to it as the Dalai Lama demands the 'genuine autonomy' of a lose federal state while China has a non-federal, unitary constitutional system.
There are already many provisions for autonomous regions within China's laws, Yi Duo says, and many such regions are already established, including an autonomous Tibet region. There is no need to expand the system.
In his (official Chinese) reading these are the issues the exiles' memorandum includes:
- Demand for an independent, uncontrolled "right of legislation"
- Seeking for a "Greater Tibet" Without any Historic, Realistic and Legal Basis
- Trying to create isolation among ethnic groups
- Trying to stop promotion and use of Putonghua [the unified Mandarin language]
- Strongly opposing government's management of religious affairs in line with laws
- Completely ignoring fact that Tibet is always part of China
- Claiming "Tibet government-in-exile" as representative of Tibetan people
Yi Duo ends:
The door of the central government for the Dalai Lama to return to the patriotic stance has always been open and will remain open in the future. However, the door for "Tibet independence," "half independence" or "covert independence" has never been open, nor will it be open in the future.
After the rejection of his demands, the Dalai Lama called for a meeting of all exile groups in Dharamsala in India and, as McClatchy reports, it's debate by day, party by night.
The meeting is supposed to debate how to go on with the struggle. The Dalai Lama so far represented a peaceful political struggle. He still has support but there are some harsh voices that call for terrorism against China:
[Lhasang Tsering, a former head of the Tibetan Youth Congress,] said he hoped that Tibetan exiles would return to a policy of demanding independence and using, if necessary, a campaign "to target their industries, their power supply and communications inside China through acts of sabotage."
The Tibetan Youth Congress was one of the U.S trained groups behind the violence in Lhasa in March.
The exile meeting may decide to reduce the demands and find a compromise to return to their homeland or it may decide to struggle on peacefully. But some of the groups involved are likely to part way with that and will create more bloody riots or other violent acts as soon as the recent meeting is over.
I therefore expect and increase in terrorist incidents within China.
---
Official Chinese government Tibet site: China Tibet Information Center
The Tibetan exile page: Central Tibetan Administration
Posted by b on November 21, 2008 at 17:31 UTC | Permalink | Comments (10)
The Double Top
Two quotes from:
Technical Analysis of Stock Trends
Robert D. Edwards and John Magee,
8th edition, CRC Press, 2001
A Double Top is formed when a stock advances to a certain level with, usually, high volume at and approaching the Top figure, then retreats with diminishing activity, then comes up again to the same (or practically the same) top price as before with some pickup in turnover, but not as much as the first peak, and the finally turns down a second time for a Major or Consequential Intermediate Decline.
(page 134)
Standard & Poors 500 index (SPX weekly), 1970-2008, via bigcharts.com
bigger
If prices on their recession from the second peak, drop through the Bottom level of the valley, a Reversal of Trend from up to down is signaled. And it is usually a sign of major importance. Fully confirmed Double Tops seldom appear at turns in the Intermediate Trend; they are characteristically a Primary Reversal phenomenon. Hence, when you are sure you have one do not scorn it. Even though prices may have already receded 20%, the chances are they have very much further to go befor they reach bottom.
(page 140)
Posted by b on November 21, 2008 at 13:25 UTC | Permalink | Comments (15)
IAEA And The Media On Iran And Syria
Yesterday the IAEA released its latest report (pdf) on Iran and one on Syria's 'Box on the Euphrates'.
As expected there is nothing new on Iran. It produces low enriched Uranium, as is its right, and refutes murky U.S. allegations of a nuclear weaponization program.
On the Box of the Euphrates, the building Israel bombed in Syria a year ago, the IAEA found that the size of the building would allow for a reactor and the pipeline from the river for enough reactor cooling.
So the demolished building could have been for a reactor. But it could also have been for a myriad of other purposes. Of the ground samples the IAEA took, one(!) included a tiny bit of chemically altered Uranium which was neither enriched nor depleted.
The usual suspects in the 'western' media are of course trying to twist the facts to let Iran and Syria look guilty of whatever. This is a campaign, initiated by Israel with the help of the U.S., to simply put independent regional competitors of Israel under international pressure.
A few examples of the false news reporting which often is quite subtle, but effective.
On the Iran report the Financial Times asserts this nonsense:
IAEA officials said relations between the organisation and Iran had deteriorated so much there had been no contact between them for over two months, UN officials said on Wednesday. [sic!]
No contact for two month? Hmm. The IAEA report says:
On 29 September 2008, the Agency conducted a physical inventory verification (PIV) at the Pilot Fuel Enrichment Plant (PFEP), ...
On 26 October 2008, Iran provided updated Design Information Questionnaires (DIQs) ...
The Agency has continued to monitor the use and construction of hot cells ...The Agency has been able to continue to verify the non-diversion of declared nuclear material in Iran. Iran has provided the Agency with access to declared nuclear material and has provided the required nuclear material accounting reports in connection with declared nuclear material and activities.
No contact?
In Haaretz Yossi Melman writes:
The International Atomic Energy Agency report stresses that Syria refuses to produce documents in relation to the site as it is required to do.
Syria is not 'required' to provide any documents on non-nuclear sites. Only four days ago Melman asserted:
The report will state that IAEA inspectors discovered traces of enriched uranium at the site on the bank of the Euphrates River.
The report did not state that. In his writeup today Melman does not mention that the Uranium particles found were not enriched at all. He did not mention his recent false report either.
The Wall Street Journal prints:
The IAEA, however, said the chemical makeup of the uranium detected at Al Kibar wasn't consistent with uranium from a bomb, but from a reactor.
Again, the IAEA says nothing like that. It was natural Uranium chemically altered is all the IAEA says. How it was altered and for what purpose is not in the report at all. The report would for example be consistent with metallic Uranium used in an Israeli bomb, or residues from Syria's legitimate phosphate fertilizer production which also provides for chemical altered natural Uranium as a by-product.
The Washington Post tells its readers:
Officials with the United Nations' atomic agency stopped short of declaring the wrecked facility a nuclear reactor, but they said it strongly resembled one. And they noted that Syria had gone to great lengths -- including elaborate "landscaping" with tons of freshly imported soil -- to alter the site before admitting outsiders.
The IAEA does not mention any 'landscaping' with regard to the bombed and IAEA visited site at all. Recent landscaping, not tons of fresh soil, is mentioned only with regard to the three site the U.S. wants the IAEA to visit (spy on) in Syria:
As indicated above, the Agency requested access to the three locations on 2 May 2008. Analysis of satellite imagery taken of these locations indicates that landscaping activities and the removal of large containers took place ...
While all of the 'western' media emphasize that the IAEA wrote:
a significant number of natural uranium particles
were found on the ground, none of them mentions this part:
It is necessary to draw attention also to the fact that the result of the analysis of one sample points to three uranium particles, whereas the results of four other samples taken from the same place within a 30 meter range contained no uranium particles.
Three particles on one spot are significant. That is one more than normaly would be found on my not-mopped kitchen floor. Unless of course I recently came back from a visit to a fertilizer plant. Than three or even four Uranium particles might be found on my kitchen floor just like some other quite icky stuff.
Together with the microwave oven right next to them and exaggerated 'western' media reporting, it would be likely enough to come under serious suspicion and maybe even UN sanctions.
But only if such would be in the interest of one specific country. Otherwise noone would ever care, as it should be.
Posted by b on November 20, 2008 at 20:17 UTC | Permalink | Comments (22)
The Deflation Scare
Does this graph show deflation?
No and yes.
That Google-trends graph shows an inflationary use of the word deflation in search terms and news references.
My personal theory about what the Fed and the Treasury are trying to engineer is this:
- Push the claim that the U.S. is on the border of or in deflation
- Use that claim to propose serious inflationary measures
- Inflate the U.S. out of its debt
Alan Greenspan used a similar deflation-scare scheme to reignite the debt-driven economy in the last half of 2002 to justify a lower Fed rate at 1% and to keep it there for much too long time. The media helped a lot in that by generating "deflation" talk. Greenspan's policy ignited the housing bubble and led to serious commodity inflation.
While the housing bubble grew and commodity prices exploded, the government and the attached media did their best to obfuscate that the money supply expanded too fast and created serious price-inflation. That was often observable in the reporting when the Bureau of Labor Statistics released the monthly consumer price index (CPI).
When the CPI went up, the media emphasized "core-inflation", the consumer price increase which neglects "volatile" oil and food prices. Now as the relative high inflation decreases a bit, and just like back in late 2002, the media emphasis is on the "headline inflation" number.
CNN Money in July 2007: Inflation tame in June
Government's key measure in line with expectations, despite higher food prices.
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Prices paid by consumers rose in June, but when food and energy prices were stripped out the government's key inflation measure was in line with Wall Street expectations.
CNN Money yesterday: Consumer prices in record decline
Inflation falls by a record 1% in October, worrying economists that falling prices will become a disturbing trend.
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Consumer prices fell by a record amount in October, another worrisome sign about the contracting economy, the government reported Wednesday.
Only the 16th paragraph of the current piece mentions core inflation, which was - 0.1% compared to last month prices, but the word "deflation" occurs nine times.
In July 2007 the year- over-year consumer price increase, which was downplayed as 'tame' by CNN, was 2.7%. The October 2008 y-o-y price increase, that now is used as a deflation scare, was 3.7%, coming down from a high of 5.6% just four month ago. In other words, inflation is still too high. There is no price-deflation (yet).
While inflation was on its way up, CNN played it down. As it is now decreasing a bit, but still high, CNN talks of deflation. (I use CNN simply as an example here. All mainstream media do just the same.)
Edward Harrison at RGE Monitor provides graphs of the y-o-y CPI and concludes:
From where I sit, this information reinforces the idea that falling oil prices are going to bring down inflation for some time to come as comparisons to year ago levels will continue to be favorable. However, there has not been a similar move in underlying core inflation as yet. Consumer price deflation is a completely oil-relate phenomenon to date.
Again what I see going on here is an engineered campaign to talk of deflation where inflation is only decreasing from too high levels.
The Fed, in my theory, will then uses this deflation-scare to lower the Fed rate to zero and to adopt "unusual" measures like quantitative easing which is the method the Bank of Japan used to prop up the bankrupt Japanese banking system.
Indeed the chief economist of the Bank of America is already urging for such measures:
The Federal Reserve should buy mortgage securities in the open market to loosen up the mortgage market, said Mickey Levy, the chief economist at Bank of America on Wednesday. The move would be a form of so-called "quantitative easing" undertaken by the Bank of Japan in the early 2000s to fight deflation. Under this approach, the Fed would ignore its normal policy of targeting short-term interest rates. The idea appears to be on the Fed's radar screen. Earlier Wednesday, Fed vice chairman Donald Kohn said quantitative easing measures were under review at the central bank as normal contingency planning.
Japan used such measures because it saw a bit of real deflation. It really had a falling consumer price index. The deflation was good for consumers. Prices fell stronger than wages, giving the people more money in real terms.
But the U.S. has yet to see any deflation. Using the Japanese policies while there is still serious inflation in the U.S. economic system will lead to higher inflation, possibly much higher inflation.
For all the above I'll stick to my theory for now.
But there are other theories on what that powers-that-be are engineering here. Dude, where's the Dharma? (via BP) muses about The TARP Fund? and Empire.
His theory:
- The p-t-b want to save the U.S. empire status at all cost
- The US-dollar as the vehicle of empire is therefore not allowed to fall as it should
- Inflation would help out of the current crisis but tank the dollar
- The p-t-b prop up the U.S. dollar via the TARP and Fed lending
- Thereby the p-t-b are engineering a deflation which will lead to a depression but save the empire.
Dude expands on that here.
It is an interesting (possible?) theory, but too far fetched for me. But it would explain the secrecy around the use of the TARP money and the trillions of mysterious Fed lending.
Anyway, how do you interpret what is happening now?
Posted by b on November 20, 2008 at 17:49 UTC | Permalink | Comments (7)