Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Well then they need to look at the American and civil war. End slavery and elect solid democracy and above all nail the terrorists in each of those countries.
:=) Gary Swancey
Wait a minute... This is about knocking out terrorism in the world wherever it maybe not the US rebuilding the world. Middle East has plenty of money to do its own reform.
:=) Gary Swancey
I am not sure.
:=) Gary Swancey
Oh I truly believe that Suddam is behind this without a doubt. I also expect the ploy of trying to give up something so that any invasion will be consider wrongful. No negotiating no anything. The war is not just for Laden or Suddam but the networks and their would be seconds that will rise once the leaders are taken out.
Bush is not going to just take what is given, he is going for the networks.
After this network is resoved then you are right build the economies and anything other than dictatorship be implemented. Rights for Islam women especially. That would curve a lot of the testostrone crock that reigns in the middle east.
:=) Gary Swancey
It they halt "short selling" then they would have to cover.
:=) Gary Swancey
Yep that is great but two years from now is not when we will need that resolved. It needs to be dealt with right now. Can you imagine what would happen if the SEC but a halt on "Short Selling?'
:=) Gary Swancey
OH I AGREE! Great points Inho. The only way I know is for the voice of the free world to send emails to the agancies and ask why the obvious scenarioes are not being handled.
I would be willing to bet that the terrorist did not expect the lazy FAA to shut down flights eithers. SEC won't stop selling what they do not own until it gets to a point that it is absurd.
Last night I was glad to see that some were putting blame where blame is due. CLINTON! Crippled out intelligence, weaken our military and took out the NSA by exporting encyption devices to Syria. And that is not even close to what he did.
:=) Gary Swancey
Oh I already have. I also attached my two gifs I made that appear on my signature but got a email back from the SEC that ScanMail deleted the gifs. I forgot you can't send anything but text to the SEC>
Also sent it to news services and will send it to other sources today. Can;t beleive the SEC does not see what is going on.
:=) Gary Swancey
Ok sending it to the SEC and other places ...
Subject: Release No. 34-42037; File No. S7-24-99
mailto:rule-comments@sec.gov
mailto:comments@foxnews.com
mailto:community@cnn.com
mailto:Squawk@CNBC.com
:=) Gary Swancey
Ike here is a letter I intend to send to the SEC ... Thoughts?
To the USA Security And Exchange Commission
I would like to ask the SEC one question.
How low will shorting be allowed to take the USA Stock Market, ZERO before the SEC finally sees they need to do something?
The terrorists are accomplishing their primary objective, to hurt the USA economy. No matter what happens in the future, shorting has been the catalyst for the most manipulated scenario in our stock market history to tank our economy and steal money from US citizens. The market is the shape it is in because anyone that does not live in the USA shorting everything they can. Bashers and short selling are out of control. There is no check or balance by the SEC to regulate short selling nor even have a fair shot at supply and demand for citizens of the USA to even dare attempt to support the stock market, our economy, our country. Of course the blame is placed on nervous investors.
The USA citizens are ready to buy, but no matter what we buy the price will decline. Not because of real people selling or supply & demand, but because of unrelenting short selling from greedy MMs and offshore, anti-US interests. Americans put up money to make solid investments in a hope to make money and there is always some unregulated offshore or Market Maker shorting everything that is bought. Our stock market is in horrible shape, shorting will continue to destroy our market and thus our economy and finally us as a country. They hit us in the financial heart of our economy with the murderous act at the WTC and arrogantly know the USA will let them short to finance more efforts to undermine our democracy.
Is it a coincidence that the first strike in this horrible murderous act just happens to target the firm responsible for ¼ of all the bond trading worldwide? And by the way nearly wiped it out.
Terrorist networks are widespread and extremely well backed. Can’t you see where if they would go to the long term planning of crippling our market and thus our economy they would have a plan to finish the job?
They hate us for being the richest nation the world has ever known. They intend to remedy that by destroying our wealth. How long will you continue to allow them to steal from the American people? How long?
:=) Gary Swancey
bb Here is a letter I am going to send to the SEC ... thoughts?
To the USA Security And Exchange Commission
I would like to ask the SEC one question.
How low will shorting be allowed to take the USA Stock Market, ZERO before the SEC finally sees they need to do something?
The terrorists are accomplishing their primary objective, to hurt the USA economy. No matter what happens in the future, shorting has been the catalyst for the most manipulated scenario in our stock market history to tank our economy and steal money from US citizens. The market is the shape it is in because anyone that does not live in the USA shorting everything they can. Bashers and short selling are out of control. There is no check or balance by the SEC to regulate short selling nor even have a fair shot at supply and demand for citizens of the USA to even dare attempt to support the stock market, our economy, our country. Of course the blame is placed on nervous investors.
The USA citizens are ready to buy, but no matter what we buy the price will decline. Not because of real people selling or supply & demand, but because of unrelenting short selling from greedy MMs and offshore, anti-US interests. Americans put up money to make solid investments in a hope to make money and there is always some unregulated offshore or Market Maker shorting everything that is bought. Our stock market is in horrible shape, shorting will continue to destroy our market and thus our economy and finally us as a country. They hit us in the financial heart of our economy with the murderous act at the WTC and arrogantly know the USA will let them short to finance more efforts to undermine our democracy.
Is it a coincidence that the first strike in this horrible murderous act just happens to target the firm responsible for ¼ of all the bond trading worldwide? And by the way nearly wiped it out.
Terrorist networks are widespread and extremely well backed. Can’t you see where if they would go to the long term planning of crippling our market and thus our economy they would have a plan to finish the job?
They hate us for being the richest nation the world has ever known. They intend to remedy that by destroying our wealth. How long will you continue to allow them to steal from the American people? How long?
:=) Gary Swancey
Second Draft:
To the USA Security And Exchange Commission
I would like to ask the SEC one question.
How low will shorting be allowed to take the USA Stock Market, ZERO before the SEC finally sees they need to do something?
The terrorists are accomplishing their primary objective, to hurt the USA economy. No matter what happens in the future, shorting has been the catalyst for the most manipulated scenario in our stock market history to tank our economy and steal money from US citizens. The market is the shape it is in because anyone that does not live in the USA shorting everything they can. Bashers and short selling are out of control. There is no check or balance by the SEC to regulate short selling nor even have a fair shot at supply and demand for citizens of the USA to even dare attempt to support the stock market, our economy, our country. Of course the blame is placed on nervous investors.
The USA citizens are ready to buy, but no matter what we buy the price will decline. Not because of real people selling or supply & demand, but because of unrelenting short selling from greedy MMs and offshore, anti-US interests. Americans put up money to make solid investments in a hope to make money and there is always some unregulated offshore or Market Maker shorting everything that is bought. Our stock market is in horrible shape, shorting will continue to destroy our market and thus our economy and finally us as a country. They hit us in the financial heart of our economy with the murderous act at the WTC and arrogantly know the USA will let them short to finance more efforts to undermine our democracy.
Is it a coincidence that the first strike in this horrible murderous act just happens to target the firm responsible for ¼ of all the bond trading worldwide? And by the way nearly wiped it out.
Terrorist networks are widespread and extremely well backed. Can’t you see where if they would go to the long term planning of crippling our market and thus our economy they would have a plan to finish the job?
They hate us for being the richest nation the world has ever known. They intend to remedy that by destroying our wealth. How long will you continue to allow them to steal from the American people? How long?
:=) Gary Swancey
Here is the first draft. PLEASE everyone who wants to lets get this letter designed and sent to SEC.
To the USA Security And Exchange Commission
I would like to ask the Sec one question.
How low will shorting be allowed to take the USA Stock Market, ZERO?
The terrorist are winning and no matter what happens in the future shorting has been the catalyst for the most manipulated scenario in our stock market history. The market is the lowest it has ever been and it is not because of P&D, it’s anyone that does not live in the USA shorting everything they can. Bashers are out of control as is shorting. There is not check by the SEC to regulate or even have a fair shot at supply and demand.
The USA citizens are ready to buy but no matter what we buy the price will decline not because of real people selling or supply & demand, short selling from greedy MMs combined with off-shore. We put up money to make solid investments in a hopes to make money and there is always some unregulated off-shore or Market Maker shorting everything that is bought. Our stock market is in horrible shape and no matter what, shorting will destroy our market and thus our economy and finally us as a country. They hit us in the financial heart of our economy with the murderous act of the WTC and arrogantly know the USA will let them short.
Is it a coincidence that the first strike in this horrible murderous act just happens to target the firm responsible for ¼ of all bond trading. And by the way nearly wiped it out.
Terrorist networks are widespread and extremely well backed. Can’t you see where if they would go to the long term planning of crippling out market and thus our economy they would have a plan to finish the job.
They are hitting us in the pocketbook.
:=) Gary Swancey
DD, I am in the process of writing a letter the SEC that will be comprosied of how much more shorting is the SEC going to allow before the entire USA market is not worth the price of one F-15 Eagle.
:=) Gary Swancey
Mornign Da! .... Can you comment on whether CBQ, Inc. is testing Chinese-manufactured laptops currently?
From my understanding they are testing for Quality and standards.
If they are, can you shed any light on what the testing is aimed at?
No exactly sure about the acutal testing be performed.
Is it quality assurance? Yes, CBQ wants to make sure the products are of highest grade of quality. Of course quality directly relates to price .
Is it getting to know the machines and how they perform?
Absolutely. But how and where that relates to CBQ I have to be careful on. We all know the deal with Atec and of course we have Sarah.
Is it related to performance standards specified by a prospective customer?
No comment.
CIIR cash & restricted stock
:=) Gary Swancey
Pentagon Issues Order To Elite Units In Infantry
Military Action Could Involve Ground Troops
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A41006-2001Sep16.html
By Thomas E. Ricks
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, September 17, 2001; Page A13
The Pentagon issued a "warning order" late last week to some elite infantry units to prepare for a possible imminent combat mission, indicating the administration is moving closer toward taking wide-ranging military action that will involve ground combat troops, a defense official said.
The order was issued after planners on the staff of the Joint Chiefs last week worked intensely to produce several possible "courses of action," as the military calls tentative plans, to retaliate for the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center in New York and the Pentagon. A senior officer on the Joint Staff then notified the Army that most of the missions being contemplated could require ground combat forces, as well as combat aircraft.
A warning order involving the deployment of troops overseas requires the approval of the secretary of defense.
President Bush is expected to be briefed on the tentative plans today by Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld and may approve one for execution, defense officials said.
Rumsfeld also indicated that multifaceted missions are being planned when he said on Fox News yesterday that "this isn't going to be a few cruise missiles flying around on television for the world to see that something blew up." He said that "there very likely will be" military action.
more...
:=) Gary Swancey
Pakistan Army Says Afghan Troops Amass at Border
Pakistan Officials Press Taliban to Turn Over Bin Laden
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A42321-2001Sep17.html
By Jack Redden
Reuters
Monday, September 17, 2001; 9:46 AM
ISLAMABAD, Sept 17 – Pakistan's army said on Monday that Afghanistan's Taliban rulers have deployed a force of between 20,000 and 25,000 fighters just across the border from the Khyber Pass into Pakistan.
A Pakistani army officer said Islamabad had reinforced its own troops fanned out along the 870-mile long frontier.
"We are also forming our forces, but there has been no firing," Captain Ahmed Bahtti said at a military base in the Khyber Pass, some 200 km (120 miles) west of Islamabad.
The Islamic fundamentalist Taliban warned at the weekend that it would attack Pakistan if it provided help to the United States against Afghanistan. The Americans blame Kabul for sheltering Osama bin Laden, the man believed to have masterminded Tuesday's terror attacks on New York and Washington.
Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf, meanwhile, was locked in closed-door meetings on Monday as he tried to try to stave off a U.S. strike on Afghanistan while preparing his nation for a war next door.
He sent a delegation to the Taliban stronghold of Kandahar in southern Afghanistan to seek the surrender of Saudi-born militant Osama bin Laden to avert an expected U.S. assault.
In a sign of the growing tension, the U.S. embassy in Pakistan said it had requested permission from Washington for all non-essential American staff and their dependents to be allowed to leave the country.
At the presidential palace in Islamabad, Musharraf was out of sight, apparently meeting advisers and officials of his military government. Aides gave no details of his talks.
As the consultations went ahead, the United Nations reported tens of thousands of Afghans streaming out of major cities and heading toward the borders with Pakistan and Iran.
"We are preparing for the influx of tens of thousands of people who are now on their way towards the borders of the neighbouring countries," said Yusuf Hassan, spokesman for the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees in Islamabad.
General Musharraf, who had previously defended Pakistan's backing for the rule of the purist Taliban, is in an awkward position domestically as he lines up behind Washington.
The divisions inside Pakistan were underlined by a meeting in Lahore, Pakistan's second-largest city, of about 50 leaders of the Afghan Defence Council that was formed to protect the Taliban from international demands that they hand over bin Laden.
Pakistan, under intense U.S. pressure to provide assistance in the wake of last week's devastating terror attacks on New York and Washington, sent the team led by intelligence chief General Mahmood Ahmed to Afghanistan early on Monday to see the Taliban leadership.
The Pakistan-based Afghan Islamic Press said the delegation went into an immediate meeting with the Taliban foreign minister and would later meet the hardline Islamic movement's spiritual leader, Mullah Mohammad Omar.
The United States has named bin Laden, who is sheltered by the Taliban and was already wanted for the bombing of two U.S. embassies in 1998, as a leading suspect in the latest attacks.
Pakistani Foreign Minister Abdul Sattar, speaking as the delegation arrived in Afghanistan, told CNN in an interview that any decision to hand over bin Laden lay with the Taliban.
Sattar said the delegation would urge the Taliban government "to act responsibly in the terribly grave situation" raised by the attacks on New York and Washington.
While Pakistan would offer Washington full cooperation, Sattar said that any decision on specific help against terrorism would be taken only once Washington made known precisely what action it has in mind.
"Pakistan's position remains quite precarious," wrote The Nation newspaper. "Damned if it helps the U.S., not only by the Taliban but also by the large number of Taliban supporters in the country.
"And damned if it does not, because the U.S., already suspicious of Pakistan's disclaimers of its support to the Taliban, would lump Pakistan and Afghanistan together and act accordingly."
Musharraf consulted opinion leaders in the country following his promise to Washington to do whatever was necessary to help then track down those responsible for the September 11 attacks.
After meeting newspaper editors on Sunday, he was quoted as saying Pakistan had to be involved in the formation of a new political structure inside Afghanistan – an admission that he believed that larger changes than the surrender of bin Laden were now inevitable.
In Lahore, the leaders of groups united under the banner of the Afghan Defence Council were meeting to plot their strategy as Washington vowed retribution for the terror attacks in which more than 5,000 people are missing and feared dead.
The group was formed in response to U.N. sanctions invoked last January against the Taliban in a futile effort to force the surrender of bin Laden, whom the Taliban consider a "guest."
But there is broad antagonism in Pakistan to any U.S. attack on Afghanistan. A plan by the United Nations to deploy monitors along the border to enforce its arms embargo on the Taliban was condemned last month across Pakistan's political spectrum.
:=) Gary Swancey
Perosnally I believe they will invade Pakistan prior to the US getting a support force there to attempt to get control of certain scenarios.
:=) Gary Swancey
PCLN eom
:=) Gary Swancey
CNBC states to support the border from US attack. But no one knows just yet.
:=) Gary Swancey
Taliban deploys 20,000 to Pakistan Border
:=) Gary Swancey
Now I will once my targets are hit. But they are up.
:=) Gary Swancey
Yep I believe the margin calls will be heavy, also they are not extending the options, puts, calls. Triple Witching is still Friday I believe.
Big Money is going to fight the sell off ...
:=) Gary Swancey
Yep that is a good site.
:=) Gary Swancey
Yep I have a real sneaky feeling the SEC and US government in partnership with other forign goverments and exchanges are going to be looking for where the money flow is for Terrorist.
Looking for confirmation in the news.
:=) Gary Swancey
I figured that much ... Frank is a very solid person I have come to know for years now. But no sense getting into it with someone like him. Every civilization has those that make you absolutely ashame to have to recognize as being part of humanity. That which slips through the crack thus spawning truest evil heart for self profit at whoever's expense.
:=) Gary Swancey
Buffett says 'won't be selling anything' on Monday
http://biz.yahoo.com/rf/010916/n16214829_4.html
By Anna Willard
WASHINGTON, Sept 16 (Reuters) - U.S. billionaire investor Warren Buffett said on Sunday he will not sell any of his stocks when the market reopens on Monday, and in fact if the markets fall significantly he may use it as a buying opportunity.
:=) Gary Swancey
I do ... but it is nt there now.
:=) Gary Swancey
Ike I have been following your posts. Keep up the good work. I just saw on CNBC that the SEC is checking ADRs to see where terrorist traders may have shorted certain stocks prior to the WTC murders. They are going to track down if the terrorist are making capital in the markets.
Looks like the US is going to hurt them in the pocket book.
:=) Gary Swancey
Frank, I just looked and do not see my name anywhere. I took him for his word he would remove it. Did you do refresh to make sure you were seeing the most recent revision.
Lot of pages are not dynamic. But thanks for you looking out for me.
:=) Gary Swancey
Touche' Ike ...
:=) Gary Swancey
Here is a thought ... Imagine people who could careless about the over all picture of what just happened and flat refuse to see what has actually happen. They just see the death as an "Oh Well" lets get back to it. They can not comprehend that there is more to this than the high cost of human life that was loss.
Of course insensitive narrow minded people will just say get over it. However these types have never experienced the fear of war, the panic the hearing your heart pump so loud you are scare it will be heard by the enemy, or not knowing if the next second you will die from any number of scenarios. War is good training for arrogant self centered types that refuse to understand there are those of us who fought for their right to be this way and not take a bullet for being overly cruel thus fueling the emotions of those that understand our freedom and security has been totally threatened.
With life we all have to make decisions. It sad there are those that their primary decision is to get all they can get from whoever they can without regard for anyone but themselves. They are never the ones that have to face a situation of war and fear. How much life has to be loss before some finally figure out this is about freedom. Will it have to come down to a horrible situation where they go to work one morning to nail whoever they can for personal gain and end up having to make a decision whether to die from smoke and flames or dive 1000 to the concrete because something they have taken for granite, their's along with the rest of the world's freedom has just taken a deathly blow.
:=) Gary Swancey
Same as I did did the other terrorist supportive states. Neutral means I belive they will talk unison but their history countradicts that they will be supportive.
Same as I have Russian and Cuba in that neutral catagory.
As far as Jerry Flawell I trhink he needs to take his spoiled backside off his selfrighteous throne and be stuck in the middle of as a chaplin. I have no use for Jerry Falwell and his absurd stupidity.
You are correct that it is going to take education and reform to stop terrorism.
:=) Gary Swancey
That makes perfect sense however:
Will Pakistan faughter once the Taliban attacks them for daring to all infidels on Muslim soil? The Taliban is ruthless and kills their own or executes them without any hestitation. Also isn't Afghanistan one of the mjor Poppy Producers in the world?
Syria is the where Clinton exports a rubber Presidential scenario for encyption devices. How much more did Clinton do to aide the Terrorist in their growth and secercy? We probably wont know that till later when things finally do surface.
Missing Suddam was a serious mistake and the way the Gulf was performed may have stopped him but we all knoew we would be facing him again. I believe he will be a major player in the Holy WWWIII.
I was unaware till I started do my DD on this just how cruel this has been for your people. I am shocked at what I do not knowof children and innocent people dying not to mention the horrible condition for the women. You are right there is now stopping this and the more that is coveyed the more poeple will understand the true horror. As for liberals if I never talk to another liberal would be fine with me.
I was in London a few years ago for the opening of the Globe on the Thames and I traveled across Britian and I will say one thing US is a spoiled nation. Spoil nations breed liberals. Poor nations breed terrorist.
You are right this is not about the markets or money this is about innocent bllod being spilled by these cults.
But how far will this war grow if China, Russia, and Other countries continue to fuel the terrorists with arms and technology? How long before nuclear capability such as what pakistan has is controlled by the Taliban.
I agree that recognition of Israel is not the issue here. They are a force in the middle east regardless if recognized as a state or not. I doubt Israel or the US will faughter in this cam[paign against terrorism. Just be glad Carter, Clinton or Gore or some other spoil liberal is not in the White House.
Do you think India will leap at the chance to war with Pakistan it their support of this anti terror campaign?
Hopefully the Praetotian Guard will be reinstill to keep what is won over from falling back into the control of the terrorist. ANd who knows maybe the liberals will wait up to what is going on and that their kind only fuels the taking of innocent lives. Maybe the Liberal should live in the in Afghanistan for a while.
:=) Gary Swancey
Violations by the Taliban
http://www.hrw.org/reports/2001/afghan2/Afghan0701-01.htm#P181_37555
· January-June 2001: Fighting between forces of the Taliban and the United Front factions Hizb-i Wahdat and Harakat-i Islami in and around the town of Yakaolang in the Hazarajat region led to a series of reprisals by Taliban troops against local civilians, who were mainly ethnic Hazaras. In January the Taliban massacred 176 civilians after retaking control of the town of Yakaolang. They lost and regained control of the town two more times over the next five months. In June Taliban troops summarily executed an unknown number of civilians and burned much of the town's center before being forced to withdraw from the town. 62 Also in January 2001 Taliban forces summarily executed at least thirty-one ethnic Uzbek civilians while retreating from Khwajaghar, in Takhar province, during battles with United Front forces.63
· August-October 2000: According to displaced persons who had fled to United Front-held Faizabad, the Taliban bombed residential areas of Taloqan and surrounding villages in the weeks before the city fell to them on September 5, 2000. Bombs, shells, and cluster munitions were heavily used throughout the city, destroying many homes. After the Taliban consolidated control of the villages, its forces carried out summary executions of suspected sympathizers of United Front commander Ahmad Shah Massoud.64
· May 2000: Taliban forces summarily executed at least thirty-one civilians near the Robatak pass, northwest of the town of Pul-i Khumri. These were men taken during sweep operations throughout Samangan and neighboring provinces in late 1999 and early 2000.65
· July-December 1999: A series of Taliban offensives in the north was marked by summary executions, the abduction and "disappearance" of women, forced labor of detainees, the burning of homes, and the destruction of other property and agricultural assets, including fruit trees, one of the mainstays of the local economy.66 According to a U.N. report later that year, "The Taliban forces, who allegedly carried out these acts, essentially treated the civilian population with hostility and made no distinction between combatants and non-combatants."67 According to one human rights researcher, in Khwajaghar, near Taloqan, 3,000 houses were systematically destroyed in July, and in Shamali, detainees were used for mine clearance.68 In July-August Taliban forces bombed the town of Dara-i Suf with incendiary cluster munitions; ground demolition forces burned down the entire central market and destroyed wells and homes.69 In December Taliban forces massacred ethnic Uzbek civilians in the village of Khoja Kuliob, Aibak district, Samangan province.70
· August 1998: After capturing Mazar-i Sharif on August 8, more than a year after some 3,000 of its soldiers had been captured and murdered there, Taliban troops rounded up and summarily executed at least 2,000 civilians, the majority of them ethnic Hazaras. Thousands more, including ethnic Uzbek and Tajik men, were detained. The Taliban governor, Mullah Manon Niazi, made inflammatory speeches in which he accused the Hazaras of murdering Taliban soldiers in 1997 and ordered them to become Sunni Muslims or risk being killed. Many civilians were also killed in aerial bombardments and rocket attacks as they tried to flee the city. There were reports that in certain Hazara neighborhoods, a number of women were raped and abducted by Taliban troops.71
· September 1997: Retreating Taliban forces summarily executed ethnic Shi'a Hazara villagers near Mazar-i Sharif after having failed to capture the city. According to the U.N. Special Rapporteur for Afghanistan, fifty-three villagers were summarily executed in one city, Qezelabad, and some twenty houses set on fire. In the village of Sheikhabad, some thirty elderly people were reported to have been summarily executed. Killings of a similar type were also reported in other villages in the area.72
· In addition, the Taliban has committed other serious violations of internationally recognized human rights outside of the context of armed conflict. Minorities have suffered from discrimination and other abuses, including arbitrary arrest and torture. Summary trials of suspected criminals frequently result in harsh sentences involving corporal punishment under the Taliban's strict interpretation of Islamic law. In areas under their control, Taliban authorities have enacted policies prohibiting women from working outside the home in activities other than health care, although the policies are not uniformly enforced. They have prohibited women from attending universities and have closed girls' schools in Kabul and some other cities, although primary schools for girls operate in many other areas of the country under Taliban control. The Taliban has enforced a strict dress code for women and the religious police have beaten women on the streets for violation of this code. Men have also been beaten or fined for dress code violations or for having beards that are too short.
:=) Gary Swancey
Pakistan, Iran, Russia Fueling Afghan Civil War
http://www.hrw.org/press/2001/07/afghan0701.htm
(New York, July 13, 2001) The United Nations Security Council should impose a comprehensive embargo on all military assistance against all warring factions in Afghanistan, Human Rights Watch urged today.
In a new report released today, Human Rights Watch accused Pakistan, Iran, and Russia of providing military support to Afghan factions with a long record of committing gross abuses of human rights. Other states in the region have also contributed to the ongoing war.
"The civil war in Afghanistan has been absolutely disastrous for civilians," said Joost R. Hiltermann, Executive Director of the Arms Division of Human Rights Watch. "An arms embargo is the only way to stop the human rights violations they have suffered."
The 55-page report, "Crisis of Impunity: The Role of Pakistan, Russia, and Iran in Fueling the Civil War in Afghanistan," details the nature of military support provided to the warring parties; the major transit routes used to move arms and other equipment; the suppliers; the role of state and nonstate actors; and the response of the international community. Human Rights Watch conducted research on military assistance to the Taliban and the United Front over a two-year period, traveling to both Kabul and areas of Afghanistan under United Front control, as well as Kazakhstan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, and Pakistan, and interviewing government officials, members of the diplomatic community, military officers, civil servants, journalists, academics, and others.
In calling for an embargo on military assistance, Human Rights Watch said that enforcement measures should be carefully structured to ensure a two-sided embargo would not benefit one side, the Taliban, at the expense of the other, the United Front. For reasons of geography and other factors, an embargo is more easily enforced against the United Front than the Taliban.
Lifting the embargo should be made contingent on concrete steps by the factions to end gross violations of human rights and bring perpetrators to justice, Human Rights Watch said.
In the war, all major factions have repeatedly committed serious violations of international law, including killings, indiscriminate aerial bombardment and shelling, direct attacks on civilians, summary executions, rape, persecution on the basis of religion, and the use of antipersonnel landmines. Most of the recent violations, especially summary executions and indiscriminate aerial bombardment, have been by the Taliban, while the United Front has failed to hold its commanders accountable for past abuses.
Many of the factions' violations can be shown to have been "widespread or systematic," a criterion of crimes against humanity. Direct attacks on civilians and indiscriminate attacks resulting in civilian casualties may amount to war crimes under international humanitarian law.
The report charges that Pakistan has violated the U.N. arms embargo on the Taliban imposed in December 2000 by permitting arms to cross its border into Taliban-controlled territory. The Taliban is the Afghan faction in power in Kabul; Pakistan has been its principal international sponsor. Official denials notwithstanding, Pakistan has provided the Taliban with military advisers and logistical support during key battles; has bankrolled the Taliban; has facilitated transshipment of arms, ammunition, and fuel through its territory; and has openly encouraged the recruitment of Pakistanis to fight for the Taliban. In addition, Saudi Arabia has provided funds to the Taliban, while private actors and some officials benefit from the smuggling that links these countries.
Supporting the coalition of opposition groups known as the United Front are Iran and Russia, with secondary roles played by Tajikistan and, at least until 1998, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, and Kyrgyzstan. Iran has provided weapons, large-scale funding, and training. Russia has played a crucial enabling role in the resupply of United Front forces by arranging for the transport of Iranian aid, as well as providing direct military assistance itself, including transport helicopters in late 2000. Military assistance to United Front forces has crossed the Tajikistan-Afghanistan border with the active collusion of the Russian government. In general, Human Rights Watch supports international sanctions against governments and rebel groups that have engaged in a practice of gross violations of international human rights and humanitarian law. Such sanctions include the imposition of embargoes on arms and other forms of military assistance by the international community. Likewise, governments that provide military assistance to abusive states and rebel groups should be held accountable for the resulting abuses.
The humanitarian toll of twenty years of fighting-some 1.5 million deaths and the massive displacement of populations, famine, and the ruin of the country's economic base-has not figured prominently in international policy on Afghanistan, Human Rights Watch said. Existing U.N. sanctions against the Taliban, imposed to compel the surrender of Osama bin Laden, the Saudi national suspected of having orchestrated the bombings of the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, do not address the larger issue of the war's impact on the civilian population.
"The international community has failed to hold Afghanistan's warring factions accountable for violations of international human rights and humanitarian law," said Hiltermann. "Civilians are at the center of this conflict, and their well-being must be at the center of the solution."
In calling for a comprehensive embargo on arms and other military assistance, Human Rights Watch said that Pakistan, in particular, should be pressed to comply with the embargo, especially to prevent the re-supply of ammunition and spare parts to the Taliban. Pakistan should also be urged to accept U.N. monitors to work alongside its own customs personnel, and steps should be taken to penalize Pakistan if it fails to comply with the U.N. embargo. Such measures should be designed to minimize any adverse humanitarian impact in Pakistan.
:=) Gary Swancey
Experts Weigh Risks of Air, Ground Campaigns in Afghanistan
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-091401defense.story
By PAUL RICHTER, Times Staff Writer
WASHINGTON -- As the Bush administration began weighing strikes against terrorist havens in Afghanistan, defense officials and military experts said Thursday that major operations in the rugged terrain could require months of preparation and would probably entail U.S. casualties.
Because of a primitive infrastructure and the hostility of many Afghanis, a major ground campaign would require a lead time long enough to allow several divisions of troops and their supplies to reach the region, experts predicted. An assault by special operations forces would probably lead to some U.S. casualties because of the difficulty the units would face trying to wend their way across the rugged, heavily armed region, they said.
And an air campaign, though easier in several respects, would have marginal value unless the U.S. forces had the kind of timely intelligence that it has often lacked about Osama bin Laden, experts said.
One military officer, noting that Afghans had defeated powerful intruders for more than 1,000 years, said the country "may be the worst place on Earth to do one of these things."
Pentagon officials said that over the past several years they have drafted various plans for possible operations in Afghanistan because of their concerns about bin Laden and other terrorist groups in the country. And U.S. intelligence has some familiarity with the region because of the aid the U.S. government offered Afghan rebels in their fight against the Soviet Union in the 1980s.
Yet they acknowledged that any effort would be hindered by a shortage of usable airfields, poor roads and faulty communications and utilities. Even the difficulty of local dialects will make it tougher for ground forces to make their way through the country.
Another major obstacle to a military campaign is America's poor relationship with most of Afghanistan's neighbors.
State Department officials, including Secretary of State Colin L. Powell, have spent long hours this week trying to convince the Pakistanis to cooperate with the new counter-terrorist effort. But though the Pakistanis have sought to appear cooperative, experts predicted that it would be difficult to persuade them to allow the United States to open any staging base in their country for a military effort in Afghanistan.
"I have to believe they would be very unenthusiastic" about permitting use of their territory as a base for a military strike, said Teresita Schaffer, a South Asia specialist and former U.S. ambassador, even though the Pakistanis are under strong pressure now to help the United States against terrorism.
Experts said they believed that the U.S. government's first choice would be to have Pakistan pressure the Taliban into forcing withdrawal of bin Laden's network from Afghanistan. If that effort were to fail, U.S. special forces could be sent to Afghanistan seeking to kill or capture bin Laden and other key figures in his network.
But experts said the long distances involved and rugged terrain would raise risks for the special forces and the helicopters that would carry them.
"You're taking chances with those long distances and possible maintenance problems," said retired Marine Lt. Gen. Anthony Zinni, the last commander of U.S. forces in the Middle East. The capabilities of special forces units are better than they were in 1980, when President Carter's commando mission to rescue Iranian hostages failed. Yet, he added, "you face the same sort of circumstances."
Military experts said that if the Pentagon does not want to go with a small special forces unit to try to track down individual terrorists, the next best choice would be to go with a very large force, of perhaps several divisions. That is needed, they said, so that the troops would have all the force protection and logistic support needed in the difficult environment of Afghanistan.
"You can go small, or you can go big, but you don't want to have a force that's in-between," said retired Army Lt. Col. Ralph Peters. "You've got to support yourself and protect yourself."
But experts universally insisted that none of these approaches would make sense unless the United States is able to get intelligence-- possibly with the aid of allies-- that is accurate and timely.
When the U.S. forces struck Bin Laden's camps with cruise missiles in 1998, U.S. intelligence indicated he was there. But by the time the missiles were fired, bin Laden had moved on, adding to the impression that the strikes were a meaningless gesture.
"You don't want to use forces like this unless you've got very, very good intelligence," Zinni said.
:=) Gary Swancey
Ike, would you object to tracking and right now speculating on the countries that will be in support, neutral & against the upcoming anti-terrorist effort?
Here is what I have at the present moment:
Against Afghanistan:
Against Albania:
Against Algeria:
Against Azerbaijan:
Against Bahrain:
Against Bangladesh:
Against Bosnia and Herzegovina:
Against Brunei:
Against Chad:
Against Cocos (Keeling) Islands:
Against Comoros:
Against Cote d'Ivoire:
Against Djibouti:
Against Egypt:
Against Eritrea:
Against Ethiopia:
Against Gambia, The:
Against Gaza Strip:
Against Guinea:
Against Indonesia:
Against Iran:
Against Iraq:
Against Jordan:
Against Kazakhstan:
Against Kuwait:
Against Kyrgyzstan:
Against Lebanon:
Against Libya:
Against Maldives:
Against Mali:
Against Mauritania:
Against Mayotte:
Against Morocco:
Against Niger:
Against Nigeria:
Against Oman:
Against Qatar:
Against Saudi Arabia:
Against Senegal:
Against Sierra Leone:
Against Somalia:
Against Sudan:
Against Syria:
Against Tajikistan:
Against Tunisia:
Against Turkey:
Against Turkmenistan:
Against United Arab Emirates:
Against Uzbekistan:
Against West Bank:
Against Western Sahara:
Against Yemen:
Neutral Pakistan: They have agreed thus for to Support the Effort.
Neutral China:
Neutral Russia:
Nuetral Cuba:
Nuetral Korea, North:
Support American Samoa:
Support Andorra:
Support Angola:
Support Anguilla:
Support Antigua and Barbuda:
Support Argentina:
Support Armenia:
Support Aruba:
Support Australia:
Support Austria:
Support Bahamas, The:
Support Barbados:
Support Belarus:
Support Belgium:
Support Belize:
Support Benin:
Support Bermuda:
Support Bhutan:
Support Bolivia:
Support Botswana:
Support Brazil:
Support British Virgin Islands:
Support Bulgaria:
Support Burkina Faso:
Support Burma:
Support Burundi:
Support Cambodia:
Support Cameroon:
Support Canada:
Support Cape Verde:
Support Cayman Islands:
Support Central African Republic:
Support Chile:
Support Christmas Island:
Support Colombia:
Support Congo, Democratic Republic of the:
Support Congo, Republic of the:
Support Cook Islands:
Support Costa Rica:
Support Croatia:
Support Cyprus:
Support Czech Republic:
Support Denmark:
Support Dominica:
Support Dominican Republic:
Support Ecuador:
Support El Salvador:
Support Equatorial Guinea:
Support Estonia:
Support Falkland Islands (Islas Malvinas):
Support Faroe Islands:
Support Fiji:
Support Finland:
Support France:
Support French Guiana:
Support French Polynesia:
Support Gabon:
Support Georgia:
Support Germany:
Support Ghana:
Support Gibraltar:
Support Greece:
Support Greenland:
Support Grenada:
Support Guadeloupe:
Support Guam:
Support Guatemala:
Support Guernsey:
Support Guinea-Bissau:
Support Guyana:
Support Haiti:
Support Holy See (Vatican City):
Support Honduras:
Support Hong Kong:
Support Hungary:
Support Iceland:
Support India:
Support Ireland:
Support Israel:
Support Italy:
Support Jamaica:
Support Japan:
Support Jersey:
Support Kenya:
Support Kiribati:
Support Korea, South:
Support Laos:
Support Latvia:
Support Lesotho:
Support Liberia:
Support Liechtenstein:
Support Lithuania:
Support Luxembourg:
Support Macau:
Support Macedonia, The Former Yugoslav Republic of:
Support Madagascar:
Support Malawi:
Support Malaysia:
Support Malta:
Support Man, Isle of:
Support Marshall Islands:
Support Martinique:
Support Mauritius:
Support Mexico:
Support Micronesia, Federated States of:
Support Moldova:
Support Monaco:
Support Mongolia:
Support Montserrat:
Support Mozambique:
Support Namibia:
Support Nauru:
Support Nepal:
Support Netherlands Antilles:
Support Netherlands:
Support New Caledonia:
Support New Zealand:
Support Nicaragua:
Support Niue:
Support Norfolk Island:
Support Northern Mariana Islands:
Support Norway:
Support Palau:
Support Panama:
Support Papua New Guinea:
Support Paraguay:
Support Peru:
Support Philippines:
Support Pitcairn Islands:
Support Poland:
Support Portugal:
Support Puerto Rico:
Support Reunion:
Support Romania:
Support Rwanda:
Support Saint Helena:
Support Saint Kitts and Nevis:
Support Saint Lucia:
Support Saint Pierre and Miquelon:
Support Saint Vincent and the Grenadines:
Support Samoa:
Support San Marino:
Support Sao Tome and Principe:
Support Serbia and Montenegro:
Support Seychelles:
Support Singapore:
Support Slovakia:
Support Slovenia:
Support Solomon Islands:
Support South Africa:
Support Spain:
Support Sri Lanka:
Support Suriname:
Support Swaziland:
Support Sweden:
Support Switzerland:
Support Taiwan:
Support Tanzania:
Support Thailand:
Support Togo:
Support Tokelau:
Support Tonga:
Support Trinidad and Tobago:
Support Turks and Caicos Islands:
Support Tuvalu:
Support Uganda:
Support Ukraine:
Support United Kingdom:
Support United States:
Support Uruguay:
Support Vanuatu:
Support Venezuela:
Support Vietnam:
Support Virgin Islands:
Support Wallis and Futuna:
Support Zambia:
Support Zimbabwe:
:=) Gary Swancey
China Reaches Agreement to Join WTO
By NAOMI KOPPEL, Associated Press Writer
GENEVA (AP) - China reached an agreement Friday on the terms of its membership in the World Trade Organization (news - web sites), setting the stage for it to become a full member early next year.
Wrapping up 15 years of tough negotiations, a compromise was reached over the remaining obstacle - a dispute over insurance companies. The agreement opens the way for China to be formally approved at the WTO's meeting of trade ministers scheduled to be held in Doha, Qatar, in November.
Allowing for the accord to pass through China's own legislature, the world's most populous nation would become a full WTO member during the first months of 2002.
The entry of China into the WTO will open its economy to imports but will also lead to an upsurge in Chinese exports to the rest of the world. China will also be required to adhere to global trading rules.
Membership ``will commit China to adhering to the rules-based global trading system,' said Jeffrey Bader, chief U.S. negotiator. ``It will open markets and contribute greatly' to encouraging reform in China.
EU chief negotiator Karl Falkenberg said the move would create new trading opportunities.
``It creates stability and predictability so that investors can, with more security, plan their activity in the Chinese market,' he said.
China applied to join the WTO and its predecessor the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 15 years ago. The application process was caught up in political problems over Beijing's crackdown on the pro-democracy movement and economic fears that China would use its vast labor market to undercut competing products.
China's entry into the WTO will have far-reaching implications. Pushing China's state-dominated economy toward a freer market is a huge political and economic challenge for Chinese communist leaders.
In the short-term, millions of Chinese are expected to lose their jobs as increased foreign competition worsens layoffs and bakruptcies at state-owned firms - many of which have resisted WTO entry.
Chinese leaders have pushed for WTO entry in the expectation that increased foreign investment and greater access overseas for Chinese exports will create jobs and prosperity - both key to maintaining the Communist Party's grip on power.
A deadline of Thursday had been initially set for the draft accord, but negotiations were adjourned for two days on Wednesday following the terrorist attacks on New York and Washington. The agreement must be rubber-stamped by negotiators at another meeting on Monday before it can be sent to trade ministers in Doha.
One of the final stumbling blocks was removed Thursday when Mexico and China reached a bilateral accord. Mexico was the last WTO member to hold out against Beijing.
That left just one remaining hurdle - a complicated dispute involving the United States and the 15-nation European Union (news - web sites) over insurance and accounting for just one paragraph in a treaty of more than 1,000 pages.
Amid the celebrations, China's chief negotiator Long Yongtu injected a note of caution.
``It is only the end of the beginning,' he said. ``It is a long process for China to implement and to enforce and to be a good member of the WTO.'
U.S. insurer American International Group, which has operated in China since 1994, wants guarantees that it can continue to expand without having to find Chinese partners. The draft WTO text states that new companies joining the life insurance market must be 50 percent Chinese owned. European companies, which operate as joint ventures with Chinese partners, insist that AIG must play by the same rules as they do.
The share of North American imports coming from China rose from 0.8 percent in 1983 to 7.3 percent by 1999, and ``Made in China' labels are widespread in European stores. Chinese sales abroad are expected to soar further once Beijing joins the WTO and thus gains easier access to other markets.
China has already started reducing some import tariffs - for example on automobiles, whetting foreign appetites at potentially enormous sales.
As a sign of its supreme confidence, China has built a new mission to the WTO, a high-tech building on the lakeshore with stunning views of the Alps - a far cry from the modest U.S. and EU trade missions.
CIIR Cash & Restricted stock
:=) Gary Swancey
WTO Group Agrees on Chinese Membership
By Robert Evans
Friday September 14, 9:08 pm Eastern Time
http://biz.yahoo.com/rb/010914/business_trade_wto_china_dc_1.html
GENEVA (Reuters) - World Trade Organization (WTO) officials said on Friday they had agreed terms for China's entry to the body -- clearing the way for Beijing to come in by the end of the year.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Agreement was sealed at a meeting of the WTO's special working party, which has been negotiating with China for the last 15 years.
``It has been done. The big breakthrough has been achieved,' said spokesman Keith Rockwell.
The accord will be rubber-stamped by a formal meeting of the working party on Monday. It will then go through the formality of confirmation by the WTO's ruling General Council, essentially the same negotiators who form the working party, or by ministers of all 142 member countries set to meet in Qatar in November.
China's entry will bring the world's fifth largest trading power -- after the United States, the European Union, Japan and Canada -- into the WTO, and, analysts say, change the balance of forces in the body forever.
``It is only the end of the beginning. It is a long process for China to implement and enforce the agreement and to a good WTO member,' chief Chinese negotiator Long Yongtu told reporters after the meeting.
MAJOR PLAYER
As a developing country, Beijing would be expected to add huge weight to the position of the poorer nations -- who already make up well over two thirds of the membership but complain that the current big four dictate the agenda to their own advantage.
``It was long and painful but in the end we have an agreement that will ensure the integration of China into the world trading system,' said the European Union's chief negotiator, Karl Falkenberg.
For the big four, known in trade parlance as ``The Quad,' the lure of a market of one billion people -- one sixth of the world's population -- for goods and services outweighed concerns over the stance China might take in the trade body.
Western leaders also argue that bringing China into the WTO and opening up its economy to the outside world will also bring domestic political liberalization and make the long feared 'Communist Dragon' a more predictable partner.
``All countries -- China and its partners -- would benefit. This should become a win-win game,' said Falkenberg.
But many developing economies fear that Chinese goods will capture markets for items like clothing, textiles and footwear as well as for agricultural produce that they had hoped to win themselves in the richer countries of the North.
On Thursday, Mexico completed a side agreement with China allowing it to maintain restrictions on many Chinese consumer goods for six years in order to give its industries time to adjust.
INSURANCE AN ISSUE
Right up to the last, however, the deal had also been threatened by a dispute between the EU and the United States over terms for foreign insurance companies opening new offices in China once it has come under the umbrella of WTO rules.
The two powers, with China in the middle, had been at odds over insistence by the United States that the huge American International Group Inc (AIG) conglomerate would be able to hold 100 per cent ownership of any new Chinese operations.
The EU argued that this would mean the AIG getting better terms than insurers from its 15 member states -- which would be bound by Chinese rules giving newcomers onto its market the right to only 50 percent ownership.
Such an outcome, Brussels said, would violate the WTO's basic principle of most-favored-nation, or no discrimination between trading partners who are members of the trade body.
There were no immediate details on how the differences had been resolved.
``The last page in this process reflected close cooperation between the United States and the European Union,' said Washington's top negotiator Jeffrey Bader.
CIIR cash & restricted stock
:=) Gary Swancey