Weakly Humerus News 11-28-09
WEAKLY HUMERUS NEWS 11-28-09
AIMED AT YOUR FUNNY BONE
TOP QUOTES OF THE WEEK
By a vote of 5-2, the Georgia Supreme Court has ruled that teachers
may legally have sex with students 16 or older if the sex is consensual.
Here's what makes matters worse: Since it's Georgia, a lot of these
16-year-olds are still in the third grade. (Jay Leno)
Former Miss California Carrie Prejean is dating Rams backup quarterback
Kyle Boller. In fact, Prejean dedicated her book to him. For his part
Boller says Carrie's giving him a whole new appreciation for watching
tape. (Janice Hough)
Actress Amanda Peet says that Tom Brady's wife Gisele Bundchen has the
body most women want. It's also the body most men want. (RJ Currie)
During his performance on the American Music Awards Sunday night,
Adam Lambert made out with a one of his male dancers, simulated
getting oral sex with another dancer, and flipped off the crowd.
For a minute there, he thought he was the owner of the Buffalo Bills.
(Jerry Perisho)
Oprah said she used prayer to help her decide to end her show. She said
she stopped praying when she realized she has more money than the guy
she's praying to. (Conan O'Brien)
Over $142 million gross for "The New Moon" this weekend. 80 percent
of the audience was women. There were even rumors that of the 20 %
men, about a dozen were actually straight. (Janice Hough)
A poll says a majority of Republicans believe ACORN stole the presidential
election for Barack Obama. Of course the last group of nuts accused of
stealing a presidential election was the Supreme Court. (Jim Barach)
A lot of people are saying that it's too soon for Sarah Palin to write
a memoir. They say she should wait until she had at least 10 more years
of inexperience. (David Letterman)
Today's NFL game between the home 1-8 Lions and the 1-8 Browns
is blacked out for people in the Detroit area. For the rest of us,
no such luck. (RJ Currie)
A study says unhappy people watch 30% more TV than happy people.
What do you say to someone who always sees a dark cloud? "Why did
you leave CNN, Mr. Dobbs." (Alan Ray)
THANKSGIVING
On Friday, President Obama pardons the White House turkey. Dick Cheney
didn't miss an opportunity. This proves that Obama is soft on poultry.
(David Letterman)
They're having a big Thanksgiving dinner at Sarah Palin's house, and people
say, "Is she a good cook?" I said, well, sure, she cooked John McCain's goose.
(David Letterman)
This being Thanksgiving week, Barack Obama had the traditional presidential
task of pardoning a turkey. But first it had to stand
trial in New York City. (Wendel Potter)
President Obama is getting ready to pardon the White House turkey,
the Treasury Secretary, Tim Geithner. I don't want to say Geithner
is not doing a good job. But, today, God asked for his name to be
taken off the bill. (Jay Leno)
This is President Obama's first Thanksgiving in Washington, which
means he has to officially pardon a turkey. Though many Democrats
think believe Obama's already done enough for Joe Lieberman.
(Janice Hough)
President Obama is scheduled to pardon a turkey this week, and today
Bernie Madoff was overheard saying "gobble gobble, gobble gobble."
(Pedro Bartes)
Hey! This Thursday is the Macy's Thanksgiving Day Parade on NBC.
That's when Americans can sit in front of their TV's watching balloons
floating by for two hours without feeling foolish afterwards. Of course,
on Fox News they'll have alternative programming. The Sarah Palin
Moosie's Thanksgiving Day Parade. (Frank King)
Former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin today issued the following
"thankfulnesses list: I have thankfulness that little Falcon was
found safe and sound in that box, being that I was worried sick
about him flying around in that balloon. I have thankfulness also
for the new drapes I installed in my house to keep the Russians
from peeping in. I have thankfulness for all of the good people
who read my book, and for the person who wrote it also. (Andy Borowitz)
According to a new poll, more Americans would like to have Thanksgiving
dinner with Hillary Clinton than with Sarah Palin. Mainly, because no
one wants to eat elk pie. (Conan O'Brien)
A new survey by Triple A says that airline travel for Thanksgiving week
in 2009 will be down 62 percent from what is was in 2000. Asked to comment
on the cause of the decline, a spokesman for the airline industry said,
"I'd love to tell you, but there's a $150.00 fee for answering that
question, and an additional $25.00 fee for each follow-up question."
(Frank King)
Thanksgiving Day travel was predicted to be heavy by the Auto Club as
American families gather this week. It's a tradition four centuries old.
The first turkeys weren't wild, they just went crazy when they found
out what we planned to do with them. (Argus Hamilton)
PRESIDENT OBAMA & THE ADMINISTRATION
In the new Gallup Poll, Pres. Obama's approval rating is at 49%; the first
time it has dipped under 50%. Now, if Obama had just bitten Chinese President
Hu Jintao's neck, well, ratings would be through the roof. (Jerry Perisho)
The White House might soon reveal that the President may delay the
announcement he is not even close to making a decision on Afghanistan.
Maybe. (Will Durst)
President Obama will answer questions about the economy at a news conference
today with Indian Prime Minister Singh. Singh won't be answering any questions
himself, he's just there as tech support for Obama's teleprompter. (Jake Novak)
Tonight at the White House, President Obama is hosting a State Dinner for
the prime minister of India, and to make the prime minister feel welcome,
the menu will include curry, chutney, and other Indian foods. And to make
everyone else feel welcome, the dessert will be Tums, Mylanta, and
Imodium AD. (Conan O'Brien)
The state dinner at the White House honored the prime minister of India,
and the menu was vegetarian. How do you like that for Thanksgiving? No turkey,
wrong Indians. (Wendel Potter)
Hollywood stars and moguls made up most of the A-list guests at the
vegetarian White House state dinner last night. To make sure he got at
least some meat at the event, David Geffen brought Adam Lambert.
(Jake Novak)
Some Republicans are angry that Sen. John McCain wasn't invited to the
state dinner. In response, the White House said, "Of course we didn't
invite John McCain — the dinner was at 8 o'clock at night."
(Conan O'Brien)
President Obama just had his first official state dinner in honor of
India's Prime Minister Singh. See, pretty smart of the Obamas. Not only
do they get to have a state dinner for an ally, all night long they get
free tech support. (Jay Leno)
Former Cuban leader Fidel Castro, reportedly a huge fan of president Obama.
He thinks President Obama's doing a great job. Well, Obama hasn't had P. R.
that good since the Reverend Wright was campaigning for him. (Jay Leno)
THE CONGRESS
Over the weekend, the Senate voted to allow debate on the health care bill.
Can you believe that? It's like fighting over whether or not to fight.
(Jimmy Fallon)
Senate Democrats added a tax on cosmetic surgery in the health care bill.
It's timed perfectly to nail aging Baby Boomers. If they had taxed pot
in the Sixties, coke in the Seventies and rehabs in the Eighties, this
country would be solvent today. (Argus Hamilton)
Senate Democrats proposed a tax on all plastic surgery procedures Friday.
It's the nation's hobby. Last week a woman in Beverly Hills ordered her
plastic surgeon to make her just like Jessica Simpson, so he gave her
breast implants and a lobotomy. (Argus Hamilton)
Senator Harry Reid scrambled Monday to buy votes in the Senate for the
health care bill. He's offering bridges, dams and highway funds. When he
offered Heidi Fleiss the job of Majority Whip she thought it was going
to be something else entirely. (Argus Hamilton)
Congressman Patrick Kennedy was banned from receiving Holy Communion
by the Roman Catholic bishop of Rhode Island over his pro-choice votes.
He doesn't miss it. The bars haven't been closed on Sundays in
Massachusetts in thirty-six years. (Argus Hamilton)
Saw a story on TV last night about the Louisiana Purchase. Remember how
Congress bought Louisiana? Not the whole state, just Senator Mary Landrieu.
Well actually, to her credit, because she changed her vote, her state is
going to get $300 million. But you know what the government's going to do.
They'll just have FEMA deliver it, so it will never get there. (Jay Leno)
THE COURTS, CIVIL RIGHTS & THE CONSTITUTION
The New York State Supreme Court ruled that the New Jersey Nets can use
eminent domain to clear homeowners and businesses in the way of building
their new arena in Brooklyn. Who said the 0-15 Nets couldn't win one
this season? (Dwight Perry)
The Georgia Supreme Court has ruled that a riding-lawnmower is not
considered a motor vehicle. The ruling was reported in the Journal
of Questions That Are Only Raised in Georgia. (Conan O'Brien)
THE STATES & LOCAL NEWS
Governor Schwarzenegger has been photographed with his Porsche parked
illegally. Maybe this means Arnold's next job should be with the 49ers.
At least he knows how to get into the red zone. (Janice Hough)
Arnold Schwarzenegger was photographed parking his Porsche in an emergency
vehicle zone. He later said there was nothing illegal about it because he
is the governor of California which is in a state of emergency.. Fortunately
Maria Shriver called later from his cell-phone while driving her kids to
school to apologize on behalf of her husband. (Pedro Bartes)
California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger says he will not run for another
office once his term as governor is over. And the amazing thing — do you
know what he's going to be doing after this? He'll be a speech therapist.
(Jay Leno)
California gubernatorial candidate Meg Whitman hopes to follow the sales
success of "Going Rogue" with her own forthcoming autobiography, "The Power
of Many." Whitman says her book will differ from Palin's in a few
substantive ways – nouns, verbs, sentences… (Janice Hough)
On South Carolina's Black Friday tax holiday on firearms purchases:
"No taxes on guns — because one thing you want right after people have
been drinking and arguing with their families is gun purchases made
easier." (Jimmy Fallon)
The city with the lowest smoking rate in the U. S. is in Utah. It is
understandable. It must be hard to smoke when you have your 20 wives
asking you to put out your cigarette. (Pedro Bartes)
U.S. POLITICIANS
The George W. Bush library design was unveiled this week by former first
lady Laura Bush. Did you know that she was a librarian when she first
met George? In fact, she's the only thing he ever checked out of a library.
(Jay Leno)
If you want to get your friends a great gift, get them the new Sarah Palin
book. I got it. This is interesting: It came with a sticker on it that read,
"After reading, do not operate heavy machinery." (David Letterman)
The ratings just came in for Sarah Palin's appearance on "The Oprah Winfrey Show."
It earned Oprah her highest ratings since the episode where she reunited the
Osmond family. Yeah, viewers who saw both episodes say Palin's more likable
but that Donny and Marie are more qualified to be president. (Conan O'Brien)
Barnes & Noble is running a great promotion on the Sarah Palin book. You buy
the Sarah Palin book, they will throw in a free Mayan calendar. (David Letterman)
Former vice presidential candidate, Sarah Palin, is promoting her book,
"Going Rogue." Don't confuse this with the current vice president,
Joe Biden's book: "Going Rogaine." (Alex Kaseberg)
TAXES & THE ECONOMY
A research firm says nearly eleven million homes are "under water", where
the buyer owes more than what the house is worth. Some people are so far
under water they are seeing if they are covered by their flood insurance.
(Jim Barach)
A new report shows that investors are remaining cautious despite the recent
run-up in stocks. Experts say Americans are scared by job losses, bank failures
and everything they saw on the American Music Awards. (Jake Novak)
The majority of states added jobs in October, although most of them were
temporary. Of course, in this economy every job is pretty much considered
temporary. (Jim Barach)
The Democrats are proposing a "War Tax" to pay for the extra troop deployment
in Afghanistan. War tax? Eek! I'm burning my W2 and catching the next VW bus
to Canada. (Bill Williams)
The Congressional Budget Office estimates the interest payments alone on the
national debt will total $4.8 Trillion over the next ten years. Apparently
Congress is financing the country with a subprime loan. (Jim Barach)
Support is growing for JP Morgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon to take over as
Secretary of the Treasury. The only trouble is that if Dimon goes to the
government, there will be no one left in America earning any money.
(Jake Novak)
Salvation Army kettles are now equipped to take donations by plastic.
So people can now use their credit cards to help other people who got
into financial trouble with their credit cards. (Jim Barach)
BUSINESS & LABOR
Costco is cutting out all Coca-Cola products from its stores due to a price
dispute. They are replacing the shelf space with dental products now that
their customers will actually have some teeth left to protect. (Jim Barach)
The U. S. Postal Service announced it lost four billion dollars last year
despite laying off thousands. It can't be helped. Until it's legal to send
pornography through the mail, the Postal Service will never be able to
compete with the Internet. (Argus Hamilton)
The White House and the Senate Democrats are working on a new jobs bill.
The White House said this new jobs bill could create twice as many
nonexistent fake jobs as the last one. (Jay Leno)
Quite a few McDonald's in the U. S. will undergo a European style makeover.
The counter help already has a French look. Most don't understand English.
(Alan Ray)
Continental Airlines has been fined $100,000 by the FAA for stranding
passengers on the tarmac for several hours. However, Continental made
more than twice that amount with the amount they charged for beverages
during the wait. (Jim Barach)
Retailers are beefing up security for this week's Black Friday sales...
but this time they'll need to protect themselves not from a crush of
shoppers, but a stampede of people applying for a job. (Jake Novak)
Everybody is running sales for Black Friday. Except strip clubs, which
are already offering clothes at 100 percent off. (Paul Seaburn)
CRIME & PUNISHMENT
Customs officers seized a shipment of 316,000 bongs disguised as Christmas
ornaments at Los Angeles harbor. In related news, shares of Krispy Kreme
stock just dropped 10 percent. (Janice Hough)
Los Angeles County Prosecutor Steve Cooley says anyone selling medicinal
marijuana will get busted. Apparently that means people will have to go
back to selling pot the old fashioned way. On street corners near schools.
(Jim Barach)
IMMIGRATION, SECURITY & TERRORISM
That evil guy, the evil masterminding terrorist Khalid Sheikh Mohammed,
he is going on trial here in New York City. I will tell you something,
this guy is nothing but evil. One time he called CNN and told them that
his son was floating away in a balloon. (David Letterman)
THE MILITARY
The latest Army statistics show a stunning 75% of military-age youth are
ineligible to join the military because they're overweight, can't pass
entrance exams, have dropped out of high school or had run-ins with the
law. Luckily, all of those people are very qualified for jobs in Congress.
(Jake Novak)
NASA & SPACE
Congratulations to NASA astronaut Randy Bresnik whose wife, Rebecca,
gave birth to a baby girl while he was on a six-hour spacewalk Saturday.
Whew! Finally a NASA diaper story they can be proud of! (Frank King)
Space Shuttle Atlantis astronauts were surprised by a Thanksgiving Day
turkey dinner. They said the food was "tangy". Mostly because they can't
get the taste of Tang out of their mouths. (Jim Barach)
EUROPE
A Swiss court has just granted Roman Polanski's bail request. But just to
be safe, the justice ministry says Polanski's release won't happen until
the end of the current Hannah Montana concert tour. (Jake Novak)
THE MIDDLE EAST
Iraq's government offered young Sunnis and young Shiites two thousand dollars
to marry each other. The idea is to reduce hostilities by having people from
rival sects get married. If they can just stop fighting about religious
differences and start fighting about sex and money they will be on their way
to being a free society. (Argus Hamilton)
ASIA
A South Korean court has struck down a law that punished men for falsely
promising marriage in exchange for sex with women. Or as we call it in
America, "Saturday night". (Jim Barach)
President Obama was in China last week. Today, the Chinese government sent
him a beautiful gift. Did you see this on the news tonight? It was a 10 percent
off coupon at Wal-Mart. (Jay Leno)
This week, Afghanistan's President Hamid Karzai was sworn in wearing Afghanistan's
traditional clothing, the Kevlar pants, helmet and bulletproof vest. (Jay Leno)
AFRICA
An expert commission of African leaders today announced their plan for
comprehensive reform of music band U2. Saying that U2's rock had lost
touch with its African roots, the commission called for urgent measures
to halt U2's slide towards impending crisis. (Aid Watch)
SCIENCE & HEALTH
A women's sex aide drug is awaiting approval from the FDA, Flibanserin.
The way it works is it makes women think all men look like George Clooney.
(Alex Kaseberg)
The Department of Health issued a report saying women shouldn't get mammograms
until they are fifty. It's arguable. It sounds heartless but we've seen how
breast exams of younger women can cause false positives, unnecessary anxiety,
and impeachment. (Argus Hamilton)
There's a lot of controversy over this section of this new health care bill
that says if you don't buy health insurance, you can go to jail for five years.
They say it'll prevent freeloaders of the system. Yeah, but — well, if they
do go to jail, won't they get free health care for five years? (Jay Leno)
The White House said Friday a swine flu strain has turned up that is resistant
to Tamiflu. No one likes the medicine. Young adults in Los Angeles wouldn't
take Tamiflu if you mixed it with vodka and grenadine and called it Sex in
the Oxygen Tent. (Argus Hamilton)
A study says that gasoline fumes make lab rats more aggressive. That makes sense.
It was the smell of petroleum that got us to invade Iraq. (Jim Barach)
Los Angeles cops vowed Friday to shut down rogue medical marijuana shops.
They are supposed to be collectives but many are making a profit. Medical
marijuana is legal under an Obama administration order but making a profit's
a shooting offense. (Argus Hamilton)
The next step in the government's drive to make health care more efficient
will be to recommend far fewer blood pressure tests. Studies found that when
people learn their blood pressure, it just raises their blood pressure.
(Scott Witt)
A study says that comfort foods relieve stress. Although they do nothing
to relieve the stress on buttons, hooks and zippers. (Jim Barach)
THE WEATHER & THE ENVIRONMENT
California has taken a major step toward limiting greenhouse gas emissions by
actively looking to bankrupt the last three business that still makes anything
in that state. (Jake Novak)
SPORTS
New New Yorks Knicks slogan – We suck less than the Nets. (Janice Hough)
The Oakland Raiders face the Dallas Cowboys on Thanksgiving Day. Expect an
extremely physical battle. And after Tom Cable's coaches meeting, it's on
to the field. (Alan Ray)
Hear about the governors' bet for today's battle between the 1-8 Browns and
the 1-8 Lions? Forget winning — the loser has to take both teams.
(Dwight Perry)
Cleveland Browns quarterback Brady Quinn is dating Olympic gymnast Alicia Sacramone.
Typical of Quinn, he had to make three passes before she gave him a tumble. (RJ Currie)
Cavaliers center Shaquille O'Neal faces prerequisite training before he can
become a special police deputy in Ohio:. He'd better hope any shooting test
isn't from the free-throw line. (Elliott Harris)
Some of Usain Bolt's countrymen have suggested that mannish water, a spicy soup
made with goat testicles, is what makes Jamaican athletes run so fast. It's also
what makes Jamaican goats run so fast. (RJ Currie)
Over in the Ivy League, Yale was leading 10-7 over Harvard with about two and
a half minutes left. The Bulldogs had a 4th and 22 at their own 26 yard line.
With a punter who had been averaging 51 yards and the Crimson out of timeouts.
And Yale tried a fake punt. Which came up short. Harvard drove 40 yards for
a game winning touchdown. Even Bill Belichick said "What were they THINKING?"
(Janice Hough)
Notre Dame quarterback Jimmy Clausen is sporting a black eye after getting
punched outside a South Bend bar, but the good news is he's skyrocketed to
No. 1 on the Oakland Raiders' draft board. (Dwight Perry)
Remember when Allen Iverson wrote on his Twitter site: "God chose Memphis?"
Didn't quite work out. "Even I make mistakes," tweeted God. (Greg Cote)
After taking a bobsled ride with U. S. Olympic driver Steven Holcomb in
Lake Placid, N.Y. : "It felt like I was being hit in the head with ice hammers.
It was like losing the worst snowball fight of your life." (Stephen Colbert)
Last week the league fined a number of players from between $5,000 to 10,000
for unnecessary roughness. Including some plays that resulted in injuries.
After fining Chad Ochicinco $20,000 for a fake $1 bribe to an official.
And of course Titans' Bud Adam's $250,000 fine for giving the finger to
Bills fans. Can't imagine how anyone thinks the league doesn't take the
health of their players seriously. (Janice Hough)
Buying out the remaining six years of Coach Charlie Weis' 10-year deal would
cost the university upward of $29 million with no guarantee his successor
would do any better. That's a tough call to make in the middle of a recession.
(Tom Van Riper)
Veteran NFL tackle Jon Runyan, just signed by the San Diego Chargers, says
he'll retire at season's end to launch a campaign for the congressional seat
in New Jersey's 3rd District. In other words, he's taking a pass on football
to work on his running game. (Dwight Perry)
Krystal Gray was ejected from a Lingerie Football League (LFL) game last week
for instigating a fight. When you attend a lingerie football game, a brawl is
about the last thing you expect to break out. (Cam Hutchinson)
Michigan's football program failed to file mandatory practice logs during its
disastrous 3-9 season a year ago, an internal audit embarrassingly revealed,
but Plan B ought to rebuff any allegations the team practiced too much.
(Dwight Perry)
New York Jets coach Rex Ryan has installed a code system with Mark Sanchez
in an attempt to cut down the rookie quarterback's mistakes and provide him
with a clearer idea of the tasks at hand. Since Sanchez is a former USC player
I can only assume that the code is 1 for a handoff, 2 for a pass. (Janice Hough)
The Saskatchewan Roughriders meet the Montreal Alouettes this Sunday for the
CFL championship. Riders quarterback Darian Durant is nicknamed Double D.
It seems appropriate that he's been in two Cups. (RJ Currie)
As if seeing Sammy Sosa's pale face from those ill-fated skin treatments
wasn't bad enough, now comes word he's suffering from a bad case of
bleacher bum. (Dwight Perry)
Snowboarder Hannah Teter is the first athlete to have a Ben & Jerry’s ice cream
flavor named after her. The flavor “Maple Blonde” features ice cream with blonde
brownie pieces and maple caramel swirl. Hannah Tater fits the profile perfectly.
She’s blonde and symbolizes Maple syrup through her Hannah’s gold charity and
her Vermont origins. (Cristina Kumka)
After Hugh Hefner's mag named Michigan State's Kalin Lucas to its All-America
team but left Tom Izzo off its best-dressed coach list: "Playboy might know hoops,
but what does it know about clothes?" (Steve Schrader)
Coach Lane Kiffin suspended one player and dismissed two others from the
Tennessee Volunteers football team for their part in a failed robbery and
attempted getaway in a Toyota Prius. He reportedly said they made poor
decisions. What, the attempted robbery? Or trying to outrun the cops in
a hybrid? (RJ Currie)
ENTERTAINMENT
The movie "New Moon" premiered last night. It is the movie about a bunch of
vampires from a town called Forks. What I don't get is how it is that these
Vampires all look good, shaved and combed… If you're a real vampire, shouldn't
you look like a mess, scruffy, with razor cuts? Because a true vampire can't
see their reflection in the mirror… (Pedro Bartes)
Give the "Twilight" phenonomen some credit. The movies are making many parents
think back nostalgically to the days of "Barney the Dinosaur." (Janice Hough)
The Twilight Saga: New Moon did a huge movie box-office of one hundred and
forty million dollars last weekend. Young people have always flocked to movies
about vampires. Everybody loves a bloodsucker until they get their first
property tax bill. (Argus Hamilton)
Roman Polanski said he can't wait to see the movie "New Moon", especially
when he heard it was about a 100-year-old vampire trying to seduce a high-school
girl. (Pedro Bartes)
It was great seeing Michael Jackson winning four AMA awards, giving the Jackson
family that much more to fight over. (Tim Hunter)
"Fantastic Mr. Fox" is out in theaters this weekend. A no count nuisance must
end his wily ways and become a responsible father. Or, Kate Gosselin will get
sole custody of the children. (Alan Ray)
Cirque de Soleil has followed up "The Beatles" with "Elvis." How many more
casinos does Vegas need before Hall & Oates get their show? (Will Durst)
MEDIA & THE INTERNET
Oprah's announced that she's quitting her show in 2011. Now you know why the
Mayans ended their calendar in 2012. Once Oprah leaves her show, the most
powerful woman on TV will be Ryan Seacrest. (Craig Ferguson)
Oprah's announced that she's quitting her show in 2011. Now you know why the
Mayans ended their calendar in 2012. (Craig Ferguson)
Former CNN anchor Lou Dobbs is considering running for the senate in 2012
against New Jersey incumbent Robert Menendez... or having him deported,
whichever's easier. (Jake Novak)
CNN has paid Lou Dobbs a reported $8 Million to leave the network. Which works
out to approximately $ 1 Million for each CNN viewer. (Jim Barach)
AOL has announced that they're going to lay off one-third of their employees.
Yeah. On the bright side, it's AOL, so they're going to do it slowly and with
frequent interruptions. (Conan O'Brien)
OTHER CELEBRITIES
Farrah Fawcett left Ryan O'Neal none of her five million dollars when her will
was read Monday. She left it to the guy who quarterbacked the Texas Longhorns
when she went to college there. In Texas that is the equivalent of leaving it
to the church. (Argus Hamilton)
After his racy performance at the American Music Awards, Adam Lambert's
appearance on Good Morning America was cancelled. Apparently ABC felt it
would be inappropriate for a potential family audience. Instead, they
spent the time discussing Carrie Prejean's sex tapes and Mark Sanford's
ethics violations. (Janice Hough)
Levi Johnston does not do frontal nudity in his upcoming "Playgirl" pictorial.
But if you want to have a description, you can ask anybody in Alaska.
(Pedro Bartes)
Kate Gosselin rejected a bouquet of red roses that Jon Gosselin brought as
a peace offering to their divorce meeting on Saturday. Jon's proctologist
says he'll remove the stitches from those thorn punctures in about a week.
(Jerry Perisho)
EDUCATION
A study says that college students who live in co-ed housing are more
likely to binge drink and have sex. Or as the students call it, getting
in shape for spring break. (Jim Barach)
Law schools across the country are reporting that the hiring rate for
new lawyers has been significantly reduced. Apparently it doesn't do
any good to sue someone when they don't have a house, a car or any money.
(Jim Barach)
RELIGION
A report from the Catholic Church says that homosexual priests are no more
likely to molest children than heterosexual priests. Well, it's certainly
good to know that the Catholic Church doesn't discriminate when it comes
to pedophiles. (Jim Barach)
Rhode Island's top Roman Catholic leader has asked Rep. Patrick Kennedy
to stop taking Communion... not because of Kennedy's support for abortion
rights, but because he keeps hogging all the wine. (Jake Novak)
CULTURE & SEXUAL MORES
A new study by the National Bureau of Economic Research has found that
when an NFL game ends in an upset, there's an 8% increase in domestic
violence in the home state of the losing team. So for the women in Detroit,
and Cleveland, just move out of the house every Sunday and you'll be safe.
(Pedro Bartes)
A 39-year-old man paid young teens to defecate on him. It must have cost
him a fortune, because we know that teens don't give a crap about anything.
(Pedro Bartes)
ACORN offices in Los Angeles were videotaped counseling an undercover
journalist how to set up a prostitution ring with underage girls. The
pressure's really on. Roman Polanski could be extradited any day now
and Los Angeles has to prepare his welcome home party. (Argus Hamilton)
A study says one third of all teenagers say they have texted while driving.
The other two thirds were too busy with their iPods, putting on makeup or
calling friends on their cell phones. (Jim Barach)
Compiled by Stan Kegel skegel@socal.rr.com
Saturday, November 28, 2009
On Wall Street: Apocalypse how? - Conflicting bets on inflation or deflation
On Wall Street: Apocalypse how? - Conflicting bets on inflation or deflation
By Spencer Jakab
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2009
Published: November 27 2009 17:11 | Last updated: November 27 2009 17:11
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/a9650124-db74-11de-9424-00144feabdc0.html
Confused about what the future holds for the economy? So are financial markets.
Record gold prices and negative US Treasury yields are strange bedfellows, indicating general uneasiness but also conflicting bets on inflation or deflation.
As the great economist Woody Allen once put it: “More than any other time in history, mankind faces a crossroads. One path leads to despair and utter hopelessness, the other to total extinction. Let us pray we have the wisdom to choose correctly.”
Fear that one’s net worth might evaporate is, of course, no laughing matter. In spite of the fact that risk appetite has come roaring back, it is hard to reconcile resurgent optimism with the eventual fiscal and monetary hangover of the financial crisis.
Voices from beyond Wall Street who foresaw the debacle now range from mildly to wildly pessimistic. Nobody captures the confusion better than the satirical economic country and western singer Merle Hazard (geddit?) crooning about whether we face hyperinflation or deflation: “Will we become Zimbabwe or will we be Japan?”
Unprecedented growth in money supply will unleash higher inflation warns Bob Wiedemer, co-author of the recently published Aftershock, and of the prescient 2006 book America’s Bubble Economy.
Agreeing with him is Michael Panzner, who published Financial Armageddon just as the last boom peaked and followed it up with When Giants Fall: An Economic Roadmap for the End of the American Era.
In the opposite corner is well-known economist and pundit A. Gary Shilling, who was also appropriately bearish before the bust and now sees deflation ahead. Money supply growth and yawning deficits alone will not spark price increases before overly leveraged consumers rebuild their balance sheets and excess global production capacity is soaked up, he says. That may take another decade.
It is hard to be pessimistic in the face of a furious market rebound and harder still when the handful of prognosticators who came out of the crisis with their reputations enhanced cannot agree on what constitutes a haven.
Dr Shilling advises long-term government bonds while Messrs Wiedemer and Panzner would eschew them, preferring hard assets such as precious metals.
There are other authors predicting upheaval, some late to the party. The apparently flexible Harry S. Dent Jr’s latest tome, The Great Depression Ahead: How to Prosper in the Crash Following the Greatest Boom in History, released in January, was preceded by The Roaring 2000s: Building The Wealth And Lifestyle You Desire In The Greatest Boom In History, published in 1998. So long Dow 44,000!
Of course it is simpler to be pessimistic as a writer than as an insider. “There’s no upside to being bearish – it’s an occupational hazard both on Wall Street and in Washington,” says Mr Panzner, a stockbroker.
Those who took the risk such as David Rosenberg, Paul Kasriel, Meredith Whitney, Peter Boockvar, Albert Edwards, Jeremy Grantham, Nouriel Roubini and Andrew Smithers remain a pessimistic lot these days but take a less apocalyptic view than purveyors of disaster-lit.
While those already hoarding bullion or cash may not care for the latter, it is worth recalling popular tomes that spooked readers into unnecessary precautions in the past.
Two are 1981’s Survive and Win in the Inflationary Eighties, (recently re-issued) and Surviving the Great Depression of 1990, written after the 1987 stock market crash.
Then again, forewarned is forearmed, and Messrs Wiedemer, Panzner and Shilling are, by no stretch of the imagination, kooks.
“I think people were looking for someone with a long beard and a sign that says: ‘The end is near’ and were surprised to find someone from Wall Street,” says Mr Panzner.
There is no point in being a kneejerk contrarian, says Dr Shilling, who also got his start on Wall Street, but hewing to consensus adds little value. And, while being a pessimist might get one noticed, it is hardly pleasant.
“I’m by nature a very optimistic person,” says Mr Wiedemer. “In a way, I’d rather not be right. I’d support this bubble economy if I didn’t think it’d blow up.”
By Spencer Jakab
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2009
Published: November 27 2009 17:11 | Last updated: November 27 2009 17:11
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/a9650124-db74-11de-9424-00144feabdc0.html
Confused about what the future holds for the economy? So are financial markets.
Record gold prices and negative US Treasury yields are strange bedfellows, indicating general uneasiness but also conflicting bets on inflation or deflation.
As the great economist Woody Allen once put it: “More than any other time in history, mankind faces a crossroads. One path leads to despair and utter hopelessness, the other to total extinction. Let us pray we have the wisdom to choose correctly.”
Fear that one’s net worth might evaporate is, of course, no laughing matter. In spite of the fact that risk appetite has come roaring back, it is hard to reconcile resurgent optimism with the eventual fiscal and monetary hangover of the financial crisis.
Voices from beyond Wall Street who foresaw the debacle now range from mildly to wildly pessimistic. Nobody captures the confusion better than the satirical economic country and western singer Merle Hazard (geddit?) crooning about whether we face hyperinflation or deflation: “Will we become Zimbabwe or will we be Japan?”
Unprecedented growth in money supply will unleash higher inflation warns Bob Wiedemer, co-author of the recently published Aftershock, and of the prescient 2006 book America’s Bubble Economy.
Agreeing with him is Michael Panzner, who published Financial Armageddon just as the last boom peaked and followed it up with When Giants Fall: An Economic Roadmap for the End of the American Era.
In the opposite corner is well-known economist and pundit A. Gary Shilling, who was also appropriately bearish before the bust and now sees deflation ahead. Money supply growth and yawning deficits alone will not spark price increases before overly leveraged consumers rebuild their balance sheets and excess global production capacity is soaked up, he says. That may take another decade.
It is hard to be pessimistic in the face of a furious market rebound and harder still when the handful of prognosticators who came out of the crisis with their reputations enhanced cannot agree on what constitutes a haven.
Dr Shilling advises long-term government bonds while Messrs Wiedemer and Panzner would eschew them, preferring hard assets such as precious metals.
There are other authors predicting upheaval, some late to the party. The apparently flexible Harry S. Dent Jr’s latest tome, The Great Depression Ahead: How to Prosper in the Crash Following the Greatest Boom in History, released in January, was preceded by The Roaring 2000s: Building The Wealth And Lifestyle You Desire In The Greatest Boom In History, published in 1998. So long Dow 44,000!
Of course it is simpler to be pessimistic as a writer than as an insider. “There’s no upside to being bearish – it’s an occupational hazard both on Wall Street and in Washington,” says Mr Panzner, a stockbroker.
Those who took the risk such as David Rosenberg, Paul Kasriel, Meredith Whitney, Peter Boockvar, Albert Edwards, Jeremy Grantham, Nouriel Roubini and Andrew Smithers remain a pessimistic lot these days but take a less apocalyptic view than purveyors of disaster-lit.
While those already hoarding bullion or cash may not care for the latter, it is worth recalling popular tomes that spooked readers into unnecessary precautions in the past.
Two are 1981’s Survive and Win in the Inflationary Eighties, (recently re-issued) and Surviving the Great Depression of 1990, written after the 1987 stock market crash.
Then again, forewarned is forearmed, and Messrs Wiedemer, Panzner and Shilling are, by no stretch of the imagination, kooks.
“I think people were looking for someone with a long beard and a sign that says: ‘The end is near’ and were surprised to find someone from Wall Street,” says Mr Panzner.
There is no point in being a kneejerk contrarian, says Dr Shilling, who also got his start on Wall Street, but hewing to consensus adds little value. And, while being a pessimist might get one noticed, it is hardly pleasant.
“I’m by nature a very optimistic person,” says Mr Wiedemer. “In a way, I’d rather not be right. I’d support this bubble economy if I didn’t think it’d blow up.”
The GOP's suicide pact
The GOP's suicide pact
By Kathleen Parker
Copyright by The Washington Post
Sunday, November 29, 2009
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/27/AR2009112702325.html
Some people can't stand prosperity, my father used to say. Today, he might be talking about Republicans, who, in the midst of declining support for President Obama's hope-and-change agenda, are considering a "purity" pledge to weed out undesirables from their ever-shrinking party.
Just when independents and moderates were considering revisiting the GOP tent.
Just when a near-perfect storm of unpopular Democratic ideas -- from massive health-care reform to terrorist show trials, not to mention global-warming hype -- is coagulating over 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.
Just when the GOP was gaining traction after gubernatorial victories in Virginia and New Jersey . . . Republicans perform a rain dance at their own garden party.
Things were just going too well.
Thus, some conservative members of the party have come up with a list of principles they want future candidates to agree to or forfeit backing by the Republican National Committee.
The so-called purity test is a 10-point checklist -- a suicide pact, really -- of alleged Republican positions. Anyone hoping to play on Team GOP would have to sign off on eight of the 10 -- through their voting records, public statements or a questionnaire. The test will be put up for consideration before the Republican National Committee when it meets early next year in Hawaii.
The list apparently evolved in response to the Republican loss in the recent congressional race in Upstate New York, when liberal Republican Dede Scozzafava withdrew from the race under pressure from conservatives and endorsed Democrat Bill Owens, who won. Republicans had held that seat for more than a century.
James Bopp Jr., chief sponsor of the resolution and a committee member from Indiana, has said that "the problem is that many conservatives have lost trust in the conservative credentials of the Republican Party."
Actually, no, the problem is that many conservatives have lost faith in the ability of Republican leaders to think. The resolutions aren't so much statements of principle as dogmatic responses to complex issues that may, occasionally, require more than a Sharpie check in a little square.
It's too bad that "elite" and "nuance" have become bad words in the Republican lexicon. Elites are viewed in Republican circles as "those people" who are out of touch with "real Americans." And "nuance," the definition of which suggests a sophisticated approach to understanding (as opposed to "Because I said so, case closed") has come to be viewed as a Frenchified word Republicans successfully hung on presidential candidate John Kerry in 2004. His flip-floppery on issues became associated with nuance, a.k.a. lack of decisiveness. Ergo, a lack of leadership skills.
It was superb message manipulation, if you go for that sort of thing. But it was also pandering to America's inner simpleton. Not to defend Kerry, specifically, but heaven forbid anyone should ever consider shades of meaning or new developments and change his mind. As Kerry said during a 2008 Associated Press interview, "Decisiveness wrongly applied can create a lot of pain." This nation was, after all, for slavery before it was against it.
Most of us know that decisiveness isn't always a virtue, yet those pushing the purity test seem to view nuance as an enemy of conservatism. The old elite corps of the conservative movement, men such as William F. Buckley and Russell Kirk, undoubtedly would find this attitude both dangerous and bizarre. When did thinking go out of style?
In fact, the 10-point checklist proffered by Bopp and others is the antithesis of conservatism. As Kirk wrote in his own "Ten Conservative Principles," conservatism "possesses no Holy Writ and no Das Kapital to provide dogmata . . . conservatism is the negation of ideology: it is a state of mind, a type of character, a way of looking at the civil social order."
Each of Bopp's bullets is so overly broad and general that no thoughtful person could endorse it in good conscience. Some are so simplistic as to be meaningless. As just one example: "We support victory in Iraq and Afghanistan by supporting military-recommended troop surges." What does that mean? Do we support all troop surges no matter what other considerations might be taken into account? Do we take nothing else into account? Does disagreement mean one doesn't support victory?
Whatever the intent of the authors, the message is clear: Thinking people need not apply. The formerly elite party of nuanced conservatism might do well to revisit its nonideological roots.
Otherwise, might we bother Mr. Kirk to beam us up?
kathleenparker@washpost.com
By Kathleen Parker
Copyright by The Washington Post
Sunday, November 29, 2009
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/27/AR2009112702325.html
Some people can't stand prosperity, my father used to say. Today, he might be talking about Republicans, who, in the midst of declining support for President Obama's hope-and-change agenda, are considering a "purity" pledge to weed out undesirables from their ever-shrinking party.
Just when independents and moderates were considering revisiting the GOP tent.
Just when a near-perfect storm of unpopular Democratic ideas -- from massive health-care reform to terrorist show trials, not to mention global-warming hype -- is coagulating over 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.
Just when the GOP was gaining traction after gubernatorial victories in Virginia and New Jersey . . . Republicans perform a rain dance at their own garden party.
Things were just going too well.
Thus, some conservative members of the party have come up with a list of principles they want future candidates to agree to or forfeit backing by the Republican National Committee.
The so-called purity test is a 10-point checklist -- a suicide pact, really -- of alleged Republican positions. Anyone hoping to play on Team GOP would have to sign off on eight of the 10 -- through their voting records, public statements or a questionnaire. The test will be put up for consideration before the Republican National Committee when it meets early next year in Hawaii.
The list apparently evolved in response to the Republican loss in the recent congressional race in Upstate New York, when liberal Republican Dede Scozzafava withdrew from the race under pressure from conservatives and endorsed Democrat Bill Owens, who won. Republicans had held that seat for more than a century.
James Bopp Jr., chief sponsor of the resolution and a committee member from Indiana, has said that "the problem is that many conservatives have lost trust in the conservative credentials of the Republican Party."
Actually, no, the problem is that many conservatives have lost faith in the ability of Republican leaders to think. The resolutions aren't so much statements of principle as dogmatic responses to complex issues that may, occasionally, require more than a Sharpie check in a little square.
It's too bad that "elite" and "nuance" have become bad words in the Republican lexicon. Elites are viewed in Republican circles as "those people" who are out of touch with "real Americans." And "nuance," the definition of which suggests a sophisticated approach to understanding (as opposed to "Because I said so, case closed") has come to be viewed as a Frenchified word Republicans successfully hung on presidential candidate John Kerry in 2004. His flip-floppery on issues became associated with nuance, a.k.a. lack of decisiveness. Ergo, a lack of leadership skills.
It was superb message manipulation, if you go for that sort of thing. But it was also pandering to America's inner simpleton. Not to defend Kerry, specifically, but heaven forbid anyone should ever consider shades of meaning or new developments and change his mind. As Kerry said during a 2008 Associated Press interview, "Decisiveness wrongly applied can create a lot of pain." This nation was, after all, for slavery before it was against it.
Most of us know that decisiveness isn't always a virtue, yet those pushing the purity test seem to view nuance as an enemy of conservatism. The old elite corps of the conservative movement, men such as William F. Buckley and Russell Kirk, undoubtedly would find this attitude both dangerous and bizarre. When did thinking go out of style?
In fact, the 10-point checklist proffered by Bopp and others is the antithesis of conservatism. As Kirk wrote in his own "Ten Conservative Principles," conservatism "possesses no Holy Writ and no Das Kapital to provide dogmata . . . conservatism is the negation of ideology: it is a state of mind, a type of character, a way of looking at the civil social order."
Each of Bopp's bullets is so overly broad and general that no thoughtful person could endorse it in good conscience. Some are so simplistic as to be meaningless. As just one example: "We support victory in Iraq and Afghanistan by supporting military-recommended troop surges." What does that mean? Do we support all troop surges no matter what other considerations might be taken into account? Do we take nothing else into account? Does disagreement mean one doesn't support victory?
Whatever the intent of the authors, the message is clear: Thinking people need not apply. The formerly elite party of nuanced conservatism might do well to revisit its nonideological roots.
Otherwise, might we bother Mr. Kirk to beam us up?
kathleenparker@washpost.com
The right reform for the Fed
The right reform for the Fed
By Ben Bernanke
Copyright by The Washington Post
Sunday, November 29, 2009
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/27/AR2009112702322.html
For many Americans, the financial crisis, and the recession it spawned, have been devastating -- jobs, homes, savings lost. Understandably, many people are calling for change. Yet change needs to be about creating a system that works better, not just differently. As a nation, our challenge is to design a system of financial oversight that will embody the lessons of the past two years and provide a robust framework for preventing future crises and the economic damage they cause.
These matters are complex, and Congress is still in the midst of considering how best to reform financial regulation. I am concerned, however, that a number of the legislative proposals being circulated would significantly reduce the capacity of the Federal Reserve to perform its core functions. Notably, some leading proposals in the Senate would strip the Fed of all its bank regulatory powers. And a House committee recently voted to repeal a 1978 provision that was intended to protect monetary policy from short-term political influence. These measures are very much out of step with the global consensus on the appropriate role of central banks, and they would seriously impair the prospects for economic and financial stability in the United States. The Fed played a major part in arresting the crisis, and we should be seeking to preserve, not degrade, the institution's ability to foster financial stability and to promote economic recovery without inflation.
The proposed measures are at least in part the product of public anger over the financial crisis and the government's response, particularly the rescues of some individual financial firms. The government's actions to avoid financial collapse last fall -- as distasteful and unfair as some undoubtedly were -- were unfortunately necessary to prevent a global economic catastrophe that could have rivaled the Great Depression in length and severity, with profound consequences for our economy and society. (I know something about this, having spent my career prior to public service studying these issues.) My colleagues at the Federal Reserve and I were determined not to allow that to happen.
Moreover, looking to the future, we strongly support measures -- including the development of a special bankruptcy regime for financial firms whose disorderly failure would threaten the integrity of the financial system -- to ensure that ad hoc interventions of the type we were forced to use last fall never happen again. Adopting such a resolution regime, together with tougher oversight of large, complex financial firms, would make clear that no institution is "too big to fail" -- while ensuring that the costs of failure are borne by owners, managers, creditors and the financial services industry, not by taxpayers.
The Federal Reserve, like other regulators around the world, did not do all that it could have to constrain excessive risk-taking in the financial sector in the period leading up to the crisis. We have extensively reviewed our performance and moved aggressively to fix the problems.
Working with other agencies, we have toughened our rules and oversight. We will be requiring banks to hold more capital and liquidity and to structure compensation packages in ways that limit excessive risk-taking. We are taking more explicit account of risks to the financial system as a whole.
We are also supplementing bank examination staffs with teams of economists, financial market specialists and other experts. This combination of expertise, a unique strength of the Fed, helped bring credibility and clarity to the "stress tests" of the banking system conducted in the spring. These tests were led by the Fed and marked a turning point in public confidence in the banking system.
There is a strong case for a continued role for the Federal Reserve in bank supervision. Because of our role in making monetary policy, the Fed brings unparalleled economic and financial expertise to its oversight of banks, as demonstrated by the success of the stress tests.
This expertise is essential for supervising highly complex financial firms and for analyzing the interactions among key firms and markets. Our supervision is also informed by the grass-roots perspective derived from the Fed's unique regional structure and our experience in supervising community banks. At the same time, our ability to make effective monetary policy and to promote financial stability depends vitally on the information, expertise and authorities we gain as bank supervisors, as demonstrated in episodes such as the 1987 stock market crash and the financial disruptions of Sept. 11, 2001, as well as by the crisis of the past two years.
Of course, the ultimate goal of all our efforts is to restore and sustain economic prosperity. To support economic growth, the Fed has cut interest rates aggressively and provided further stimulus through lending and asset-purchase programs. Our ability to take such actions without engendering sharp increases in inflation depends heavily on our credibility and independence from short-term political pressures. Many studies have shown that countries whose central banks make monetary policy independently of such political influence have better economic performance, including lower inflation and interest rates.
Independent does not mean unaccountable. In its making of monetary policy, the Fed is highly transparent, providing detailed minutes of policy meetings and regular testimony before Congress, among other information. Our financial statements are public and audited by an outside accounting firm; we publish our balance sheet weekly; and we provide monthly reports with extensive information on all the temporary lending facilities developed during the crisis. Congress, through the Government Accountability Office, can and does audit all parts of our operations except for the monetary policy deliberations and actions covered by the 1978 exemption. The general repeal of that exemption would serve only to increase the perceived influence of Congress on monetary policy decisions, which would undermine the confidence the public and the markets have in the Fed to act in the long-term economic interest of the nation.
We have come a long way in our battle against the financial and economic crisis, but there is a long way to go. Now more than ever, America needs a strong, nonpolitical and independent central bank with the tools to promote financial stability and to help steer our economy to recovery without inflation.
The writer is chairman of the Federal Reserve Board of Governors.
By Ben Bernanke
Copyright by The Washington Post
Sunday, November 29, 2009
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/27/AR2009112702322.html
For many Americans, the financial crisis, and the recession it spawned, have been devastating -- jobs, homes, savings lost. Understandably, many people are calling for change. Yet change needs to be about creating a system that works better, not just differently. As a nation, our challenge is to design a system of financial oversight that will embody the lessons of the past two years and provide a robust framework for preventing future crises and the economic damage they cause.
These matters are complex, and Congress is still in the midst of considering how best to reform financial regulation. I am concerned, however, that a number of the legislative proposals being circulated would significantly reduce the capacity of the Federal Reserve to perform its core functions. Notably, some leading proposals in the Senate would strip the Fed of all its bank regulatory powers. And a House committee recently voted to repeal a 1978 provision that was intended to protect monetary policy from short-term political influence. These measures are very much out of step with the global consensus on the appropriate role of central banks, and they would seriously impair the prospects for economic and financial stability in the United States. The Fed played a major part in arresting the crisis, and we should be seeking to preserve, not degrade, the institution's ability to foster financial stability and to promote economic recovery without inflation.
The proposed measures are at least in part the product of public anger over the financial crisis and the government's response, particularly the rescues of some individual financial firms. The government's actions to avoid financial collapse last fall -- as distasteful and unfair as some undoubtedly were -- were unfortunately necessary to prevent a global economic catastrophe that could have rivaled the Great Depression in length and severity, with profound consequences for our economy and society. (I know something about this, having spent my career prior to public service studying these issues.) My colleagues at the Federal Reserve and I were determined not to allow that to happen.
Moreover, looking to the future, we strongly support measures -- including the development of a special bankruptcy regime for financial firms whose disorderly failure would threaten the integrity of the financial system -- to ensure that ad hoc interventions of the type we were forced to use last fall never happen again. Adopting such a resolution regime, together with tougher oversight of large, complex financial firms, would make clear that no institution is "too big to fail" -- while ensuring that the costs of failure are borne by owners, managers, creditors and the financial services industry, not by taxpayers.
The Federal Reserve, like other regulators around the world, did not do all that it could have to constrain excessive risk-taking in the financial sector in the period leading up to the crisis. We have extensively reviewed our performance and moved aggressively to fix the problems.
Working with other agencies, we have toughened our rules and oversight. We will be requiring banks to hold more capital and liquidity and to structure compensation packages in ways that limit excessive risk-taking. We are taking more explicit account of risks to the financial system as a whole.
We are also supplementing bank examination staffs with teams of economists, financial market specialists and other experts. This combination of expertise, a unique strength of the Fed, helped bring credibility and clarity to the "stress tests" of the banking system conducted in the spring. These tests were led by the Fed and marked a turning point in public confidence in the banking system.
There is a strong case for a continued role for the Federal Reserve in bank supervision. Because of our role in making monetary policy, the Fed brings unparalleled economic and financial expertise to its oversight of banks, as demonstrated by the success of the stress tests.
This expertise is essential for supervising highly complex financial firms and for analyzing the interactions among key firms and markets. Our supervision is also informed by the grass-roots perspective derived from the Fed's unique regional structure and our experience in supervising community banks. At the same time, our ability to make effective monetary policy and to promote financial stability depends vitally on the information, expertise and authorities we gain as bank supervisors, as demonstrated in episodes such as the 1987 stock market crash and the financial disruptions of Sept. 11, 2001, as well as by the crisis of the past two years.
Of course, the ultimate goal of all our efforts is to restore and sustain economic prosperity. To support economic growth, the Fed has cut interest rates aggressively and provided further stimulus through lending and asset-purchase programs. Our ability to take such actions without engendering sharp increases in inflation depends heavily on our credibility and independence from short-term political pressures. Many studies have shown that countries whose central banks make monetary policy independently of such political influence have better economic performance, including lower inflation and interest rates.
Independent does not mean unaccountable. In its making of monetary policy, the Fed is highly transparent, providing detailed minutes of policy meetings and regular testimony before Congress, among other information. Our financial statements are public and audited by an outside accounting firm; we publish our balance sheet weekly; and we provide monthly reports with extensive information on all the temporary lending facilities developed during the crisis. Congress, through the Government Accountability Office, can and does audit all parts of our operations except for the monetary policy deliberations and actions covered by the 1978 exemption. The general repeal of that exemption would serve only to increase the perceived influence of Congress on monetary policy decisions, which would undermine the confidence the public and the markets have in the Fed to act in the long-term economic interest of the nation.
We have come a long way in our battle against the financial and economic crisis, but there is a long way to go. Now more than ever, America needs a strong, nonpolitical and independent central bank with the tools to promote financial stability and to help steer our economy to recovery without inflation.
The writer is chairman of the Federal Reserve Board of Governors.
Pakistan warns US on Afghan troop surge
Pakistan warns US on Afghan troop surge
By Farhan Bokhari in Islamabad
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2009
Published: November 26 2009 17:49 | Last updated: November 26 2009 17:49
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/583311fe-da9f-11de-933d-00144feabdc0.html
Pakistan’s prime minister Yusuf Raza Gilani warned on Thursday that a US military surge in Afghanistan could further destabilise his country and urged the Obama administration to consult before making any decision on troop numbers.
Barack Obama is expected to increase the number of US troops in Afghanistan by 30,000-35,000 when he presents his Afghan strategy in a primetime address on Tuesday.
But Mr Gilani voiced concerns that are widespread among Pakistani officials when he said that a US troop surge on the Afghan side of the border might force Taliban militants to cross over in to neighbouring Pakistan.
”Sending more troops to Afghanistan, there’s fear that the influx of militants may be towards Baluchistan,” Mr Gilani told a news conference in Islamabad.
“We should be consulted, with our intelligence and defence related officials, so that we can formulate our strategy accordingly,” he said.
One western diplomat said Barack Obama faced “very difficult” challenge reconciling Pakistani concerns with calls from within the US military establishment to send more troops.
“On the one hand, Pakistan is Afghanistan’s big neighbour, with a large army and an alliance with the US and Nato. But it also has a history which makes many people feel very uncomfortable,” the diplomat said.
Mr Gilani’s warning comes amid continuing security concerns over the south-western province of Baluchistan, which borders south Afghanistan where the international forces’ war with the Taliban is most intense. The region has been ravaged by an armed nationalist insurgency for years.
Taliban attacks in Pakistan
Interactive graphic charting recent attacks by Taliban militants from Peshawar to Rawalpindi
Pakistan this year began an offensive against Taliban safe havens, first in the country’s northern Swat valley and more recently in the south Waziristan region near the Afghan border.
However, western officials have for years suspected the Pakistani intelligence services of having built close ties to Islamic militant groups.
One senior Pakistani intelligence official, speaking to the Financial Times ahead of Mr Gilani’s comments, said he was concerned about US sending more troops to Afghanistan “in a haphazard manner without consulting us and with no co-ordination”.
The official warned that increasing the number of US troops might only succeed in uniting the Taliban in Afghanistan, causing more volunteers to join its ranks and, ultimately, fuelling the Taliban movement in Pakistan.
“The consequences of this [troop surge] are hard to predict exactly. You can not tell for certain that more US troops in Afghanistan at this time will essentially have a stabilising effect,” he said.
By Farhan Bokhari in Islamabad
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2009
Published: November 26 2009 17:49 | Last updated: November 26 2009 17:49
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/583311fe-da9f-11de-933d-00144feabdc0.html
Pakistan’s prime minister Yusuf Raza Gilani warned on Thursday that a US military surge in Afghanistan could further destabilise his country and urged the Obama administration to consult before making any decision on troop numbers.
Barack Obama is expected to increase the number of US troops in Afghanistan by 30,000-35,000 when he presents his Afghan strategy in a primetime address on Tuesday.
But Mr Gilani voiced concerns that are widespread among Pakistani officials when he said that a US troop surge on the Afghan side of the border might force Taliban militants to cross over in to neighbouring Pakistan.
”Sending more troops to Afghanistan, there’s fear that the influx of militants may be towards Baluchistan,” Mr Gilani told a news conference in Islamabad.
“We should be consulted, with our intelligence and defence related officials, so that we can formulate our strategy accordingly,” he said.
One western diplomat said Barack Obama faced “very difficult” challenge reconciling Pakistani concerns with calls from within the US military establishment to send more troops.
“On the one hand, Pakistan is Afghanistan’s big neighbour, with a large army and an alliance with the US and Nato. But it also has a history which makes many people feel very uncomfortable,” the diplomat said.
Mr Gilani’s warning comes amid continuing security concerns over the south-western province of Baluchistan, which borders south Afghanistan where the international forces’ war with the Taliban is most intense. The region has been ravaged by an armed nationalist insurgency for years.
Taliban attacks in Pakistan
Interactive graphic charting recent attacks by Taliban militants from Peshawar to Rawalpindi
Pakistan this year began an offensive against Taliban safe havens, first in the country’s northern Swat valley and more recently in the south Waziristan region near the Afghan border.
However, western officials have for years suspected the Pakistani intelligence services of having built close ties to Islamic militant groups.
One senior Pakistani intelligence official, speaking to the Financial Times ahead of Mr Gilani’s comments, said he was concerned about US sending more troops to Afghanistan “in a haphazard manner without consulting us and with no co-ordination”.
The official warned that increasing the number of US troops might only succeed in uniting the Taliban in Afghanistan, causing more volunteers to join its ranks and, ultimately, fuelling the Taliban movement in Pakistan.
“The consequences of this [troop surge] are hard to predict exactly. You can not tell for certain that more US troops in Afghanistan at this time will essentially have a stabilising effect,” he said.
Sweden rules out state bail-out for Saab - New parties show interest in GM unit
Sweden rules out state bail-out for Saab - New parties show interest in GM unit
By Andrew Ward in Stockholm
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2009
Published: November 27 2009 17:40 | Last updated: November 27 2009 17:40
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/3aca2404-db7b-11de-9424-00144feabdc0.html
Sweden’s prime minister has ruled out a government bail-out for Saab Automobile and warned that European leaders must not stand in the way of efforts to tackle overcapacity in the car industry.
Fredrik Reinfeldt said his government would offer credit guarantees if General Motors could find a buyer with the “powerful resources” needed to turn Saab round, as it emerged that the US carmaker had received fresh approaches for its Swedish unit.
But the government would not intervene if GM chose to liquidate Saab after a consortium led by Koenigsegg Automotive, the Swedish maker of high-performance sports cars, pulled out of a deal to buy the company this week.
“We have been very clear that we do not put taxpayer money intended for healthcare or education into owning car companies or covering losses in car companies,” Mr Reinfeldt told the Financial Times.
“You cannot save jobs just by pushing in taxpayers’ money if you don’t have the competitiveness to survive in a tough industry with overcapacity.”
Saab on Friday said GM had received expressions of interest from “more than one” potential bidder since Koenigsegg pulled out.
Merbanco, a Wyoming-based merchant bank that was linked with Saab in the past, is among those to have contacted GM, according to people close to the situation.
But Mr Reinfeldt said any bidder would need to prove its financial strength before receiving government backing. “Anyone coming close to today’s Saab [would] need resources to cover losses and also to cover investment in development of the company,” he said.
Mr Reinfeldt’s centre-right administration has faced criticism from opposition parties over its hardline approach to Swedish carmakers ahead of next year’s general election.
Volvo, the country’s other global car brand, also faces an uncertain future as Ford tries to offload the business to Geely of China.
Mr Reinfeldt said he was keen to preserve Swedish car manufacturing, but urged governments to face up to industry overcapacity. “Politicians in Europe cannot all say, ‘We must keep our facilities exactly as they are,’” he said.
His comments came as GM prepares to restructure Opel with job cuts threatened in Germany, Belgium and the UK.
Mr Reinfeldt said Saab could be discussed when he travels to Beijing this weekend for a European Union summit with China. But, while he would listen to any Chinese proposals for the group, he was not going on a sales mission, he said.
Beijing Automotive Industry Holding held a minority stake in the Koenigsegg-led consortium and there has been speculation that it could pursue its interest alone.
By Andrew Ward in Stockholm
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2009
Published: November 27 2009 17:40 | Last updated: November 27 2009 17:40
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/3aca2404-db7b-11de-9424-00144feabdc0.html
Sweden’s prime minister has ruled out a government bail-out for Saab Automobile and warned that European leaders must not stand in the way of efforts to tackle overcapacity in the car industry.
Fredrik Reinfeldt said his government would offer credit guarantees if General Motors could find a buyer with the “powerful resources” needed to turn Saab round, as it emerged that the US carmaker had received fresh approaches for its Swedish unit.
But the government would not intervene if GM chose to liquidate Saab after a consortium led by Koenigsegg Automotive, the Swedish maker of high-performance sports cars, pulled out of a deal to buy the company this week.
“We have been very clear that we do not put taxpayer money intended for healthcare or education into owning car companies or covering losses in car companies,” Mr Reinfeldt told the Financial Times.
“You cannot save jobs just by pushing in taxpayers’ money if you don’t have the competitiveness to survive in a tough industry with overcapacity.”
Saab on Friday said GM had received expressions of interest from “more than one” potential bidder since Koenigsegg pulled out.
Merbanco, a Wyoming-based merchant bank that was linked with Saab in the past, is among those to have contacted GM, according to people close to the situation.
But Mr Reinfeldt said any bidder would need to prove its financial strength before receiving government backing. “Anyone coming close to today’s Saab [would] need resources to cover losses and also to cover investment in development of the company,” he said.
Mr Reinfeldt’s centre-right administration has faced criticism from opposition parties over its hardline approach to Swedish carmakers ahead of next year’s general election.
Volvo, the country’s other global car brand, also faces an uncertain future as Ford tries to offload the business to Geely of China.
Mr Reinfeldt said he was keen to preserve Swedish car manufacturing, but urged governments to face up to industry overcapacity. “Politicians in Europe cannot all say, ‘We must keep our facilities exactly as they are,’” he said.
His comments came as GM prepares to restructure Opel with job cuts threatened in Germany, Belgium and the UK.
Mr Reinfeldt said Saab could be discussed when he travels to Beijing this weekend for a European Union summit with China. But, while he would listen to any Chinese proposals for the group, he was not going on a sales mission, he said.
Beijing Automotive Industry Holding held a minority stake in the Koenigsegg-led consortium and there has been speculation that it could pursue its interest alone.
Dollar and government bonds rally as investors seek havens - European bourses stabilise after early sell-off
Dollar and government bonds rally as investors seek havens - European bourses stabilise after early sell-off
By Jamie Chisholm
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2009
Published: November 27 2009 07:13 | Last updated: November 27 2009 22:32
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/3f57bfac-db23-11de-9023-00144feabdc0.html
18:25 GMT: Investors piled into dollars as US traders got their first chance to assess the global rout in risky assets that followed the Dubai World debt restructuring.
A reappraisal of the much-discussed dollar carry trade – where the buck is sold to pay for other assets – saw the greenback rebound from a fresh 14-year low against the yen and pick up speed against a swathe of other currencies.
After falling below Y85 in Asian trading, the dollar was later up 0.2 per cent to Y86.76. It rose 0.4 per cent against the euro to $1.4957 and climbed 0.2 per cent on a trade-weighted basis to 74.99.
US stocks opened their half-day session sharply lower, though they managed to pare losses. The S&P 500 closed 1.7 per cent to 1,091.50. At one stage, equity futures had been pointing to a 3 per cent decline on concerns about possible financial contagion from the Dubai crisis.
The market’s low volumes accentuated the session’s volatility. The Vix index, a gauge of investor anxiety, soared 21 per cent to 24.74.
European stock markets initially added to Thursday’s heavy losses, though the improvement in New York helped the FTSE 100 finish up 1 per cent at 5,245.7, and the FTSE Eurofirst 300 gained 1.2 per cent to 999.59.
The volatile session in Europe followed another day of sharp falls in Asia as analysts struggled to calculate what would be the full impact of Dubai’s difficulties. Banks and construction stocks with links to the emirate were particularly badly hit.
The Nikkei 225 in Tokyo fell 3.2 per cent to 9,081.5, with exporters again bearing the brunt as the yen soared. The Kospi in Seoul was one of the worst performers in the region, losing 4.7 per cent to 1,524.5, its worst day since January. The sell-off took both bourses to four-month lows.
Mainland China’s benchmark, the Shanghai Composite, lost 2.4 per cent and Hong Kong’s Hang Seng fell 4.8 per cent to 21,1134.5, with index heavyweight HSBC taking a battering.
In Australia, the S&P/ASX 200 slumped 2.9 per cent to 4,572.1 as resource groups joined financials in the sell-off, as commodity prices pulled back.
Oil broke back below the $75 mark, at one stage but was later down 2.4 per cent to $76.06, helping to lead the commodity complex off its lows.
The haven of triple-A government bonds was much in demand. The benchmark US 10-year Treasury yield fell 7 basis points to 3.20 per cent. Meanwhile, the yield on the two-year Treasury note was at 0.68 per cent, down 6 basis points on the day. The two-year yield was up from an overnight low of 0.608 per cent, just above the 0.604 per cent record low established last December.
Japanese bonds also rallied as equities slumped and data showed that deflation continued to stalk the land. The yield on the 10-year JGB fell 4 basis points to a seven-week low of 1.25 per cent.
The Market Eye
“I’ve never seen a quicker paper liquidation in gold ever.” Those were the words of Ben Davies, director of gold hedge fund Hinde Capital, as he surveyed carnage in the bullion complex on Friday morning. The precious metal at one stage dropped almost 5 per cent as a soaring dollar provided an excuse for some serious profit-taking after a multi-month rally that saw gold almost hit $1,200 on Thursday. Gold later recovered some poise to trade off 1.3 per cent at $1,172.52.
By Jamie Chisholm
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2009
Published: November 27 2009 07:13 | Last updated: November 27 2009 22:32
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/3f57bfac-db23-11de-9023-00144feabdc0.html
18:25 GMT: Investors piled into dollars as US traders got their first chance to assess the global rout in risky assets that followed the Dubai World debt restructuring.
A reappraisal of the much-discussed dollar carry trade – where the buck is sold to pay for other assets – saw the greenback rebound from a fresh 14-year low against the yen and pick up speed against a swathe of other currencies.
After falling below Y85 in Asian trading, the dollar was later up 0.2 per cent to Y86.76. It rose 0.4 per cent against the euro to $1.4957 and climbed 0.2 per cent on a trade-weighted basis to 74.99.
US stocks opened their half-day session sharply lower, though they managed to pare losses. The S&P 500 closed 1.7 per cent to 1,091.50. At one stage, equity futures had been pointing to a 3 per cent decline on concerns about possible financial contagion from the Dubai crisis.
The market’s low volumes accentuated the session’s volatility. The Vix index, a gauge of investor anxiety, soared 21 per cent to 24.74.
European stock markets initially added to Thursday’s heavy losses, though the improvement in New York helped the FTSE 100 finish up 1 per cent at 5,245.7, and the FTSE Eurofirst 300 gained 1.2 per cent to 999.59.
The volatile session in Europe followed another day of sharp falls in Asia as analysts struggled to calculate what would be the full impact of Dubai’s difficulties. Banks and construction stocks with links to the emirate were particularly badly hit.
The Nikkei 225 in Tokyo fell 3.2 per cent to 9,081.5, with exporters again bearing the brunt as the yen soared. The Kospi in Seoul was one of the worst performers in the region, losing 4.7 per cent to 1,524.5, its worst day since January. The sell-off took both bourses to four-month lows.
Mainland China’s benchmark, the Shanghai Composite, lost 2.4 per cent and Hong Kong’s Hang Seng fell 4.8 per cent to 21,1134.5, with index heavyweight HSBC taking a battering.
In Australia, the S&P/ASX 200 slumped 2.9 per cent to 4,572.1 as resource groups joined financials in the sell-off, as commodity prices pulled back.
Oil broke back below the $75 mark, at one stage but was later down 2.4 per cent to $76.06, helping to lead the commodity complex off its lows.
The haven of triple-A government bonds was much in demand. The benchmark US 10-year Treasury yield fell 7 basis points to 3.20 per cent. Meanwhile, the yield on the two-year Treasury note was at 0.68 per cent, down 6 basis points on the day. The two-year yield was up from an overnight low of 0.608 per cent, just above the 0.604 per cent record low established last December.
Japanese bonds also rallied as equities slumped and data showed that deflation continued to stalk the land. The yield on the 10-year JGB fell 4 basis points to a seven-week low of 1.25 per cent.
The Market Eye
“I’ve never seen a quicker paper liquidation in gold ever.” Those were the words of Ben Davies, director of gold hedge fund Hinde Capital, as he surveyed carnage in the bullion complex on Friday morning. The precious metal at one stage dropped almost 5 per cent as a soaring dollar provided an excuse for some serious profit-taking after a multi-month rally that saw gold almost hit $1,200 on Thursday. Gold later recovered some poise to trade off 1.3 per cent at $1,172.52.
Cadbury warms to Hershey tie-up - US group seen as better cultural fit than Kraft
Cadbury warms to Hershey tie-up - US group seen as better cultural fit than Kraft
By Jenny Wiggins
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2009
Published: November 27 2009 23:30 | Last updated: November 27 2009 23:30
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/835e0b56-db97-11de-9424-00144feabdc0.html
Todd Stitzer, Cadbury chief executive, has signalled support for a possible tie-up with Hershey, declaring the US confectioner a better cultural fit with the chocolate maker than Kraft, the food conglomerate that has launched a hostile £10bn bid.
Hershey, which has owned the licence for the Cadbury brand in the US since 1988, is contemplating a bid for Cadbury after the decision by Kraft of the US this month to go hostile. If Hershey can finance the bid, it is likely to make a friendly offer.
Mr Stitzer told the Financial Times that the ethical values of the Cadbury brand – founded by Quakers who marketed tea, coffee and cocoa drinks as alternatives to alcohol – were similar to those of Hershey.
Milton Hershey, the US company’s founder, was inspired by Cadbury’s Bournville village in building his Pennsylvanian company town, Hershey.
“Both companies were founded by men of principle and vision who created company towns and supported charitable causes . . . There is quite a lot of cultural similarity,” Mr Stitzer said on Friday. “I would prefer Cadbury to be in an environment where its values and principles could continue.”
Mr Stitzer suggested that Cadbury’s values, which he said included Fairtrade certification for some of its chocolate brands, could be lost if it were bought by Kraft, which is better known for processed cheese, instant coffee and bacon.
“I think there’s a worry that in a much larger, less focused organisation that those values don’t get nurtured in the right way,” he said. “Ask the folk at Terry’s whether or not the spirit of the family that founded Terry’s is still alive . . . I think not.” Terry’s Chocolate Orange was acquired by Kraft in 1993.
There is no sign yet that a counter-offer from Hershey, or another possible bidder such as Italy’s Ferrero, will be forthcoming. Kraft went public with a £10.2bn cash and stock offer for Cadbury in September after Roger Carr, Cadbury chairman, rejected an unsolicited approach from Kraft’s chief executive Irene Rosenfeld in August.
Kraft is due to post its offer document to Cadbury shareholders by December 7 and will then have 60 days to convince them to accept the bid. Cadbury shares closed up 3p at 806p. Kraft’s were down 13 cents at $26.67 in New York trading, making its offer worth £9.88bn.
By Jenny Wiggins
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2009
Published: November 27 2009 23:30 | Last updated: November 27 2009 23:30
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/835e0b56-db97-11de-9424-00144feabdc0.html
Todd Stitzer, Cadbury chief executive, has signalled support for a possible tie-up with Hershey, declaring the US confectioner a better cultural fit with the chocolate maker than Kraft, the food conglomerate that has launched a hostile £10bn bid.
Hershey, which has owned the licence for the Cadbury brand in the US since 1988, is contemplating a bid for Cadbury after the decision by Kraft of the US this month to go hostile. If Hershey can finance the bid, it is likely to make a friendly offer.
Mr Stitzer told the Financial Times that the ethical values of the Cadbury brand – founded by Quakers who marketed tea, coffee and cocoa drinks as alternatives to alcohol – were similar to those of Hershey.
Milton Hershey, the US company’s founder, was inspired by Cadbury’s Bournville village in building his Pennsylvanian company town, Hershey.
“Both companies were founded by men of principle and vision who created company towns and supported charitable causes . . . There is quite a lot of cultural similarity,” Mr Stitzer said on Friday. “I would prefer Cadbury to be in an environment where its values and principles could continue.”
Mr Stitzer suggested that Cadbury’s values, which he said included Fairtrade certification for some of its chocolate brands, could be lost if it were bought by Kraft, which is better known for processed cheese, instant coffee and bacon.
“I think there’s a worry that in a much larger, less focused organisation that those values don’t get nurtured in the right way,” he said. “Ask the folk at Terry’s whether or not the spirit of the family that founded Terry’s is still alive . . . I think not.” Terry’s Chocolate Orange was acquired by Kraft in 1993.
There is no sign yet that a counter-offer from Hershey, or another possible bidder such as Italy’s Ferrero, will be forthcoming. Kraft went public with a £10.2bn cash and stock offer for Cadbury in September after Roger Carr, Cadbury chairman, rejected an unsolicited approach from Kraft’s chief executive Irene Rosenfeld in August.
Kraft is due to post its offer document to Cadbury shareholders by December 7 and will then have 60 days to convince them to accept the bid. Cadbury shares closed up 3p at 806p. Kraft’s were down 13 cents at $26.67 in New York trading, making its offer worth £9.88bn.
US retailers report strong ‘Black Friday’ crowds - Strong emphasis on sales of practical items
US retailers report strong ‘Black Friday’ crowds - Strong emphasis on sales of practical items
By Jonathan Birchall in New York
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2009
Published: November 27 2009 18:05 | Last updated: November 27 2009 18:0
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/2f233832-db7d-11de-9424-00144feabdc0.html
US shoppers flocked to stores on Friday for the traditional post-Thanksgiving sales, while still maintaining the utilitarian focus that has replaced bubble-era excess since last September’s Wall Street crash.
The National Retail Federation said all sectors had reported “strong crowds”, while analysts said numbers seemed similar to, or slightly above, last year’s levels.
“Budget-focused shoppers seemed to be pleasantly surprised with post-Thanksgiving deals,“ said Tracy Mullin, the NRF’s chief executive.
Barry Judge, chief marketing officer of Best Buy, the consumer electronics retailer, told his Twitter followers that customer traffic “seems good versus last year”.
But analysts said deals on basic items such as low-cost vacuum cleaners, coffee makers, towels, bedding and luggage reflected a prevailing tone of practicality, as well as a bid by retailers to persuade consumers to start spending again.
“Consumers have really been deferring a lot of their own purchases,” said Paul Leinwand, a retail consultant at Booz & Company. “Understandably, shoppers have been thinking, ‘if it’s not broken, do I really need to replace it?’ ”
Janet Hoffman, a retail consultant at Accenture, said: “There is an element of practicality out there ...The retailers want to make it easier for the consumer to spend.”
The NRF said the most popular items were high-definition televisions, laptops, coats and the low-cost Zhu Zhu Pet robotic hamsters that have been this season’s hottest toy.
Marshal Cohen, head retail industry analyst at NPD Group, said the day had been driven by a mixture of “pent-up demand and frugal fatigue”, with shoppers coming to the stores with a clear idea of exactly what they wanted.
But in spite of the focus on practicality, few shoppers indicated any readiness to spend more this season.
By Jonathan Birchall in New York
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2009
Published: November 27 2009 18:05 | Last updated: November 27 2009 18:0
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/2f233832-db7d-11de-9424-00144feabdc0.html
US shoppers flocked to stores on Friday for the traditional post-Thanksgiving sales, while still maintaining the utilitarian focus that has replaced bubble-era excess since last September’s Wall Street crash.
The National Retail Federation said all sectors had reported “strong crowds”, while analysts said numbers seemed similar to, or slightly above, last year’s levels.
“Budget-focused shoppers seemed to be pleasantly surprised with post-Thanksgiving deals,“ said Tracy Mullin, the NRF’s chief executive.
Barry Judge, chief marketing officer of Best Buy, the consumer electronics retailer, told his Twitter followers that customer traffic “seems good versus last year”.
But analysts said deals on basic items such as low-cost vacuum cleaners, coffee makers, towels, bedding and luggage reflected a prevailing tone of practicality, as well as a bid by retailers to persuade consumers to start spending again.
“Consumers have really been deferring a lot of their own purchases,” said Paul Leinwand, a retail consultant at Booz & Company. “Understandably, shoppers have been thinking, ‘if it’s not broken, do I really need to replace it?’ ”
Janet Hoffman, a retail consultant at Accenture, said: “There is an element of practicality out there ...The retailers want to make it easier for the consumer to spend.”
The NRF said the most popular items were high-definition televisions, laptops, coats and the low-cost Zhu Zhu Pet robotic hamsters that have been this season’s hottest toy.
Marshal Cohen, head retail industry analyst at NPD Group, said the day had been driven by a mixture of “pent-up demand and frugal fatigue”, with shoppers coming to the stores with a clear idea of exactly what they wanted.
But in spite of the focus on practicality, few shoppers indicated any readiness to spend more this season.
Region Finds U.S. Lacking on Honduras
Region Finds U.S. Lacking on Honduras
By GINGER THOMPSON
Copyright by The New York Times
Published: November 27, 2009
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/28/world/americas/28honduras.html?ref=global-home
WASHINGTON — Drug cartels are running amok in Mexico, Raúl Castro is tightening his grip on Cuba and Hugo Chávez of Venezuela is making mischief with Russia and Iran, but it is a relatively obscure backwater, Honduras, that has provided the Obama administration with its first test in Latin America.
The ouster of Manuel Zelaya, the Honduran populist president, five months ago propelled the deeply impoverished country onto President Obama’s packed agenda. The question now is whether his administration’s support for the presidential election being held there on Sunday will be seen as a stamp of approval for a coup or, as senior administration members maintain, the beginning of the end of the crisis.
Most countries in the region see it as the former. Haunted by ghosts of authoritarian governments not long in the grave, countries like Brazil, Argentina and Chile have argued that an election held by an illegal government is, by definition, illegal.
They worry that if Mr. Obama appears to set aside that principle in Honduras, where the United States has long been a power broker, what would Washington do if democracy were threatened in a more powerful country where it wields less influence?
Last week, Marco Aurélio García, a senior adviser to the Brazilian president, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, said his country “continues to have great hopes” for good relations with the United States. But, he added, “the truth is so far we have a strong sense of disappointment.”
While there have been other issues — new United States bases planned for Colombia and a slow movement toward engagement with Cuba — much of the disappointment stems from the administration’s handling of the crisis that began June 28 when Honduran troops detained Mr. Zelaya and forced him into exile.
Mr. Obama was one of the first to condemn the coup and call for Mr. Zelaya to be restored. Rather than impose a strategy for handling the crisis, the White House collaborated with the rest of the region in support of negotiations between Mr. Zelaya and the conservative leaders of Honduras’s de facto government.
Since then, the United States policy toward Honduras has been marked by mixed signals and vague objectives. The State Department was pulled in one direction by Democrats, who supported Mr. Zelaya, and another by Republicans, who sought to weaken the administration’s resolve to reinstate him.
The administration suspended some $30 million in assistance to Honduras, but continued the bulk of its aid — worth hundreds of millions of dollars — saying it did not want to punish the majority of Hondurans living in poverty.
The United States was slow to criticize human rights abuses by the de facto government, but swift to scold Mr. Zelaya for political stunts that culminated with his sneaking back into Honduras, where he remains camped inside the Brazilian Embassy.
The move that seems to have most undermined Mr. Obama’s clout came last month when the administration reversed course by signaling that it would accept the outcome of Sunday’s elections whether or not Mr. Zelaya was restored to power.
Latin American governments accused the administration of putting pragmatism over principle and of siding with Honduran military officers and business interests whose goal was to use the elections to legitimize the coup.
“President Obama’s credibility in the region has been seriously weakened,” said Kevin Casas-Zamora, a Latin America expert at the Brookings Institution and a former vice president of Costa Rica. “In a matter of five months, his administration’s position on the coup has gone from indignation to indifference to confusion to acquiescence.”
In interviews, senior administration officials rejected that view, saying that their strategy shifted as the crisis evolved, but that they never abandoned the region’s shared principles.
Mr. Zelaya, once a darling of the Honduran upper classes, fell from favor when he began increasing the minimum wage, reducing the price of fuel and allying himself with President Chávez. His critics say he crossed a line when he defied the Supreme Court and pushed a referendum to change the Constitution so that he could run for another term. The court called in the military.
The longer the crisis went on, administration officials said, the more they feared Honduras would become another Haiti, where sanctions against a military regime pushed the hemisphere’s poorest country to the brink of collapse.
“We understand that we have to build consensus and that we have to work multilaterally, but we can’t sacrifice a country to do that,” said a senior administration official, who like others interviewed for this article asked not to be identified because he or she were discussing diplomatic deliberations. “Not recognizing the elections unless President Zelaya is restored to power doesn’t get us anywhere.”
On Sunday, President Obama sent a letter to President da Silva laying out his arguments. And on Monday, the assistant secretary of state for Western Hemisphere affairs, Arturo Valenzuela, made the administration’s case before the Organization of American States, saying the election was not an effort to “whitewash a coup d’état.” Instead, he said, it was an opportunity to permit “the Honduran people to exercise their sovereign will.”
With the exception of Panama and Costa Rica, no other countries in the region have publicly said they will join the United States in recognizing the vote.
“They really thought he was different,” said Julia Sweig of the Council on Foreign Relations, referring to Latin America’s view of Mr. Obama, adding, “But those hopes were dashed over the course of the summer.”
By GINGER THOMPSON
Copyright by The New York Times
Published: November 27, 2009
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/28/world/americas/28honduras.html?ref=global-home
WASHINGTON — Drug cartels are running amok in Mexico, Raúl Castro is tightening his grip on Cuba and Hugo Chávez of Venezuela is making mischief with Russia and Iran, but it is a relatively obscure backwater, Honduras, that has provided the Obama administration with its first test in Latin America.
The ouster of Manuel Zelaya, the Honduran populist president, five months ago propelled the deeply impoverished country onto President Obama’s packed agenda. The question now is whether his administration’s support for the presidential election being held there on Sunday will be seen as a stamp of approval for a coup or, as senior administration members maintain, the beginning of the end of the crisis.
Most countries in the region see it as the former. Haunted by ghosts of authoritarian governments not long in the grave, countries like Brazil, Argentina and Chile have argued that an election held by an illegal government is, by definition, illegal.
They worry that if Mr. Obama appears to set aside that principle in Honduras, where the United States has long been a power broker, what would Washington do if democracy were threatened in a more powerful country where it wields less influence?
Last week, Marco Aurélio García, a senior adviser to the Brazilian president, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, said his country “continues to have great hopes” for good relations with the United States. But, he added, “the truth is so far we have a strong sense of disappointment.”
While there have been other issues — new United States bases planned for Colombia and a slow movement toward engagement with Cuba — much of the disappointment stems from the administration’s handling of the crisis that began June 28 when Honduran troops detained Mr. Zelaya and forced him into exile.
Mr. Obama was one of the first to condemn the coup and call for Mr. Zelaya to be restored. Rather than impose a strategy for handling the crisis, the White House collaborated with the rest of the region in support of negotiations between Mr. Zelaya and the conservative leaders of Honduras’s de facto government.
Since then, the United States policy toward Honduras has been marked by mixed signals and vague objectives. The State Department was pulled in one direction by Democrats, who supported Mr. Zelaya, and another by Republicans, who sought to weaken the administration’s resolve to reinstate him.
The administration suspended some $30 million in assistance to Honduras, but continued the bulk of its aid — worth hundreds of millions of dollars — saying it did not want to punish the majority of Hondurans living in poverty.
The United States was slow to criticize human rights abuses by the de facto government, but swift to scold Mr. Zelaya for political stunts that culminated with his sneaking back into Honduras, where he remains camped inside the Brazilian Embassy.
The move that seems to have most undermined Mr. Obama’s clout came last month when the administration reversed course by signaling that it would accept the outcome of Sunday’s elections whether or not Mr. Zelaya was restored to power.
Latin American governments accused the administration of putting pragmatism over principle and of siding with Honduran military officers and business interests whose goal was to use the elections to legitimize the coup.
“President Obama’s credibility in the region has been seriously weakened,” said Kevin Casas-Zamora, a Latin America expert at the Brookings Institution and a former vice president of Costa Rica. “In a matter of five months, his administration’s position on the coup has gone from indignation to indifference to confusion to acquiescence.”
In interviews, senior administration officials rejected that view, saying that their strategy shifted as the crisis evolved, but that they never abandoned the region’s shared principles.
Mr. Zelaya, once a darling of the Honduran upper classes, fell from favor when he began increasing the minimum wage, reducing the price of fuel and allying himself with President Chávez. His critics say he crossed a line when he defied the Supreme Court and pushed a referendum to change the Constitution so that he could run for another term. The court called in the military.
The longer the crisis went on, administration officials said, the more they feared Honduras would become another Haiti, where sanctions against a military regime pushed the hemisphere’s poorest country to the brink of collapse.
“We understand that we have to build consensus and that we have to work multilaterally, but we can’t sacrifice a country to do that,” said a senior administration official, who like others interviewed for this article asked not to be identified because he or she were discussing diplomatic deliberations. “Not recognizing the elections unless President Zelaya is restored to power doesn’t get us anywhere.”
On Sunday, President Obama sent a letter to President da Silva laying out his arguments. And on Monday, the assistant secretary of state for Western Hemisphere affairs, Arturo Valenzuela, made the administration’s case before the Organization of American States, saying the election was not an effort to “whitewash a coup d’état.” Instead, he said, it was an opportunity to permit “the Honduran people to exercise their sovereign will.”
With the exception of Panama and Costa Rica, no other countries in the region have publicly said they will join the United States in recognizing the vote.
“They really thought he was different,” said Julia Sweig of the Council on Foreign Relations, referring to Latin America’s view of Mr. Obama, adding, “But those hopes were dashed over the course of the summer.”
Bomb Causes Derailment of Russian Train, Killing 25
Bomb Causes Derailment of Russian Train, Killing 25
By CLIFFORD J. LEVY and ELLEN BARRY
Copyright by The Associated Press
Published: November 28, 2009
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/29/world/europe/29russia.html?ref=global-home
MOSCOW —The cause of the crash of one of Russia’s most illustrious trains was identified on Saturday as a homemade bomb that went off on the tracks between Moscow and St. Petersburg, killing more than 25 people, wounding scores of others and raising fears of a new era of terrorism here.
Officials called the explosion on Friday the worst terrorist attack in Russia in years, outside volatile Muslim parts of the North Caucasus region, which includes Chechnya. There were no immediate credible claims of responsibility.
The force of the crash crumpled parts of the luxury train, propelling several of its 14 cars off the tracks, trapping passengers in smashed compartments and scattering luggage in the nearby woods. People on the train described a scene of panic and devastation in a rural area that was difficult for rescuers to reach.
The train, the Nevsky Express, is a preferred means of travel for the Russian elite between the country’s two most important cities. Among the dead were a former senator and a senior official in the federal economics ministry.
At the attack site, 200 miles northwest of Moscow, investigators reported Saturday that they had found remnants of a homemade bomb, equivalent to 15 pounds of TNT, that left a crater five feet deep. The bomb was apparently planted on the tracks and detonated while the second half of the train was passing.
Vladimir I. Yakunin, president of Russian Railways, said: “The basic version that is being investigated by the lead investigators is that it was an unknown device, by unknown persons. Simply put, a terrorist act.”
Mr. Yakunin said a second, less powerful explosive went off Saturday at the site of the crash. No one was hurt.
Russia suffered a wave of attacks in the early part of the decade as Muslim separatists from Chechnya struck trains and public places in Moscow and elsewhere, but there have been no such deadly assaults in recent years.
However, another Nevsky Express train was derailed in 2007 by an explosion, wounding more than two dozen people. While two people were later arrested, their motive remains unclear.
On Saturday, all rail service between Moscow and St. Petersburg, 450 miles away, was suspended, and there were widespread reports that Russians were canceling trips out of concern over possible attacks.
In nationally televised remarks, President Dmitri A. Medvedev called for calm. “We need there to be no chaos, because the situation is tense as it is,” he said.
Victims spoke of disarray soon after the crash, with rescuers delayed in arriving and then lacking equipment to extract people from the railway cars, according to interviews on Russian television. They said it was several hours before proper equipment arrived.
“I was riding in one of the cars that derailed,” one passenger, Igor Pechnikov, told the Channel One television network. “There was a jolt, and the car started sliding sharply to the left. I was thrown from my seat and flew halfway down the car.”
Another passenger, Tatyana Yeryomina, said: “Three of us went into the corridor to chat, when suddenly the lights went out and we fell to the floor. We were able to group together, which saved us. There was a huge hole in our car and we realized that something catastrophic had happened.”
At a nearby hospital, Marina Gravit said her train car seemed to buckle.
“All of a sudden the walls started to contract and expand and everything happened very slowly,” Ms. Gravit said. “Then there was a grinding sound. We fell to the floor and everything became dark.”
When a frantic dispatcher reached the train after the derailment, the engineer described confusion.
“There is smoke everywhere,” the engineer said, according to a recording played on television. “The locomotive is damaged. Everything is torn apart in my cabin.”
The train was carrying more than 650 passengers and 20 railway personnel during its regular run to St. Petersburg, which takes four and a half hours.
Earlier in the decade, Muslim separatists from Chechnya made passenger trains and subways a target. A 2003 suicide bomb attack on a commuter train near Chechnya killed 44. At least 12 people were wounded in 2005 when a bomb derailed a train headed from Chechnya to Moscow.
Russia’s Soviet-era infrastructure, which has often not been well maintained in recent years, has also caused deadly rail catastrophes. In addition, negligence and misconduct, sometimes caused by alcohol, have been factor in accidents.
On Saturday, Yekaterina Ivanova, one of the wounded passengers, told the NTV network that the evacuation was frustratingly slow.
“In the hospital, the doctors are better, the medical teams are working in harmony,” she said. “The young people from the Ministry of Emergency Situations carried us out on stretchers, but other people in uniform were just standing there and staring, and no one was even helping to carry out the wounded.”
Ms. Ivanova said rescue personnel did not manage to extract her from the train until 1:30 a.m., nearly four hours after the derailment.
Medical workers reported that reaching the scene was complicated because it was far from major highways.
Nadezhda Milyukova, the lead emergency doctor, told NTV: “There are only country roads, with huge ditches and puddles. You need all-terrain vehicles for those roads.”
Victims’ relatives told television networks that government hot lines did not function well, and that when they got through, there was little information.
“When we asked for some contact phone numbers, the lady told us that it didn’t fall within her job description,” a relative said.
Hundreds of passengers who survived the crash were moved onto a high-speed train and taken to St. Petersburg, arriving at 3:30 a.m. on Saturday. Several were in shock, and nearly all refused to speak about what had happened.
Police officers surrounded the platform, and ambulances pulled up to the train cars. Oleg Salov, a senior emergency situations official, said psychologists were meeting with relatives of the dead and wounded.
One of the train’s cafe cars was turned into a center for first aid and psychological assistance, and many passengers went there instead of home.
Michael Schwirtz contributed reporting.
By CLIFFORD J. LEVY and ELLEN BARRY
Copyright by The Associated Press
Published: November 28, 2009
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/29/world/europe/29russia.html?ref=global-home
MOSCOW —The cause of the crash of one of Russia’s most illustrious trains was identified on Saturday as a homemade bomb that went off on the tracks between Moscow and St. Petersburg, killing more than 25 people, wounding scores of others and raising fears of a new era of terrorism here.
Officials called the explosion on Friday the worst terrorist attack in Russia in years, outside volatile Muslim parts of the North Caucasus region, which includes Chechnya. There were no immediate credible claims of responsibility.
The force of the crash crumpled parts of the luxury train, propelling several of its 14 cars off the tracks, trapping passengers in smashed compartments and scattering luggage in the nearby woods. People on the train described a scene of panic and devastation in a rural area that was difficult for rescuers to reach.
The train, the Nevsky Express, is a preferred means of travel for the Russian elite between the country’s two most important cities. Among the dead were a former senator and a senior official in the federal economics ministry.
At the attack site, 200 miles northwest of Moscow, investigators reported Saturday that they had found remnants of a homemade bomb, equivalent to 15 pounds of TNT, that left a crater five feet deep. The bomb was apparently planted on the tracks and detonated while the second half of the train was passing.
Vladimir I. Yakunin, president of Russian Railways, said: “The basic version that is being investigated by the lead investigators is that it was an unknown device, by unknown persons. Simply put, a terrorist act.”
Mr. Yakunin said a second, less powerful explosive went off Saturday at the site of the crash. No one was hurt.
Russia suffered a wave of attacks in the early part of the decade as Muslim separatists from Chechnya struck trains and public places in Moscow and elsewhere, but there have been no such deadly assaults in recent years.
However, another Nevsky Express train was derailed in 2007 by an explosion, wounding more than two dozen people. While two people were later arrested, their motive remains unclear.
On Saturday, all rail service between Moscow and St. Petersburg, 450 miles away, was suspended, and there were widespread reports that Russians were canceling trips out of concern over possible attacks.
In nationally televised remarks, President Dmitri A. Medvedev called for calm. “We need there to be no chaos, because the situation is tense as it is,” he said.
Victims spoke of disarray soon after the crash, with rescuers delayed in arriving and then lacking equipment to extract people from the railway cars, according to interviews on Russian television. They said it was several hours before proper equipment arrived.
“I was riding in one of the cars that derailed,” one passenger, Igor Pechnikov, told the Channel One television network. “There was a jolt, and the car started sliding sharply to the left. I was thrown from my seat and flew halfway down the car.”
Another passenger, Tatyana Yeryomina, said: “Three of us went into the corridor to chat, when suddenly the lights went out and we fell to the floor. We were able to group together, which saved us. There was a huge hole in our car and we realized that something catastrophic had happened.”
At a nearby hospital, Marina Gravit said her train car seemed to buckle.
“All of a sudden the walls started to contract and expand and everything happened very slowly,” Ms. Gravit said. “Then there was a grinding sound. We fell to the floor and everything became dark.”
When a frantic dispatcher reached the train after the derailment, the engineer described confusion.
“There is smoke everywhere,” the engineer said, according to a recording played on television. “The locomotive is damaged. Everything is torn apart in my cabin.”
The train was carrying more than 650 passengers and 20 railway personnel during its regular run to St. Petersburg, which takes four and a half hours.
Earlier in the decade, Muslim separatists from Chechnya made passenger trains and subways a target. A 2003 suicide bomb attack on a commuter train near Chechnya killed 44. At least 12 people were wounded in 2005 when a bomb derailed a train headed from Chechnya to Moscow.
Russia’s Soviet-era infrastructure, which has often not been well maintained in recent years, has also caused deadly rail catastrophes. In addition, negligence and misconduct, sometimes caused by alcohol, have been factor in accidents.
On Saturday, Yekaterina Ivanova, one of the wounded passengers, told the NTV network that the evacuation was frustratingly slow.
“In the hospital, the doctors are better, the medical teams are working in harmony,” she said. “The young people from the Ministry of Emergency Situations carried us out on stretchers, but other people in uniform were just standing there and staring, and no one was even helping to carry out the wounded.”
Ms. Ivanova said rescue personnel did not manage to extract her from the train until 1:30 a.m., nearly four hours after the derailment.
Medical workers reported that reaching the scene was complicated because it was far from major highways.
Nadezhda Milyukova, the lead emergency doctor, told NTV: “There are only country roads, with huge ditches and puddles. You need all-terrain vehicles for those roads.”
Victims’ relatives told television networks that government hot lines did not function well, and that when they got through, there was little information.
“When we asked for some contact phone numbers, the lady told us that it didn’t fall within her job description,” a relative said.
Hundreds of passengers who survived the crash were moved onto a high-speed train and taken to St. Petersburg, arriving at 3:30 a.m. on Saturday. Several were in shock, and nearly all refused to speak about what had happened.
Police officers surrounded the platform, and ambulances pulled up to the train cars. Oleg Salov, a senior emergency situations official, said psychologists were meeting with relatives of the dead and wounded.
One of the train’s cafe cars was turned into a center for first aid and psychological assistance, and many passengers went there instead of home.
Michael Schwirtz contributed reporting.
U.S. Still Running Secret Prison in Afghanistan
U.S. Still Running Secret Prison in Afghanistan
By ALISSA J. RUBIN
Copyright by The New York Times
Published: November 28, 2009
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/29/world/asia/29bagram.html?ref=global-home
KABUL, Afghanistan — An American military detention camp in Afghanistan is still holding inmates for sometimes weeks at a time and without access to the International Committee of the Red Cross, according to human rights researchers and former detainees held at the site on the Bagram Air Base.
The site consists of individual windowless concrete cells, each lighted by a single light bulb glowing 24 hours a day, where detainees said that their only contact with another human being was at twice-daily interrogation sessions.
The jail’s operation highlights a tension between President Obama’s goal to improve detention conditions that had drawn condemnation under the Bush administration and his desire to give military commanders leeway to operate. In this case, that means isolating certain prisoners for a period of time so interrogators can extract information or flush out confederates.
While Mr. Obama signed an order to eliminate so-called black sites run by the Central Intelligence Agency in January, that order did not apply to this jail, which is run by military Special Operations forces.
Military officials said as recently as this summer that the secret Afghanistan jail and another like it at the Balad Air Base in Iraq were being used to interrogate high-value detainees. And officials said recently that there were no plans to close the detention centers.
In August, the administration restricted the time that detainees could be held at the secret jails to two weeks, changing previous Pentagon policy.
In the past, the military could obtain extensions. The interviewed detainees had been held longer but before the new policy went into effect.
Detainees call the Afghan site the black jail.
“The black jail was the most dangerous and fearful place,” said Hamidullah, a spare-parts dealer in Kandahar who was detained in June and who, like some Afghans, doesn’t use a last name. “They don’t let the I.C.R.C. officials or any other civilians see or communicate with the people they keep there. Because I did not know what time it was, I did not know when to pray.”
Mr. Hamidullah was released in October, after five and half months in detention, five to six weeks of it in the black jail, he said.
Although his and other detainees’ accounts could not be independently corroborated, each was interviewed separately and described similar conditions. Their descriptions also matched those obtained by two human rights workers who had interviewed other former detainees at the site.
While two of the detainees were captured before the Obama administration took office, one was captured in June of this year.
All three detainees were later released without charges. None said they had been tortured, though they said they heard sounds of abuse going on and certainly felt humiliated and roughly used. “They beat up other people in the black jail, but not me,” Hamidullah said. “But the problem was that they didn’t let me sleep. There was shouting noise so you couldn’t sleep."
Others, however, have given accounts of abuse at the site, including two Afghan teenagers who told The Washington Post that they had been subjected to beatings and humiliation by American guards.
All three former detainees interviewed by The Times complained of being held for months after the intensive interrogations were over without being told why. In addition to Hamidullah’s detention of five and a half months, another detainee said he remained at the Bagram prison complex for two years and four months; the other was held for 10 months total.
Neither Pentagon nor White House officials would comment publicly because the existence of the site is classified.
Human rights officials said the existence of a jail where prisoners were denied contact with the Red Cross or their families contradicted the Obama administration’s drive to improve detention conditions.
“Holding people in what appears to be incommunicado detention runs against the grain of the administration’s commitment to greater transparency, accountability, and respect for the dignity of Afghans,” said Jonathan Horowitz, a human rights researcher with the Open Society Institute.
Mr. Horowitz said he understood that “the necessities of war requires the U.S. to detain people, but there are limits to how to detain.”
The black jail is separate from the larger Bagram detention center, which now holds about 700 detainees, mostly in cages accommodating about 20 men apiece, and which had become notorious to the Afghan public as a symbol of abuse. That center will be closed by early next year and the internees moved to a new larger detention site as part of the administration’s effort to improve conditions at Bagram.
The former detainees interviewed by The Times said they were held at the secret site for 35 to 40 days. All three were sent there upon their arrival in Bagram and eventually transferred to the larger detention center on the base, which allows access to the Red Cross. The three detainees were hooded and handcuffed when they were taken for questioning so they did not know where they were or anything about other detainees, they said.
Mr. Horowitz said he had heard similar descriptions of the jail from former detainees, as had Sahr MuhammedAlly, a lawyer with Human Rights First, a nonprofit organization that has tracked detention issues in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, Iraq and Afghanistan.
The International Committee of the Red Cross does not discuss its findings publicly and would not say whether its officials had visited the black jail. But, in early 2008, military officials acknowledged receiving a confidential complaint from the I.C.R.C. that the military was holding some detainees incommunicado.
In August, the military said that it had begun to give the Red Cross the names of everyone detained, including those held in the Special Operations camps, within two weeks of capture. But it still does not allow the organization to have face-to-face access to the detainees.
All three detainees said the hardest part of their detention was that their families did not know whether they were dead or alive.
“For my whole family it was disastrous,” said Hayatullah, another detainee, who said he was working in his pharmacy in Kandahar when he was captured. “Because they knew the Americans were sometimes killing people, and they thought they had killed me because for two to three months they didn’t know where I was.”
The detainees interviewed by The Times said the military had mistaken them for Taliban fighters.
“They kept saying to me, ‘Are you Qari Idris?’ ” said Gulham Khan, 25, an impoverished, illiterate sheep trader, who mostly delivers sheep and goats for people who buy the animals in the livestock market in Ghazni, the capital of the province of the same name. He was captured in late October 2008 and released in early September this year, he said.
“I said, ‘I’m not Qari Idris.’ But they kept asking me over and over, and I kept saying, ‘I’m Gulham. This is my name, that is my father’s name, you can ask the elders.’ ”
Ten months after his initial detention, American soldiers went to the group cell where he was then being held and told him he had been mistakenly picked up under the wrong name, he said.
“They said, ‘Please accept our apology, and we are sorry that we kept you here for this time.’ And that was it. They kept me for more than 10 months and gave me nothing back.”
In their search for him, Mr. Khan’s family members spent more than 120,000 Afghanis, about $2,400, a fortune for a sheep dealer, who often makes just 50 Afghanis a day. Some of the money was spent on bribes to local Afghan soldiers to get information on where he was being held; they said soldiers took the money and never came back with the information.
Mr. Hamidullah was similarly mistaken for a Taliban member, he said.
After he was in the black jail, interrogators insisted that he was a Taliban fighter named Faida Muhammad. “I said, ‘That’s not me,’ ” he recalled.
“They blamed me and said, ‘You are making bombs and are a facilitator of bomb making and helping militants,’ ” he said. “I said, ‘I have a shop. I sell spare parts for vehicles, for trucks and cars.’ ”
Mr. Hamidullah credits his release, after five and a half months, to the efforts of his family, a senior Kandahar government official, and tribal elders.
Human rights researchers worry that the jail remains in the shadows and largely inaccessible both to the Red Cross and the Afghan Independent Human Rights Commission, which has responsibility for ensuring humane treatment of detainees under the Afghan Constitution.
Manfred Nowak, the United Nations’ special rapporteur on torture, said the site fell into a legal limbo and so was not clearly governed by the Geneva Conventions.
Eric Schmitt contributed reporting from Washington.
By ALISSA J. RUBIN
Copyright by The New York Times
Published: November 28, 2009
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/29/world/asia/29bagram.html?ref=global-home
KABUL, Afghanistan — An American military detention camp in Afghanistan is still holding inmates for sometimes weeks at a time and without access to the International Committee of the Red Cross, according to human rights researchers and former detainees held at the site on the Bagram Air Base.
The site consists of individual windowless concrete cells, each lighted by a single light bulb glowing 24 hours a day, where detainees said that their only contact with another human being was at twice-daily interrogation sessions.
The jail’s operation highlights a tension between President Obama’s goal to improve detention conditions that had drawn condemnation under the Bush administration and his desire to give military commanders leeway to operate. In this case, that means isolating certain prisoners for a period of time so interrogators can extract information or flush out confederates.
While Mr. Obama signed an order to eliminate so-called black sites run by the Central Intelligence Agency in January, that order did not apply to this jail, which is run by military Special Operations forces.
Military officials said as recently as this summer that the secret Afghanistan jail and another like it at the Balad Air Base in Iraq were being used to interrogate high-value detainees. And officials said recently that there were no plans to close the detention centers.
In August, the administration restricted the time that detainees could be held at the secret jails to two weeks, changing previous Pentagon policy.
In the past, the military could obtain extensions. The interviewed detainees had been held longer but before the new policy went into effect.
Detainees call the Afghan site the black jail.
“The black jail was the most dangerous and fearful place,” said Hamidullah, a spare-parts dealer in Kandahar who was detained in June and who, like some Afghans, doesn’t use a last name. “They don’t let the I.C.R.C. officials or any other civilians see or communicate with the people they keep there. Because I did not know what time it was, I did not know when to pray.”
Mr. Hamidullah was released in October, after five and half months in detention, five to six weeks of it in the black jail, he said.
Although his and other detainees’ accounts could not be independently corroborated, each was interviewed separately and described similar conditions. Their descriptions also matched those obtained by two human rights workers who had interviewed other former detainees at the site.
While two of the detainees were captured before the Obama administration took office, one was captured in June of this year.
All three detainees were later released without charges. None said they had been tortured, though they said they heard sounds of abuse going on and certainly felt humiliated and roughly used. “They beat up other people in the black jail, but not me,” Hamidullah said. “But the problem was that they didn’t let me sleep. There was shouting noise so you couldn’t sleep."
Others, however, have given accounts of abuse at the site, including two Afghan teenagers who told The Washington Post that they had been subjected to beatings and humiliation by American guards.
All three former detainees interviewed by The Times complained of being held for months after the intensive interrogations were over without being told why. In addition to Hamidullah’s detention of five and a half months, another detainee said he remained at the Bagram prison complex for two years and four months; the other was held for 10 months total.
Neither Pentagon nor White House officials would comment publicly because the existence of the site is classified.
Human rights officials said the existence of a jail where prisoners were denied contact with the Red Cross or their families contradicted the Obama administration’s drive to improve detention conditions.
“Holding people in what appears to be incommunicado detention runs against the grain of the administration’s commitment to greater transparency, accountability, and respect for the dignity of Afghans,” said Jonathan Horowitz, a human rights researcher with the Open Society Institute.
Mr. Horowitz said he understood that “the necessities of war requires the U.S. to detain people, but there are limits to how to detain.”
The black jail is separate from the larger Bagram detention center, which now holds about 700 detainees, mostly in cages accommodating about 20 men apiece, and which had become notorious to the Afghan public as a symbol of abuse. That center will be closed by early next year and the internees moved to a new larger detention site as part of the administration’s effort to improve conditions at Bagram.
The former detainees interviewed by The Times said they were held at the secret site for 35 to 40 days. All three were sent there upon their arrival in Bagram and eventually transferred to the larger detention center on the base, which allows access to the Red Cross. The three detainees were hooded and handcuffed when they were taken for questioning so they did not know where they were or anything about other detainees, they said.
Mr. Horowitz said he had heard similar descriptions of the jail from former detainees, as had Sahr MuhammedAlly, a lawyer with Human Rights First, a nonprofit organization that has tracked detention issues in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, Iraq and Afghanistan.
The International Committee of the Red Cross does not discuss its findings publicly and would not say whether its officials had visited the black jail. But, in early 2008, military officials acknowledged receiving a confidential complaint from the I.C.R.C. that the military was holding some detainees incommunicado.
In August, the military said that it had begun to give the Red Cross the names of everyone detained, including those held in the Special Operations camps, within two weeks of capture. But it still does not allow the organization to have face-to-face access to the detainees.
All three detainees said the hardest part of their detention was that their families did not know whether they were dead or alive.
“For my whole family it was disastrous,” said Hayatullah, another detainee, who said he was working in his pharmacy in Kandahar when he was captured. “Because they knew the Americans were sometimes killing people, and they thought they had killed me because for two to three months they didn’t know where I was.”
The detainees interviewed by The Times said the military had mistaken them for Taliban fighters.
“They kept saying to me, ‘Are you Qari Idris?’ ” said Gulham Khan, 25, an impoverished, illiterate sheep trader, who mostly delivers sheep and goats for people who buy the animals in the livestock market in Ghazni, the capital of the province of the same name. He was captured in late October 2008 and released in early September this year, he said.
“I said, ‘I’m not Qari Idris.’ But they kept asking me over and over, and I kept saying, ‘I’m Gulham. This is my name, that is my father’s name, you can ask the elders.’ ”
Ten months after his initial detention, American soldiers went to the group cell where he was then being held and told him he had been mistakenly picked up under the wrong name, he said.
“They said, ‘Please accept our apology, and we are sorry that we kept you here for this time.’ And that was it. They kept me for more than 10 months and gave me nothing back.”
In their search for him, Mr. Khan’s family members spent more than 120,000 Afghanis, about $2,400, a fortune for a sheep dealer, who often makes just 50 Afghanis a day. Some of the money was spent on bribes to local Afghan soldiers to get information on where he was being held; they said soldiers took the money and never came back with the information.
Mr. Hamidullah was similarly mistaken for a Taliban member, he said.
After he was in the black jail, interrogators insisted that he was a Taliban fighter named Faida Muhammad. “I said, ‘That’s not me,’ ” he recalled.
“They blamed me and said, ‘You are making bombs and are a facilitator of bomb making and helping militants,’ ” he said. “I said, ‘I have a shop. I sell spare parts for vehicles, for trucks and cars.’ ”
Mr. Hamidullah credits his release, after five and a half months, to the efforts of his family, a senior Kandahar government official, and tribal elders.
Human rights researchers worry that the jail remains in the shadows and largely inaccessible both to the Red Cross and the Afghan Independent Human Rights Commission, which has responsibility for ensuring humane treatment of detainees under the Afghan Constitution.
Manfred Nowak, the United Nations’ special rapporteur on torture, said the site fell into a legal limbo and so was not clearly governed by the Geneva Conventions.
Eric Schmitt contributed reporting from Washington.
From Shadow to Limelight for a Governor’s Wife
From Shadow to Limelight for a Governor’s Wife
By ROBBIE BROWN
Copyright by The New York Times
Published: November 27, 2009
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/28/us/politics/28jenny.html?th&emc=th
As the political standing of Gov. Mark Sanford of South Carolina continues to crumble, the career of his wife, Jenny Sanford, seems to be taking off.
She is writing a memoir, “Staying True,” to be released in April by Ballantine Books, about grappling with her husband’s marital infidelity. She has applied to trademark her own name in order to sell clothing, mugs and other items. She will appear next month on a Barbara Walters special on ABC as one of the “10 Most Fascinating People of 2009.”
She has set up a privately financed personal Web site, complete with news releases and photographs. And she has endorsed a candidate to succeed her husband, State Representative Nikki Haley, a Republican and the only woman in the race.
“She is stepping from the background into the foreground,” said Jack Bass, a professor of humanities and social sciences at the College of Charleston. “She has moved from promoting him as a loyal spouse to using those same talents on behalf of herself.”
In South Carolina, some politicians and experts believe she may run for office. They are quick to note that she has served as campaign manager during her husband’s races, shares his conservative fiscal values and acted as de facto chief of staff briefly in his first term.
“Yes, if I had to bet, I think she will run,” said Robert Oldendick, director of the Institute for Public Service and Policy Research at the University of South Carolina. “Just look at what she’s doing externally.”
Ms. Sanford declined to be interviewed for this article, and her friends played down the idea of a run for office.
Ms. Sanford’s re-emergence is accelerating at the same time that her husband, a Republican, is battling an impeachment resolution in the Legislature, dismal approval ratings and 37 charges of ethics violations over his unreported use of friends’ airplanes and improper use of campaign contributions. Once a potential presidential contender, he saw his political fortunes reversed after his confession in June to an extramarital affair with a divorced Argentine named María Belén Chapur, whom he called his “soul mate.”
After the admission, the Sanfords separated but did not dissolve their 20-year marriage. She is believed to be the only governor’s spouse in such a separation, although Gov. Jim Gibbons of Nevada has filed for divorce from his wife, Dawn Gibbons.
Ms. Sanford, who is independently wealthy, moved out of the Governor’s Mansion with their four sons and cardboard boxes of belongings and rebuffed Mr. Sanford’s efforts at reconciliation. A defiant Vogue interview and some choice words about her husband later, Ms. Sanford had become a reluctant poster woman for not standing by her man.
“All I can do is forgive,” she told Vogue. “Reconciliation is something else, and that is going to be a harder road. I have put my heart and soul into being a good mother and wife. Now I think it’s up to my husband to do the soul-searching to see if he wants to stay married. The ball is in his court.”
But these latest image-raising moves — the book, the Web site, the endorsement — suggest a person who is growing more comfortable as a headline maker.
“Initially, she may not have been interested in being in that spotlight,” said Danielle Vinson, the political science department chairwoman at Furman University in Greenville. “But it’s clear that it’s not going away, and she seems to have embraced it.”
By separating from her husband, but remaining first lady, friends say, Ms. Sanford has the best of two worlds as part public figure, part independent woman. She enjoys the perks of political office (a staff assistant, expert advice, ready publicity, admiring colleagues) without the pitfalls (a breakneck schedule of photo-ops and glad handing beside a politically toxic husband). Ms. Sanford has one full-time employee in the governor’s office, Meg Milne, an assistant and spokeswoman.
While Ms. Sanford does not receive a salary as first lady, she works on initiatives about promoting healthy eating and preventing cancer. She does not appear in public often, but she is scheduled to attend a holiday open house on Dec. 3 at the mansion, although not necessarily with the governor.
Ms. Sanford would make a strong candidate for office but could face a negative reaction if she were viewed as capitalizing on her husband’s affair, said Adam Fogle, the editor of the Palmetto Scoop, an online publication about South Carolina politics.
“At the end of the day,” Mr. Fogle said, “she’s got Sanford at the end of her name.”
Ms. Sanford has not expressed plans to run for office. Her friends dismissed the notion of a Jenny Sanford campaign as far-fetched.
“That would shock me as much as the news about Mark shocked me,” said Sally Williamson, a close friend and owner of an antiques store. “I do not think that’s how she would see herself as being beneficial.”
Ms. Sanford’s political views are closely aligned with her husband’s, especially on reducing taxation and government spending, said Joel Sawyer, a former communications director for the governor. But much of her work as first lady has been on public health. She serves on the boards of organizations for children’s health and cancer prevention and founded an initiative called the Healthy South Carolina Challenge that advocates healthy eating, exercise and not smoking.
These days, Ms. Sanford spends most of her time caring for her sons, ages 11 to 17, and writing the memoir in a simple beachfront house on Sullivan’s Island with a view of Fort Sumter. A Georgetown-educated former investment banker, Ms. Sanford is surrounded by a close-knit circle of professional women.
“She’s creating her own identity,” said Marjory Wentworth, the state poet laureate and a longtime friend who lives in nearby Mount Pleasant. “So many people have written her e-mail messages and letters of support. Here and there, when something matters to her, she will respond with a statement about her beliefs.”
One such statement concerned Ms. Haley, whom Ms. Sanford endorsed for governor. A conservative, 37-year-old Indian-American state representative from Lexington, Ms. Haley has attracted considerable attention in a state of older, mostly male and white politicians.
An ally of Mr. Sanford who distanced herself from him after the scandal, Ms. Haley was described by Ms. Sanford in the endorsement as “principled, conservative, tough and smart.”
Few details have been released about Ms. Sanford’s memoir. But Ballantine Books, an imprint of Random House, calls it an “inspirational memoir” that “will grapple with the universal issue of maintaining integrity and a sense of self during life’s difficult times.”
That is consistent with how Ms. Sanford is beginning to present herself: in selective sound bites that emphasize her independence and resilience.
“She was always the driving force behind Mark Sanford, the engine that powers the car,” said Mr. Fogle of the Palmetto Scoop. “Now the car broke down, and she’s on her own.”
By ROBBIE BROWN
Copyright by The New York Times
Published: November 27, 2009
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/28/us/politics/28jenny.html?th&emc=th
As the political standing of Gov. Mark Sanford of South Carolina continues to crumble, the career of his wife, Jenny Sanford, seems to be taking off.
She is writing a memoir, “Staying True,” to be released in April by Ballantine Books, about grappling with her husband’s marital infidelity. She has applied to trademark her own name in order to sell clothing, mugs and other items. She will appear next month on a Barbara Walters special on ABC as one of the “10 Most Fascinating People of 2009.”
She has set up a privately financed personal Web site, complete with news releases and photographs. And she has endorsed a candidate to succeed her husband, State Representative Nikki Haley, a Republican and the only woman in the race.
“She is stepping from the background into the foreground,” said Jack Bass, a professor of humanities and social sciences at the College of Charleston. “She has moved from promoting him as a loyal spouse to using those same talents on behalf of herself.”
In South Carolina, some politicians and experts believe she may run for office. They are quick to note that she has served as campaign manager during her husband’s races, shares his conservative fiscal values and acted as de facto chief of staff briefly in his first term.
“Yes, if I had to bet, I think she will run,” said Robert Oldendick, director of the Institute for Public Service and Policy Research at the University of South Carolina. “Just look at what she’s doing externally.”
Ms. Sanford declined to be interviewed for this article, and her friends played down the idea of a run for office.
Ms. Sanford’s re-emergence is accelerating at the same time that her husband, a Republican, is battling an impeachment resolution in the Legislature, dismal approval ratings and 37 charges of ethics violations over his unreported use of friends’ airplanes and improper use of campaign contributions. Once a potential presidential contender, he saw his political fortunes reversed after his confession in June to an extramarital affair with a divorced Argentine named María Belén Chapur, whom he called his “soul mate.”
After the admission, the Sanfords separated but did not dissolve their 20-year marriage. She is believed to be the only governor’s spouse in such a separation, although Gov. Jim Gibbons of Nevada has filed for divorce from his wife, Dawn Gibbons.
Ms. Sanford, who is independently wealthy, moved out of the Governor’s Mansion with their four sons and cardboard boxes of belongings and rebuffed Mr. Sanford’s efforts at reconciliation. A defiant Vogue interview and some choice words about her husband later, Ms. Sanford had become a reluctant poster woman for not standing by her man.
“All I can do is forgive,” she told Vogue. “Reconciliation is something else, and that is going to be a harder road. I have put my heart and soul into being a good mother and wife. Now I think it’s up to my husband to do the soul-searching to see if he wants to stay married. The ball is in his court.”
But these latest image-raising moves — the book, the Web site, the endorsement — suggest a person who is growing more comfortable as a headline maker.
“Initially, she may not have been interested in being in that spotlight,” said Danielle Vinson, the political science department chairwoman at Furman University in Greenville. “But it’s clear that it’s not going away, and she seems to have embraced it.”
By separating from her husband, but remaining first lady, friends say, Ms. Sanford has the best of two worlds as part public figure, part independent woman. She enjoys the perks of political office (a staff assistant, expert advice, ready publicity, admiring colleagues) without the pitfalls (a breakneck schedule of photo-ops and glad handing beside a politically toxic husband). Ms. Sanford has one full-time employee in the governor’s office, Meg Milne, an assistant and spokeswoman.
While Ms. Sanford does not receive a salary as first lady, she works on initiatives about promoting healthy eating and preventing cancer. She does not appear in public often, but she is scheduled to attend a holiday open house on Dec. 3 at the mansion, although not necessarily with the governor.
Ms. Sanford would make a strong candidate for office but could face a negative reaction if she were viewed as capitalizing on her husband’s affair, said Adam Fogle, the editor of the Palmetto Scoop, an online publication about South Carolina politics.
“At the end of the day,” Mr. Fogle said, “she’s got Sanford at the end of her name.”
Ms. Sanford has not expressed plans to run for office. Her friends dismissed the notion of a Jenny Sanford campaign as far-fetched.
“That would shock me as much as the news about Mark shocked me,” said Sally Williamson, a close friend and owner of an antiques store. “I do not think that’s how she would see herself as being beneficial.”
Ms. Sanford’s political views are closely aligned with her husband’s, especially on reducing taxation and government spending, said Joel Sawyer, a former communications director for the governor. But much of her work as first lady has been on public health. She serves on the boards of organizations for children’s health and cancer prevention and founded an initiative called the Healthy South Carolina Challenge that advocates healthy eating, exercise and not smoking.
These days, Ms. Sanford spends most of her time caring for her sons, ages 11 to 17, and writing the memoir in a simple beachfront house on Sullivan’s Island with a view of Fort Sumter. A Georgetown-educated former investment banker, Ms. Sanford is surrounded by a close-knit circle of professional women.
“She’s creating her own identity,” said Marjory Wentworth, the state poet laureate and a longtime friend who lives in nearby Mount Pleasant. “So many people have written her e-mail messages and letters of support. Here and there, when something matters to her, she will respond with a statement about her beliefs.”
One such statement concerned Ms. Haley, whom Ms. Sanford endorsed for governor. A conservative, 37-year-old Indian-American state representative from Lexington, Ms. Haley has attracted considerable attention in a state of older, mostly male and white politicians.
An ally of Mr. Sanford who distanced herself from him after the scandal, Ms. Haley was described by Ms. Sanford in the endorsement as “principled, conservative, tough and smart.”
Few details have been released about Ms. Sanford’s memoir. But Ballantine Books, an imprint of Random House, calls it an “inspirational memoir” that “will grapple with the universal issue of maintaining integrity and a sense of self during life’s difficult times.”
That is consistent with how Ms. Sanford is beginning to present herself: in selective sound bites that emphasize her independence and resilience.
“She was always the driving force behind Mark Sanford, the engine that powers the car,” said Mr. Fogle of the Palmetto Scoop. “Now the car broke down, and she’s on her own.”
Afghans Offer Jobs to Taliban Rank and File if They Defect
Afghans Offer Jobs to Taliban Rank and File if They Defect
By DEXTER FILKINS
Copyright by The New York Times
Published: November 27, 2009
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/28/world/asia/28militias.html?th&emc=th
JALALABAD, Afghanistan — The American-backed campaign to persuade legions of Taliban gunmen to stop fighting got under way here recently, in an ornate palace filled with Afghan tribal leaders and one very large former warlord leading the way.
“O.K., I want you guys to go out there and persuade the Taliban to sit down and talk,” Gul Agha Shirzai, the governor of Nangarhar Province, told a group of 25 tribal leaders from four eastern provinces. In a previous incarnation, Mr. Shirzai was the American-picked governor of Kandahar Province after the Taliban fell in 2001.
“Do whatever you have to do,” the rotund Mr. Shirzai told the assembled elders. “I’ll back you up.”
After about two hours of talking, Mr. Shirzai and the tribal elders rose, left for their respective provinces and promised to start turning the enemy.
The meeting is part of a battlefield push to lure local fighters and commanders away from the Taliban by offering them jobs in development projects that Afghan tribal leaders help select, paid by the American military and the Afghan government.
By enlisting the tribal leaders to help choose the development projects, the Americans also hope to help strengthen both the Afghan government and the Pashtun tribal networks.
These efforts are focusing on rank-and-file Taliban; while there are some efforts under way to negotiate with the leaders of the main insurgent groups, neither American nor Afghan officials have much faith that those talks will succeed soon.
Afghanistan has a long history of fighters switching sides — sometimes more than once. Still, efforts so far to persuade large numbers of Taliban fighters to give up have been less than a complete success. To date, about 9,000 insurgents have turned in their weapons and agreed to abide by the Afghan Constitution, said Muhammad Akram Khapalwak, the chief administrator for the Peace and Reconciliation Commission in Kabul.
But in an impoverished country ruined by 30 years of war, tribal leaders said that many more insurgents would happily put down their guns if there was something more worthwhile to do.
“Most of the Taliban in my area are young men who need jobs,” said Hajji Fazul Rahim, a leader of the Abdulrahimzai tribe, which spans three eastern provinces. “We just need to make them busy. If we give them work, we can weaken the Taliban.”
In the Jalalabad program, tribal elders would reach out to Taliban commanders to press them to change sides. The commanders and their fighters then would be offered jobs created by local development programs.
The Pashtuns, who form the core of the Taliban, make up a largely tribal society, with families connected to one another by kinship and led by groups of elders. Over the years, the Pashtun tribes have been substantially weakened, with elders singled out by three groups: Taliban fighters, the rebels who fought the former Soviet Union and the soldiers of the former Soviet Union itself. The decimation of the tribes has left Afghan society largely atomized.
Afghan and American officials hope that the plan to make peace with groups of Taliban fighters will complement an American-led effort to set up anti-Taliban militias in many parts of the country: the Pashtun tribes will help fight the Taliban, and they will make deals with the Taliban. And, by so doing, Afghan tribal society can be reinvigorated.
“We’re trying to put pressure on the leaders, and at the same time peel away their young fighters,” said an American military official in Kabul involved in the reconciliation effort. “This is not about handing bags of money to an insurgent.”
The Afghan reconciliation plan is intended to duplicate the Awakening movement in Iraq, where Sunni tribal leaders, many of them insurgents, agreed to stop fighting and in many cases were paid to do so. The Awakening contributed to the remarkable decline in violence in Iraq.
In the autumn of 2001, during the opening phase of the American-led war in Afghanistan, dozens of warlords fighting for the Taliban agreed to defect to the American-backed rebels. As in Iraq, the defectors were often enticed by cash, sometimes handed out by American Army Special Forces officers.
At a ceremony earlier this month in Kabul, about 70 insurgents laid down their guns before the commissioners and agreed to accept the Afghan Constitution. Some of the men had fought for the Taliban, some for Hezb-i-Islami, another insurgent group. The fighters’ motives ranged from disillusion to exhaustion.
“How long should we fight the government? How many more years?” said Molawi Fazullah, a Taliban lieutenant who surrendered with nine others. “Our leaders misled us, and we destroyed our country.”
Like many fighters who gave up at the ceremony, he shrouded his face with a scarf and sunglasses, for fear of being identified by his erstwhile comrades.
The Americans say they have no plans to give cash to local Taliban commanders. They say they would rather give them jobs.
In a defense appropriations bill recently approved by Congress, lawmakers set aside $1.3 billion for a program known by its acronym, CERP, a discretionary fund for American officers. Ordinarily, CERP money is used for development projects, but the language in the bill says officers can use the money to support the “reintegration into Afghan society” of those who have given up fighting.
For all the efforts under way to entice Taliban fighters to change sides, there will always be the old-fashioned approach: deadly force. American commanders also want to squeeze them; such is the rationale behind Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal’s request for tens of thousands of additional American troops.
Indeed, sometimes force alone does the trick. On Oct. 9, American Special Forces soldiers killed Ghulam Yahia, an insurgent commander believed responsible for, among other things, sending several suicide bombers into the western city of Herat. Mr. Yahia had changed sides himself in the past: earlier in the decade, he was Herat’s mayor.
When the Americans killed Mr. Yahia, in a mountain village called Bedak, 120 of his fighters defected to the Afghan government. Others went into hiding. Abdul Wahab, a former lieutenant of Mr. Yahia’s who led the defectors, said that the Afghan government had so far done nothing to protect them or offer them jobs. But he said he was glad he had made the jump anyway.
“We are tired of war,” he said. “We don’t want it anymore.”
Sangar Rahimi and Taimoor Shah contributed reporting from Kabul, Afghanistan.
Correction: November 28, 2009
A previous version of this article said that Gul Agha Shirzai was the governor of Jalalabad. He is governor of Nangarhar Province.
By DEXTER FILKINS
Copyright by The New York Times
Published: November 27, 2009
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/28/world/asia/28militias.html?th&emc=th
JALALABAD, Afghanistan — The American-backed campaign to persuade legions of Taliban gunmen to stop fighting got under way here recently, in an ornate palace filled with Afghan tribal leaders and one very large former warlord leading the way.
“O.K., I want you guys to go out there and persuade the Taliban to sit down and talk,” Gul Agha Shirzai, the governor of Nangarhar Province, told a group of 25 tribal leaders from four eastern provinces. In a previous incarnation, Mr. Shirzai was the American-picked governor of Kandahar Province after the Taliban fell in 2001.
“Do whatever you have to do,” the rotund Mr. Shirzai told the assembled elders. “I’ll back you up.”
After about two hours of talking, Mr. Shirzai and the tribal elders rose, left for their respective provinces and promised to start turning the enemy.
The meeting is part of a battlefield push to lure local fighters and commanders away from the Taliban by offering them jobs in development projects that Afghan tribal leaders help select, paid by the American military and the Afghan government.
By enlisting the tribal leaders to help choose the development projects, the Americans also hope to help strengthen both the Afghan government and the Pashtun tribal networks.
These efforts are focusing on rank-and-file Taliban; while there are some efforts under way to negotiate with the leaders of the main insurgent groups, neither American nor Afghan officials have much faith that those talks will succeed soon.
Afghanistan has a long history of fighters switching sides — sometimes more than once. Still, efforts so far to persuade large numbers of Taliban fighters to give up have been less than a complete success. To date, about 9,000 insurgents have turned in their weapons and agreed to abide by the Afghan Constitution, said Muhammad Akram Khapalwak, the chief administrator for the Peace and Reconciliation Commission in Kabul.
But in an impoverished country ruined by 30 years of war, tribal leaders said that many more insurgents would happily put down their guns if there was something more worthwhile to do.
“Most of the Taliban in my area are young men who need jobs,” said Hajji Fazul Rahim, a leader of the Abdulrahimzai tribe, which spans three eastern provinces. “We just need to make them busy. If we give them work, we can weaken the Taliban.”
In the Jalalabad program, tribal elders would reach out to Taliban commanders to press them to change sides. The commanders and their fighters then would be offered jobs created by local development programs.
The Pashtuns, who form the core of the Taliban, make up a largely tribal society, with families connected to one another by kinship and led by groups of elders. Over the years, the Pashtun tribes have been substantially weakened, with elders singled out by three groups: Taliban fighters, the rebels who fought the former Soviet Union and the soldiers of the former Soviet Union itself. The decimation of the tribes has left Afghan society largely atomized.
Afghan and American officials hope that the plan to make peace with groups of Taliban fighters will complement an American-led effort to set up anti-Taliban militias in many parts of the country: the Pashtun tribes will help fight the Taliban, and they will make deals with the Taliban. And, by so doing, Afghan tribal society can be reinvigorated.
“We’re trying to put pressure on the leaders, and at the same time peel away their young fighters,” said an American military official in Kabul involved in the reconciliation effort. “This is not about handing bags of money to an insurgent.”
The Afghan reconciliation plan is intended to duplicate the Awakening movement in Iraq, where Sunni tribal leaders, many of them insurgents, agreed to stop fighting and in many cases were paid to do so. The Awakening contributed to the remarkable decline in violence in Iraq.
In the autumn of 2001, during the opening phase of the American-led war in Afghanistan, dozens of warlords fighting for the Taliban agreed to defect to the American-backed rebels. As in Iraq, the defectors were often enticed by cash, sometimes handed out by American Army Special Forces officers.
At a ceremony earlier this month in Kabul, about 70 insurgents laid down their guns before the commissioners and agreed to accept the Afghan Constitution. Some of the men had fought for the Taliban, some for Hezb-i-Islami, another insurgent group. The fighters’ motives ranged from disillusion to exhaustion.
“How long should we fight the government? How many more years?” said Molawi Fazullah, a Taliban lieutenant who surrendered with nine others. “Our leaders misled us, and we destroyed our country.”
Like many fighters who gave up at the ceremony, he shrouded his face with a scarf and sunglasses, for fear of being identified by his erstwhile comrades.
The Americans say they have no plans to give cash to local Taliban commanders. They say they would rather give them jobs.
In a defense appropriations bill recently approved by Congress, lawmakers set aside $1.3 billion for a program known by its acronym, CERP, a discretionary fund for American officers. Ordinarily, CERP money is used for development projects, but the language in the bill says officers can use the money to support the “reintegration into Afghan society” of those who have given up fighting.
For all the efforts under way to entice Taliban fighters to change sides, there will always be the old-fashioned approach: deadly force. American commanders also want to squeeze them; such is the rationale behind Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal’s request for tens of thousands of additional American troops.
Indeed, sometimes force alone does the trick. On Oct. 9, American Special Forces soldiers killed Ghulam Yahia, an insurgent commander believed responsible for, among other things, sending several suicide bombers into the western city of Herat. Mr. Yahia had changed sides himself in the past: earlier in the decade, he was Herat’s mayor.
When the Americans killed Mr. Yahia, in a mountain village called Bedak, 120 of his fighters defected to the Afghan government. Others went into hiding. Abdul Wahab, a former lieutenant of Mr. Yahia’s who led the defectors, said that the Afghan government had so far done nothing to protect them or offer them jobs. But he said he was glad he had made the jump anyway.
“We are tired of war,” he said. “We don’t want it anymore.”
Sangar Rahimi and Taimoor Shah contributed reporting from Kabul, Afghanistan.
Correction: November 28, 2009
A previous version of this article said that Gul Agha Shirzai was the governor of Jalalabad. He is governor of Nangarhar Province.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
