A Snapshot of a Business Great

It would be an apt description to say Peter Sutherland is a bulldog of a man with wide strong shoulders having captained the UCD team as a prop when he was younger. He played for Lansdowne and was captain there as well. A tough, domineering forward, his nose was broken several times. One of his biggest regrets was that he wasn’t chosen for Ireland (it’s one of two - the other is that he wasn’t president of the European Commission). School, college and rugby - they were the three drivers in his early life. Even now, after all the fortune he has accumulated, his home is in Donnybrook, just a mile from each, he also has a flat in South Kensington and a house near Marbella.

He was a rising star of the Dublin Bar, combining a affable nature with a competitive streak and fierce intellect. But life as a barrister was never likely to sustain him. Sutherland was cut out for big-time business and politics, for the hazy interface of wealth and power. Back in 1981 Garret FitzGerald made him Ireland’s Attorney-General. He was just 35 - the youngest in the country’s history.

Back then was also a time of great political turbulence - and violence. He was heavily involved in the first extradition case of an IRA member to Northern Ireland. “He’s totally opposed to physical force - he’s not a traveller,” said one of his close colleagues.

It was back in 1985 that he became Ireland’s European commissioner. It was a key moment. “Going to Brussels heralded the most significant part of my life,” he said. He was completely pro-European and became a close colleague and friend of the French EC president Jacques Delors. He was architect of the EU’s new competition policy and to his enormous pride, he was the first commissioner to be given the Gold Medal of the European Parliament during his tenure.

Sutherland never landed the position he most desired however. Three times he was put forward as a candidate for EC president and on each occasion he was declined. What sets Sutherland apart from the rest is that he doesn’t let setbacks get in the way of whichever goal he has set his sights on. Only time will tell what challenge will come next for the man who has achieved so much already.

Cloning; The Possibilities and Advantages of Thought Swapping

We can all see the issues involved in the cloning debate, which go much deeper than religion; the real debate has to do with evolutions process of a self-replicating organic machine, human beings, and the future of science and the species. There will be power shifts in economic status amongst ruling elite, political families, etc along with issues of entanglement, connected brains and communication abilities in the future. Discussing issues with individuals or entire groups of clones will be done with telepathic thought transfer, which will definitely be beneficial to the group dynamics and forward progression.

We know that identical twins know what the other is thinking, clones will be even closer and will be able to communicate by thought transfer. This will help the clone family immensely and give them significant advantages over the non-clone families. As Arthur C Clark talked about in his science fiction articles of quantum thought transfer and groups of connected people with devices, such cloned groups could do this without the use of devices. We are already seeing the beginnings of connected groups in the recent invention of the Flash Mobs, Latest Cell Phone 3G+ technologies, DoCoMo mobile phone Japanese teen users.

http://worldthinktank.net/wttbbs/index.php?showtopic=181&st=0&#entry209

Businesses and wireless from the beginnings of Ricochet, Research in Motion and others are seeing this too. Today in the Mobile Planet, Dell, HP, and Gateway Catalogs and on the shelves of Radio Shack, Circuit City and Best Buy we see the trends of these technologies moving forward. Technology is supplying the needs and desires of corporations, small business and individuals as we humans flock to groups, social groupings and satisfy another innate need, which is placed well within our genes. The need of socialization with our fellow man has been discussed by philosophers, poets, and psychology professors throughout our human history. It takes but one viewing of Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs Pyramid to shake one’s head in affirmation to that truth. It takes but one PBS special of Jane Goodales work with Chimpanzees or the Mutual of Omaha “Wild Kingdom” shows or one tape in the video series of Jacque Custeau to see that this innate need is not merely one possessed by mankind. It seems to be a universal truth of most all species on the Planet. Those species, which communicate better with each other are able to propel themselves and the group to a higher standard of living. Either through communication in hunting, task organization, teaching or information transfers. Super Cloned Families will have this ability and will use it without hesitation to serve self or selves of their clan, family or group.

One point, which is not discussed very much in cloning, is that the copies might be better able to communicate between themselves than the originator to the copies. This would mean that if the originator had strong egocentric desires within it’s genes then those attributes would be passed onto the copies. Therefore the copies in communication with each other would most likely wish to attain for themselves what the originator has, control over the group. Will they plot against their originator or master? Acting like Machevellian Royalty which has been well documented?

This is typical in the ladder climbing aspects of the corporation or as we are seeing in Donald Trump series “You’re Fired” to trash on your fellow contestant to get ahead. If all the clones knew what each other was thinking and all knew they could not be the top dog, that only one could, then the manipulation would be fierce and the ones who could hide their thoughts from the rest of the group better could go along with the group, yet also be against the group by dividing their minds into two separate sets of thought processes, which should be relatively easy since the human brain comes in two-parts and the intelligence needed for manipulation and deception is well documented.

We know from studying history of slave revolts that often the larger slave group to the rulers through cooperation could over power the rulers. These dynamics would ensue within a clone family as well if each person was not treated with the equal of the originator. Yet we know from mankind that even that alone is not enough, as someone in the group always wants more. Plato had discussed in the Republic that everyone in a society should do what they are best at and be alleviated from those tasks that they are not good at. This serves both the whole and the individual best. Could a clone family do that? Probably not, because they are so closely related and would have such similar attributes that they would be without superior skills in many of the tasks. So then would it be better to have many families of clones which worked together, such as a family of cloned accountants, engineers, scientists and entrepreneurs? All different families but working together for their mutual benefit in alliances? Yes, that would work if they worked together, but we already have that in the modern corporations. Of which Plato would surely smile on such an evolved way of doing things from such a simple set of writings.

“Lance Winslow” - Online Think Tank forum board. If you have innovative thoughts and unique perspectives, come think with Lance; www.WorldThinkTank.net/wttbbs/

To Grow Out Of Unemployment

There is a connection between economic growth and unemployment. There is a connection between growth and inflation. Therefore, commonsense (and financial theory) goes, there must be a connection between inflation and unemployment. A special measure of this connection is the Non Accelerating Inflation Rate of Unemployment (NAIRU). Supposedly, this is the rate of unemployment which still does not influence inflation. If unemployment goes below NAIRU, inflationary pressures begin to exert themselves.

This is closely linked to the other concepts, those of “structural”, “frictional” and “conjectural or cyclical” unemployment types.

Some unemployment, the theory, goes is frictional. It is the inevitable result of a few processes:

• Labour Mobility - People move from one job to another, either because they are fired or because they seek to improve their lot. In the intervening period between leaving an old workplace and finding another, they are unemployed.

• Labour Force Expansion - Every year there are new entrants to the labour market. Generations mature and are ripe to be part of the labour force. Until they find their first job - these new participants are unemployed.

• Seasonal and Part Time Employment - Some professions are seasonal by their nature (a hotel in a resort hotel, for instance). These workers join the ranks of the unemployed at certain times and desert them seasonally. Other workers prefer to work part time or in the “Grey” or “Black” economy. They go unreported or report themselves as unemployed, thus distorting the true picture of unemployment.

The frictional type of unemployment is a sign of economic health. It indicates a dynamic economy in fast development. It is a sign of labour mobility, of labour flexibility (part time solutions and flexitime) and of labour adaptability. This cannot be said about the second, more insidious, type, the structural unemployment. It is this kind of unemployment which really bothers governments and worries social planners. It has long term psychological and social effects and limits both economic growth and social cohesion. It is also the most difficult to battle.

Usually, it is the result of ingrained, long term and structural processes and changes in the economy and cannot be fought with artificial one-time measure (employment initiated by the state or fiscal stimulus intended to encourage employment). Among the factors which create it:

• Technological change - new professions are created, old ones lose their lustre and, ultimately, their place in the economy. New professions, connected to new technologies, emerge. Some workers can be retrained but even this takes time (in which they might, technically, be defined as unemployed). Others cannot be retrained and they join the ranks of the long term unemployed, swelling structural unemployment.

• Changes in Consumer Preferences - Fashions change, mass consumption patterns alter, emphases on certain goods and services shift. Today’s hot item is tomorrow’s dead one. Whole industries can and are effected by these tectonic shifts.

• Globalization and Cross Border Labour Mobility - Labour mobility is intentionally encouraged, the world over. Economic unions and trade pacts include social or labour chapters. The most notable example is NAFTA which created hundreds of thousands of new jobs in Mexico and in the USA. As companies go multinational, as production processes become global, as services and goods are exported and imported within a rising tide of international trade, as international brands develop - the biggest restructuring of labour markets is taking place across the globe in rich and poor countries alike. Consider the clear erosion of the power of the trade unions or the cheap labour available in Central and Eastern Europe and in parts of Southeast Asia. These cause jobs (even skilled ones) to be reallocated across political borders.

• Skill Acquisition Failure - People who failed to acquire the minimum education necessary to participate in today’s workforce (secondary high school) are doomed to be permanently unemployed or part time employed. School dropouts form a large part of the structural unemployment in many countries. In countries which are in the process of shifting from one economic system to another, even those with the right formal education are made redundant and useless by the new paradigm. Think about a professor of economy who studied and taught Marxist economy from the wrong textbooks - he is quite useless in a capitalist market economy and might find himself unemployed despite his high education.

The last, benign, type of unemployment is the cyclical one. It is the result of the natural business cycle (at least natural to capitalism) and of the ebb and tide of aggregate demand for workers which is a result of these cycles. This is considered to be an unavoidable side effect of market economy. The pain of the laid off workers can be ameliorated (through the introduction of unemployment benefits) but the solution comes from sorting out the cycle itself and not by attacking the unemployment issue in an isolated artificial manner.

The “Natural Rate of Employment” takes into account that frictional and structural employment must exist. What is left is really the full employment rate. This is highly misleading. First, economists are forced to rely on government data which, normally, tend to underestimate and understate the problem. For example: the statistics ignore “discouraged workers” (those who despaired and stopped looking for work). A second, more philosophical issue, is that, as opposed to frictional unemployment, which is a welcome sign, structural unemployment is not and must be fiercely fought by the state. But Economy give Politics a legitimacy to ignore structural unemployment as a part of life.

But the third problem is the most pressing: what is the “natural” rate of unemployment and how should it be determined? This is where NAIRU came in: the natural rate of unemployment could be construed as that rate of unemployment which prevented bad economic effects, such as inflation. In the USA this was estimated to be 5-6%. But this estimate was based on a long history of labour and inflation statistics. History proved the wrong guide in this case: the world has changed. Globalization, technological innovation, growing free international trade, growth in productivity, electronic money, the massive move to the “Third Wave” (Information and knowledge) industries - all this meant that inflationary pressures could be exported or absorbed and the employment could go much higher without fostering them. This became part of a new paradigm in economy which proclaimed the death of the business cycle and of the inflationary boom-bust phases. Though exaggerated and probably untrue, the “New Paradigm” did predict that productivity will grow, inflation will remain subdued, unemployment will decrease drastically and the prices of financial assets will explode - all simultaneously (which was considered hitherto impossible). The unemployment rate in the USA has stayed well below 5% and there are still no sign of inflation. This is remarkable (though probably short lived. Inflation will pick up there and the world over starting in 1998).

And what about Macedonia? It is one of a group of countries in transition that suffered an unprecedented series of external shocks separation from a Federation, the loss of virtually all export markets, economic siege, monetary instability, a collapse of the financial system, and, lately, interethnic tensions. Small wonder that it endured an outlandish (official) rate of unemployment (more than one third of the active workforce). Granted, the real unemployment rate is probably lower (many workers in the black economy go unreported) - still, these are daunting figures.

Is this a structural or frictional or cyclical unemployment? It is tempting to say that it is structural. It seems to be the result of trying to adapt to a brave new world: new technologies, new determinants of survival, new market mechanisms, the need for a set of completely new skills and new consumer preferences. But a closer analysis will yield a different picture: most of the unemployment in Macedonia (and in countries in transition in general) is cyclical and frictional. It is the result of massive layoffs which, in themselves, are the results of efficiency and productivity drives. It is not that the workforce is ill adapted to cope with the new, post-transition situation. The composition of skills is well balanced, the education, in some respects, better than in the West, labour mobility is enforced by the cruelty of the new labour markets, the pay is low and is likely to remain so (wage pressures don’t go well with high unemployment). The workforce has adapted wondrously.

The failures belong to the management levels and, above all, to the political echelons. Unwilling to adapt, eager to make a quick (personal) buck, entrenched in cosy offices and old ways of thinking, more interested in their perks that in anything else, not educated in the new ways of the markets - they led themselves and their workers (=their voters) to the unemployment swamp. This unfortunate condition was avoidable.

There is no reason to assume that structural unemployment in Macedonia should be much higher than in Germany. The relative sizes and richness of the two economies is not relevant to this discussion. What is relevant is that labour in Macedonia is by far more mobile than in Germany, that it is paid much less, that it is, therefore, relatively more productive, that it is better educated, that both countries suffered external shocks (Germany the unification, Macedonia the transition), that both countries are macro-economically stable, that Macedonia has real natural and human endowments. By certain measures and theoretic formulas, the structural unemployment in Macedonia should be circa 9%, the frictional unemployment (the business cycle is turning up strongly so cyclical unemployment is bound to go down) contributing another 5%. The natural unemployment rate is, therefore, circa 15%.

Moreover, Macedonia is in the rare and enviable position of not having to worry about inflation or wage pressures. Even much higher employment will not create wage pressures. Only the most skilled workers will possess the ability to dictate their own wages and, even then, we are talking about ridiculous wages in Western terms. There is so much competition for every vacancy (”an employers’ market”) that the likelihood of demanding (and getting) higher wages (and, thus, generating inflationary pressures is all but non-existent). So NAIRU in Macedonian terms is an abstract notion with no applicability. Every additional percent of permanent employment in the West entails 2-3 as much in economic (GDP) growth. Macedonia has to grow by 10% and more annually to reduce the level of unemployment to 15% in 5 years (taking additions to the workforce into account). This is doable: Macedonia starts from such a low base that it would take little effort to achieve this kind of growth (to add 300 million USD to the GDP annually=3 months exports at today’s rate).

But this rate of unemployment can be achieved only with the right policy decisions on the state level - and the right management cadre to take advantage of these decisions and of the thrilling new vistas of the global market scene. It is here that Macedonia is lacking - it is here that it should concentrate its efforts.

About The Author

Sam Vaknin is the author of “Malignant Self Love - Narcissism Revisited” and “After the Rain - How the West Lost the East”. He is a columnist in “Central Europe Review”, United Press International (UPI) and ebookweb.org and the editor of mental health and Central East Europe categories in The Open Directory, Suite101 and searcheurope.com. Until recently, he served as the Economic Advisor to the Government of Macedonia.

His web site: http://samvak.tripod.com

Where Can You Find Fridges Online

If you are surveying the market-place for a great deal on fridges and freezers perusing on the world wide web might be an incredible way to save time & money. Do not choose to waste your valuable time scanning all around legions of high-street businesses in search of the very best deals - simply get to your personal computer and log on and a whole brand new planet of fridges awaits you online. Always shop with a retailer you trust when looking for fridges on the internet.

However, with countless on-line stores how do you consider which one can not waste your money on fridges whilst nevertheless ensuring you acquire a quality appliance. As best practice should you acquire your fridge from a shop on your high-street then you should not in reality have many significant concerns about buying your items from their site, also, as folk should all know you might ofttimes grab much cheaper prices on-line

Quickly scanning a good shoppers guide is always an unbeatable place to start when surveying the market place for fridges - shoppers guides are ofttimes packed with a wealth of info and furthermore bring up issues you will probably not have thought about by yourself. Theses important considerations can include; energy usage, extra features and storage capacity amongst additional things.

Don’t consistently go with the cheapest offer - very oftentimes the initial price you notice on a web-site will often not include value added tax or delivery charges also, once you reach the payment stage you might well be charged a lot more than you initially thought.

What date do you need it by? Not all on-line stores offer fast delivery and if your original appliance has just stopped working you possibly might well not want to wait two weeks for your brand new one. So always check what your estimated delivery date will be.

Check the return policy - fridges are a difficult item to purchase; sometimes they appear fantastic in the showroom or on a website but when you get it to your home you come to the realisation it does not match your kitchen at all. Therefore, you should always be careful.

The Disunited Nations

Arab nations plan to table a resolution at the United Nations General Assembly condemning the U.S.-British led “invasion” and “occupation” of Iraq and calling for immediate troop withdrawal. A similar effort at the Security Council last week failed, doomed by the veto powers of both alleged aggressors.

This is not likely to endear the organization to the Bush administration whose hawks regard it as a superfluous leftover from the Cold War era. Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) even introduced legislation to withdraw from the organization altogether. Nile Gardiner, a visiting fellow at the Heritage Foundation, summed up these sentiments in Insight Magazine thus:

“I think the U.N. has been in gradual decline for many years. It failed to act spectacularly in Rwanda and did nothing about Slobodan Milosevic’s brutal regime. Iraq is the latest in a long line of failures.”

Admittedly, like any bureaucracy, the organization is self-perpetuating, self-serving and self-absorbed. But it - and its raft of specialized offshoots - still give back far more than they receive. In recognition of the U.N.’s crucial role, several liberal Democrats have entered legislation to create a “permanent U.N. security force” and to “voluntarily contribute” to the U.N. Population Fund.

Consider peacekeeping operations. At a total annual cost of c. $5 billion last year, U.N. peacekeeping missions employ close to 40,000 police and military and another 11,000 civilians from 89 countries. The budget is shoestring and more than half the pledged contributions are still outstanding. The U.N. consumes less than 0.001 percent of the world’s gross domestic product. As James Paul, Executive Director of Global Policy Forum, observes:

“All UN staff, including the specialized agencies and funds, are fewer than the civil service of the City of Stockholm or the staff of McDonalds. The core UN budget is one half of one percent of the US military budget and far less than the cost of one B-2 bomber aircraft.”

Even the United States Mission to the United Nations, on its Web site, seeks to debunk a few myths. Despite a massive increase in remit and operations, the organization’s budget, at $2.6 billion, has remained constant since 1995. The workforce was cut by 11 percent, to 9000 employees, since 1997:

“The UN has done a great deal to increase efficiency and overall accountability. In 1994, the UN created the Office of Internal Oversight Services (OIOS) to serve as the inspector general and promote efficient management and reduce waste, fraud and abuse. During the year ended June 30, 2001, OIOS recommended $58 million in savings and recoveries for the UN and persuaded UN program managers to implement hundreds of recommendations for improving management and internal controls. OIOS investigations also led to successful convictions of UN staff and others for fraud and stealing UN funds.”

Yet, bad - and expensive - habits die hard. Budget discipline is lax with no clear order of priorities. The United Nations suffers from an abundance of obsolete relics of past programs, inertly and futilely maintained by beneficiary bureaucrats. Follow-up U.N. conferences - and they tend to proliferate incontrollably - are still being held in exotic resorts, or shopping-friendly megalopolises. United Nations entities at the country level duplicate efforts and studiously avoid joint programming, common databases and pooling of resources.

The aforementioned OIOS has hitherto identified more than $200 million in waste and fraud and issued 5000 recommendations to improve efficiency, transparency and accountability. Disgusted by the flagrant squandering of scarce resources, the United States - which covers one fifth of the august establishment’s pecuniary needs - accumulated more than $1.2 billion in arrears by 1999, double the debts of all other members combined.

It has since repaid the bulk of these even as it reduced its share of the United Nations’ finances. It now contributes 22 percent of the regular budget, down from 25 percent and 25-27 percent of the costs of the U.N. peacekeeping forces, down from 30-31 percent.

But a row is brewing in the corridors of power with regards to the proposed budget for 2004-5. Ambassador Patrick Kennedy, United States Representative for United Nations Management and Reform, called it “a step backwards”. The European Union, predictably, “fully concurred” with it and urged members to increase the budget in line with the U.N.’s enhanced responsibilities.

Kofi Annan, the U.N. General Secretary since 1997, is promoting the nation-building and humanitarian credentials of his reformed outfit for the postwar reconstruction of Iraq. American President George Bush is less than keen and Prime Minister Tony Blair of Britain has moderated his pro-multilateralist rhetoric following his meeting with Bush last week.

Even erstwhile keen supporters of the United Nations, such as Japan, a surprising member of the “coalition of the willing”, are hesitant. Japan contributes close to one fifth of the international body’s regular budget. Yet, disillusioned by its inability to gain permanent membership of the Security Council despite its economic clout, Japan announced, in January, its intention to cut its participation by 5 percent.

The United States seems to wish to consign the organization to the humanitarian aspects of Iraq’s restoration. Last Friday, the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) granted $8 million to the U.N.’s Children’s Fund (UNICEF) to pay for sanitation, healthcare and potable water schemes in Iraq as well as for micronutrients, vitamins and medicines for its malnourished and disease-stricken populace.

Succumbing to its niche typecasting, the United Nations has launched an unprecedented $2.2 billion “emergency appeal for immediate humanitarian assistance for the people of Iraq over the next six months, with $1.3 billion devoted to a massive food aid operation … to help the displaced, refugees, children, the elderly and other especially vulnerable groups”. The donor funds will augment the proceeds of the revamped oil-for-food program, now entirely under the control of the General Secretary.

So, is the United Nations really “just a farce” and its members mostly “petty despots” as Conrad Black, The Canadian media mogul, has it in recent interviews? Or, paradoxically, has this international body been strengthened by its faithful depiction of resistant world opinion in the face of perceived Anglo-Saxon bullying? The global assembly’s future largely depends on an incensed and disenchanted United States.

Unable to rely on the kindness of strangers, Annan is reaching out to new constituencies.

At the 1999 World Economic Forum in Davos, he challenged the global business community to enter a “Global Compact” with the U.N. to uphold “human rights, labour standards and environmental practices.” The International Chamber of Commerce, representing 7,000 business organizations in 137 countries, picked up the gauntlet and published a joint statement at a July 1999 meeting with United Nations bigwigs.

This uneasy partnership drew severe criticisms from non-governmental organizations the world over. Corpwatch, a California-based NGO, observed acidly that “in the first 18 months of the Global Compact, we have seen a growing but secret membership, heavy influence by the International Chamber of Commerce, and a failure to publish even a single case study of sustainable practices. The Global Compact logo has been used without attribution by DaimlerChrysler, even as Global Compact officials insist that use of the general UN logo is strictly controlled. The Global Compact represents a smuggling of a business agenda into the United Nations. It should not be considered a contribution to or framework for the Johannesburg Summit.”

The United Nations - like NATO and other Cold War critters - is an organization in search of a purpose. The demise of the USSR constituted a tectonic shift in international affairs. The U.N.’s inability to accommodate its institutions to the supremacy of the United States, the demography of China, the decline of Britain and France and the economic clout of Germany and Japan are symptoms of denial and delusion that are detrimental to the future of this otherwise benign and useful establishment. The war in Iraq is merely a rude wake-up call. And about time, too.

About the Author

Sam Vaknin is the author of Malignant Self Love - Narcissism Revisited and After the Rain - How the West Lost the East. He is a columnist for Central Europe Review, PopMatters, and eBookWeb , a United Press International (UPI) Senior Business Correspondent, and the editor of mental health and Central East Europe categories in The Open Directory Bellaonline, and Suite101 .

Visit Sam’s Web site at http://samvak.tripod.com

Meet The New Kerry, Same As The Old Kerry !

I sit here this morning seething as I am gathering my thoughts on the next J.R.’s Take. I am absolutely livid with the democratic presidential front runner, Sen. John F. Kerry, and so should you be. John F. Kerry has said that if elected, he will abandon the war on terror, begin a dialogue with terrorist regimes, and apologize for the mistakes of the Bush administration !

In a December foreign-policy address to the Council on Foreign Relations, Kerry called the war on terror, led by President Bush, “the most arrogant, inept, reckless and ideological foreign policy in modern history.”

Kerry’s address was praised by the main stream media. “Kerry Vows to Repair Foreign relations,” headlined the Associated Press. The new focus on foreign policy “plays to Kerry’s strength” noted Knight Ridder News Service. “Kerry Vows to Change U.S. Foreign Policy; Senator Describes Steps he Would Take as President,” headlined the Washington Post. None of the major main stream media found Kerry’s address at all inappropriate.

Kerry promised that in the first 100 days of his administration that he would travel the world to denounce his predecessor, apologize for his “radically wrong” policy, and seek “cooperation and compromise” with friend and enemy. Kerry said he would go to the United Nations and travel to our allies and affirm that the United States has rejoined the community of nations.

Apologize ? Cooperation and Compromise ? Radically wrong policy ? What the hell is wrong with this guy ? He wants America to apologize for responding to a terrorist attack that killed 3,000 innocent, defenseless people, who were going about their business before they were rudely interrupted and killed or wounded. He wants us to apologize for a U.S. ship being attacked in a port in Yemen and 17 U.S. Sailors being killed and a ship being damaged. He wants us to apologize for two of our U.S. embassy’s being attacked and over 300 people being killed. He wants us to apologize for the first attack on the World Trade Center in 1993 that killed 6 innocent people and injured 1,000 more.

Apologize, Mr. Kerry ? Cooperate and compromise Mr. Kerry ? It’s a radically wrong policy to defend ourselves Mr. Kerry ? Let’s not forget that it was they (the terrorists) that attacked us. Let’s also not forget that with the exception of the 9/11 attacks, all the other terrorist attacks happened on the Clinton administrations watch. Yes Folks, can you believe it, the terrorists were attacking us even before Bush became president. I know some of you will find that to be a stunning revelation considering all you hear from the sniveling liberals is that we are hated by the terrorists because of Bush’s foreign policy. I guess the terrorists’ must have phoned Miss Cleo and got their reading and conducted pre-emptive terrorist strikes knowing that Bush would be President in the future.

It was the cooperate, compromise and apologize stratedgy that was radically wrong with the Clinton administration’s policies. Policies that gutted our military hardware, demoralized our military personnel, and invited our enemies to attack us, that led to the attacks of 9/11. The terrorists, making the mistake of listening to the ridiculous rhetoric of the whining liberals, believed that because President Bush narrowly won the 2000 election, that he had no mandate, that he would be a weak President. They, and the rest of the world, would soon find out otherwise.

The majority of the American People will never support apologizing or cooperating and compromising with our terrorist enemies, we have seen where that has gotten us, Mr. Kerry. The majority of Americans support the Presidents policies on the war on terror, even if they don’t agree with his other policies.

It appears, ladies and gentlemen that Kerry thinks this is still the ’70’s and just as he aided and abetted our enemies then, he is hell bent on doing the same thing again in 2005 if he is elected President.

Meet the new Kerry, same as the old Kerry !

I’m J.R. and that’s my take.

About the Author

Host of Talk Show America heard live Mon-Fri 4-6 PM on the IBC Radio Network. 24 year veteran police officer, former local politician and Director of Emergency Management in a Massachusetts town

No Matter What America Does The Rest Of The World Will Never Like Us

Americans need to get used to the idea that, no matter what The United States Of America does, the rest of the world will never like us.

Ours is a unique society. We are made up of people from almost every other nationality in the world. We were originaly formed by immigrants seeking religious and other freedoms. Our ethics and moral codes were formed mainly from Judeo-Christian ideals, ie: The Old And New Testaments, The Ten Commandments and the teachings of Jesus Christ. Our form of government is mainly secular but our way of living, our body of law and our way of thinking is, for the most part, Judeo-Christian.

Ours is not an insular society. All Americans, with the possible exception of Native American Indians, are decended from immigrants. These immigrants have come from all over the world. These immigrants brought, with them, differing ideas, customs and ways of doing things. Many of these ideas, customs and ways of doing things have been melded into our way of life. The foregoing has made us completely different than any other country in the world and people, due to the nature of humans, don’t always like other people who are different.

Ours is a wealthy country, not only in resources and land but also in our varied citizenry and our freedoms. This makes other people jealous or envious. They don’t have what we have, so they say that they don’t like us or that they hate us. Some of those same people, however, can’t wait to immigrate to this country, in order to have what we have.

Our people, for the most part, are loving, caring and generous. This may very well be one of our biggest problems. We want to give to and help others. Many people think of our giving and help as pure interference while others feel that no one would give or help without expecting something in return. No other country in the world is guided by Judeo-Christain principles so no other country in the world thinks or believes as we do. We can’t understand how they think and they can’t understand how we think.

We deal with other countries and their people as we deal with each other. We don’t understand that, in most parts of the world, fear and hatered are more powerful than love, greed and envy are more powerful than kindness and generosity, wanting to win is more powerful than a sense of fair play and that all of the foregoing are considered by many people to be weaknesses.

When France helped us during the Revolutionary War, the facts that the were already at war with England in the Caribbean, that we had to pay them for their help and that they did not come to our assistance untill they were sure that we had already won the war, did not stop us from being grateful. When During the Civil War and The War of 1812 a few French helped the Union, again for pay and again after they believed that the Union had won or would win the war, we were grateful. We we helped the French during their Civil War and in the First and Second World Wars, a few French were grateful but many more hated us. After all, we had humiliated them by helping them. We had shown them that they could not succeed with out our assistance. When the French believed that, Saddam Hussein did have weapons of mass destruction and was a threat to the world, they refused to help us or to join with us because their profits were more important than the live’s of others. They believed that they were safe because they were trading partners with Hussein. In addition, they feel that we have too much power so, they oppose us every chance they get (Don’t tell me about Desert Storm, the French did and contributed very little. The main thing they did was to help talk us out of going into Bagdad and ending the problem in Iraq, thereby saving their trading partner Saddam Hussein.). On the other hand, they want our money from tourism and trade so they invite our citizens to visit and to buy their goods. The French do not do anything unless it is in their own best intrest (By the way, I hate to admit this, but I have been told that, much to my regret, I am part French.). I know that the foregoing paragraph makes it sound as if I am a biggot. I am not a biggot, I just do not like being used, abused and lied to and I feel that that is what has been happening ever since the French Indian War or as it is also called, The Seven Years War, which took place before we were even a country.

Russia hates us for causing the breakup of the Soviet Union. The governments of Russia, Mainland China, North Korea, most Moslim countries, many African countries, some Central and South American countries and certain other countries hate us because they are afraid that their citizens might try to emulate us and rise up and take away their power over those citizens. Additionally, most Moslim countries hate us because our country does not follow Islam, ‘the one true religion’. According to them we are Satanists for not following the ‘one true God’. Since all of these governments control, in large part, the information sources in those countries, the majority of the people of those countries believe the lies and propaganda that are reported about us. Notice, however, how when many, not all, of those citizens make it into this country, they learn about us and they become, not only good citizens but, assets to our country. Some of our most contributing citizens came from countries that hated or fought against us at one time or another.

People that can recieve or hear news about our country, listen to our loudest and most strident voices. Voices from people like Howard Dean, Ted Kennedy, Nancy Pelosi, Alec Baldwin, Susan Sarandon, Jane Fonda, Whoopi Goldberg, Al Sharpton, etc.. Since many people, in other countries, don’t understand the true meaning of freedom of speech, they think that these people are speaking for all of us. They think that all of us hate President Bush, they think that our country is filled with prejudice and hatred, they think that crime is out of controll and they think that every one of us carries guns and shoot each other for no reason, they think that we all feel that the war in Iraq is immoral or already lost, they think that all Republicans and most whites hate minorities and all non Jewish or Christian religions.

These people in other countries don’t understand that the voices that they are hearing come from a very loud and vocal minority of hard line left wing zealots and that those voices do not speak for all of us. These people also hear from a few loud and vocal far right wing zealots, however the right wing zealots are not celebrities so these people don’t pay as much attention to them. What the people in other countries don’t understand is that the majority of people in this country are moderate to slightly left or right wing and don’t really agree with either the far left or the far right. The majority of people in this country are hard working, kind, caring and generous people. However, moderate views are not exciting and therefore do not sell a lot of newspapers or garner a lot of television viewers, so moderate views do not get much coverage here or in any of the free or fairly free foriegn press.

Finally, most of the people in the world don’t like each other, many Chinese consider anyone not Chinese to be a barbarian and less than human, Indians and Pakastanis hate each other, Russia and all of the old Soviet Union members fight or feud with each other, many Muslims hate Jews and Christians, most Arab countries seem to hate Isreal, Muslim sects hate and kill each other, the French think that everyone else is beneath them, some Irish hate the British, in Ireland Catholics and Protestants fight each other, many Chinese and Koreans hate the Japanese and many Japanese hate the Chinese and the Koreans, Africans hate and kill other Africans, Argentines feel superior to citizens of other South American contries, etc, etc.. If so many people in the world hate or dislike each other, how can we expect them to like or love us?

Isn’t it about time that we quite worrying about being liked and instead started worrying about being respected or even a little feared. Fear usually generates a certain amount of respect. I’m not suggesting that we become another Soviet Union or a China. I am saying that perhaps we should stop worrying what the world thinks of us and instead stand up for ourselves. Use our financial clout, sacrifice a little, or a lot by not buying oil and goods from our enemies, cancell free trade agreements with our detractors, etc.. Sure many things will cost us more, but aren’t our way of life and our dignity worth something. And, if we do need to use military force, maybe we should use it without first trying to get everyone else’s permission. Help from countries like France, Germany, Russia and China would cost us more than it would help us. Help from the United Nations always seems to cost us more, in money and problems, than it helps us. There are a few countries, Australia, England, Israel, Taipei and a few others that usually stick by us, however, we may not always be able to count on them. Even now many people in England are trying to have Tony Blair removed from office and if we don’t start doing a better job of helping our friend and ally Israel, they may, someday, cease to exist.

Market boom spurs upward price pressures - Global capacity constraints won’t end until late 2006

A robust demand and a worldwide capacity shortage have combined
to push the prices of phenol up to their highest levels in
several years. Further hikes are likely at least through 2006,
say industry analysts, when new capacity may begin to provide
some relief to the tightness in the market.

Sales of phenol–which has downstream applications in
construction, automotive and electronics–closely track economic
conditions. Demand for the chemical in North America increased
about 17% in 2004 over the previous year, and has remained
strong into the early months of 2005, reports Ben Fitzpatrick,
phenol/acetone business manager at Shell Chemicals, Houston,
Tex.

The main reason, Fitzpatrick says, is that "the economy in
the U.S. has picked up" over the past year. Phenol is also
doing well in Asia, he adds, where overall business conditions
"continue to move forward at a brisk pace."

SUPPLY: Feedstock constraints

Limp margins in the phenol business induced some producers of
cumene, the main feedstock for phenol, to shutter their
production plants a few years ago. The most noteworthy cutback
was the 2003 idling of the 500,000 tons/year Chevron Phillips
Chemical Co. cumene unit in Port Arthur, Tex.

Prior to that shutdown, operating rates for cumene in North
America were about 78%, recalls Chuck Venezia, vice president
for benzene and derivatives at chemicals consultant DeWitt &
Co., Houston, Tex. After the closure, he adds, operating rates
leaped to 94% to 95% in 2004, forcing phenol producers to
scramble to find adequate cumene. Cumene still remains
"very, very tight," says Venezia.

Phenol is produced by the peroxidation of cumene
(isopropylbenzene), a process that yields another important
chemical building block, acetone, as a co-product. Cumene itself
is derived from two petrochemical feedstocks, benzene and
propylene. As a result, price and availability of phenol are
strongly dependent on crude oil prices and on petroleum refinery
capacities.

Worldwide capacity of phenol in 2004 was 8.25 million metric
tons, less than a 2% increase from 2003, reports Ben Smith,
director of phenolics and nylon intermediates at the research
firm Chemical Market Associates, Inc. (CMAI) in Houston, Tex.
According to CMAI, the major phenol producers, and their share
of the market, are Ineos Phenol, with around 20%; Sunoco, near
9%; Mitsui Chemical, near 7%; Shell Chemicals, 6%; and Formosa
Plastics, around 5%.

The hydrocarbon feedstocks for phenol "are going to remain
extremely tight to short globally, at least for the next couple
of years," predicts Fitzpatrick. Relief is unlikely, he
adds, before late 2006 or early 2007, when new petroleum
reformers are due online. And the propylene needed to make
cumene, he says, currently is in particularly short supply.

As for phenol itself, several expansion projects are in the
works in response to improved market conditions. For example,
Ineos Phenol plans to expand capacity at its 450,000 ton/year
Antwerp, Belgium phenol plant to 640,000 tons/year by late 2006.

DEMAND: Housing is strong

Phenol is a raw material for phenolic resins, polycarbonate and
epoxy plastics, and some grades of nylon. As a result, the
vigorous performance of industries that use these
products–housing, automotive and electronics–is helping to
boost phenol sales. About 7.5 million metric tons of phenol were
sold in 2004, notes CMAI. Smith projects that worldwide phenol
demand will grow between 4% to 6% annually over the next five
years.

The housing market for phenol products has been "remarkably
strong," says Venezia. Automotive sales have also been
solid, he adds, although he cautions that this sector "is
just starting to show a little weakness."

Current low interest rates have spawned a wave of home
refinancings and resulting home improvements, which Venezia says
has caused a run on construction materials based on phenolic
resins. (These materials include plywood, some types of home
insulation, and decorative laminates for kitchen and bathroom
countertops and cabinets.)

Rebuilding in the wake of several recent natural disasters,
including the round of hurricanes in Florida and the Asian
tsunami tragedy, has also upped demand for phenol-based
construction materials, Venezia adds. Meanwhile, Smith cites the
expanding popularity of CDs and DVDs, both made of
phenol-derived polycarbonates, as another factor behind phenol’s
strong showing.

The surge in sales has driven phenol producers to the limits of
their capabilities. Capacity utilization for phenol in North
America was "essentially 100%" in 2004, says
Fitzpatrick. Worldwide, the utilization rate for phenol reached
91% in 2004, says Smith, which he calls "a strong increase
over the previous year."

PRICING: On the ascent

The heated activity in end-use markets has helped propel phenol
price tags to new highs (see chart). Even with a sizable run-up
in their feedstock costs, says Venezia, "phenol producers
have done quite well" this year. That statement is borne
out, for example, by Sunoco’s fourth-quarter 2004 margins for
phenol and related products, which were 40% higher than they
were in the same 2003 period. The company credits higher phenol
prices for the dramatic margin improvement.

Contributing to rising price tags for phenol in North America,
says Venezia, is a thriving market in Asia, which has bid up the
price of the chemical worldwide. New phenol capacity coming
onstream in Asia this year may lessen price pressures a bit, he
adds.

For the present, however, upward momentum continues for prices.
This has forced purchasers of phenol to pass along their higher
costs to their customers. For example, resin producer
Schenectady International has announced several price increases
for its phenolic resins since the middle of 2004. The
Schenectady, N.Y.-based company says the hikes have been
necessitated by "continued extreme volatility in the
benzene/phenol markets."

Meanwhile, the rapid price escalation in benzene and propylene
has made providers of these two feedstocks skittish about
negotiating the standard three-month supply contracts at fixed
rates with their customers in the phenol industry, according to
Venezia. He says that a number of benzene and propylene
suppliers are increasingly insisting on monthly negotiated
contracts, "which transfer the risks of price volatility to
the downstream [phenol] side."

Higher feedstock costs, together with a number of supply/demand
factors, should continue to put upward pressure on phenol prices
as 2005 unfolds, says Fitzpatrick. He adds, however, that price
pressures this year should not be any worse than last year,
unless there are phenol shortages caused by unexpected service
interruptions at production facilities.

Editorial: Bush and Responsibility

President Bush’s acceptance of responsibility for using “bad intelligence” as he took us to war in Iraq is unacceptable.

In the 18 month rampup to war, Bush was either:

1. Incompetent or

2. Assuming the role of hear no evil, see no evil

3. Complicit in the use of lies and disinformation to convince the American public to support his invasion of Iraq.

Did Bush not have enough commonsense, experience, and understanding of history to know that, as he contemplated the most important decision a President can make, he should ask difficult questions and demand hard answers to ensure information (not intelligence) he was provided was accurate, validated, corroborated, and supported by the intelligence community and the State Department? If he didnt, then he was incompetent. But that isnt the case, because that means Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, Powell, Wolfowitz, Tenet, and a multitude of other senior officials would have had to be just as incompetent. That idea simply doesnt float.

Did Bush take a hear no evil, see no evil attitude as he moved the nation toward war? That would be an instance of the President knowing questions could be asked but simply refusing to do so. He would have elected to simply accept as truth whatever he was provided by his staff. This wouldnt be incompetence. This would be a case of plausible deniability….everyone said it was true so it must be true.

Or was the President directly involved in the lies and disinformation to which the American public was subjected? Did he know it was a sham but elected to do so because he could? Because he knew the American people were in a state of confusion, fear, and anger and could be easily manipulated?

One of the above applies. Bad intelligence doesnt. Neither does Bush’s contention that other nations (France, England, Germany) also thought Iraq had WMD. Why? Following DESERT STORM and the Iraqi Army not overthrowing Saddam Hussein, the policy he had WMD was used to justify the economic embargo levied against Iraq.

Bush was either incompetent during the rampup to invading Iraq or he intentionally elected not to question the information he was provided, or he was directly involved in the use of lies and disinformation to scare the public into supporting his war.

Bush is dangerous for the USA and he is dangerous for the international community.

Bush (and Cheney, and Rumsfeld, and Rice) should be forced to voluntarily resign or be impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors against the Republic.

http://www.blackholenews.com

Skiing Holidays for the Environmentally Conscious Skier

Thousands of keen snowboarders will presently be trying to find their ski pants and scooting off looking for the greatest snowfall.

And without doubt the impact from our carbon footprint will be about as far down the list of holiday essentials as a xmas cracker after the Christmas holidays.

Just last Christmas, a tardy snow made the the tabloids and tourists were terrified about the flakes of snow disappearing nearly as soon as they put down.

Snowboarding organisation Chalet1802, based at the foot of Monte Bianco in Chamonix in the Alps, is one of the only autonomous firms to go carbon neutral and afford snowboarders an environmentally friendly alternative when organising their skiing trip.

Chalet1802 founder Kayah said: Last winter was quite a shock with the hottest winter in 60 years in the French Alps. French skiing areas for example Le Tour, La Plagne and Val-d’Isere has difficulty.It was mild and the snowfall didnt settle so a lot of the early ski season in the mountains was uneven. We resolved to go carbon negative to help preserve the ski resort.

Kayah said: We’re not attempting to dictate to clients only we think it is important to afford the clients the selection without increasing the cost of the trip. When they book with us and goes to our chalet Chamonix they may more than off-set their carbon output and we absorb the additional costs. Naturally we still have a sauna and a hot tub - people wish for luxury but not at the expense of the environment, so we considered ways of reducing the results of someone traveling over here for a snowboarding holiday.”

The firm have also partnered with organisation Climate Care, who tackles global warming by making carbon dioxide reductions on behalf of people and businesses.