Afghanistan Seeks End to U.S. Bombing

By Sayed Salahuddin

KABUL (Reuters) -

Afghanistan (news - web sites)
is demanding the United States halt its bombing,
possibly within days, since almost all remaining
hideouts of the Taliban and Osama bin Laden
(news - web sites) have been destroyed,
an Afghan Defense Ministry spokesman said Friday.

The request was a sign of potential problems
between the new Afghan government and the
U.S. military, whose bombing campaign helped
to sweep them to power.

``We demand America stop its bombing of
Afghanistan after this goal is achieved,''

spokesman Mohammad Habeel told Reuters,
adding that the task of rooting out remaining
targets linked to bin Laden or the country's
ousted Taliban rulers was almost complete.

``Their remaining forces are few in number
and may be annihilated in a maximum of three
days and once this is done there is no need for
the continuation of the bombing,'' he said.

``Without the approval of local commanders

and the Defense Ministry,

America cannot bomb Afghanistan at will,'' he added.

His remarks came a day after a
tribal elder said interim leader,
Hamid Karzai, would ask the
United States to halt aerial attacks on
an eastern province where a convoy of
guests to his inauguration had been
bombed with heavy losses.

Witnesses and survivors said the convoy --
apparently double-crossed --
came under attack in eastern Paktia province
last week as it was en route to the inauguration
of Karzai's government at the weekend, killing about 65 people.

``All commanders who have been involved in
 opposing the Taliban and Osama say that these
people no longer have the ability and presence
to pose a threat,'' Habeel said.

``They are in small numbers in mountainous
areas along the border with Pakistan and they
 should be finished off in a matter of days,'' he added.

Locals said enemies of those in the convoy may
have passed information on its whereabouts to
the Pentagon (news - web sites), calling in planes to bomb it.

U.S. officials have insisted the convoy opened
fire on U.S. aircraft just before it was bombed
and had been carrying leaders of bin Laden's
al Qaeda network and the Taliban.

The incident highlights the tribal rivalries that
have riven Afghanistan for centuries and which
have intensified in recent years as warlords
have battled for territory in the confusion
resulting from the 1979-89 Soviet occupation.

Also hanging over the government was the
issue of whether Saudi-born bin Laden was
still on the run in Afghanistan.

Habeel stood by his remarks a day earlier
that the fugitive millionaire was in hiding in
Pakistan under the protection of supporters
of a radical Islamic leader who helped to
create the fundamentalist Muslim Taliban.

Maulana Fazalur Rehman,

head of the militant Jamiat Ulema-i-Islam party,

who is under house arrest,

swiftly dismissed Habeel's statement as a ``joke.''

But Habeel brushed aside that denial.

``He would say it anyway because he fears
America will pursue him there and may start
bombing suspected areas there in Pakistan,'' he said.

``I think no one wants to confirm his presence,'' he added.

http://www.khou.com/news/STORY.eaf9d2470b.93.88.fa.7c.b6f43b1.html
Texas Teachers May Have Lost Millions In The Downfall Of Enron

"I want teachers to have a seat at the table...
this is the only retirement they've got"

12/26/2001

By Jeremy Rogalski / 11 News

 Click to watch video

The Teacher Retirement System lost
millions when Enron collapsed.

TRS fund managers bought $9 million worth
of Enron stock just three weeks before the
company filed for bankruptcy.

The local teachers' union is ready to sue Enron.

Annie Banks proudly shows off a
holiday doll her Special Ed students made.

But after 38 years, this teacher isn't all smiles.

Banks said,

"We as teachers.

We did not know that we invested in Enron."

Fund managers for the Teacher Retirement
System invested in the crumbling energy giant.

Buying big and banking on the
Dynegy merger to go through.

When it didn't the fund lost nearly $36 million.

Gayle Fallon with the Houston Federation
of Teachers said,

"I think they were doing the same thing
everyone else was doing with Enron.

They weren't paying attention, and that's a problem."

A problem that could possibly cost
retired teachers, not in base pay,
but yearly increases.

State law provides for an annual 2.3
percent cost of living increase.

For a retired teacher of 30 years,
the math works out to roughly $1,000
in jeopardy.

"It would hurt us tremendously.

There is no way that we should be able,
we can be able, to live off of that kind of
money being lost," said Annie Banks.

But so far the fund that bought into Enron
hasn't filed suit against the company,
like so many other state pension funds.

Something the local teachers'
union president calls unacceptable.

"I want teachers to have a seat at the table.

I definitely want them to have a seat at the table,
because this is the only retirement they've got," Fallon said.

It's why Annie Banks is signing up to be a
plaintiff against Enron to represent the class
of her teaching peers.

Teachers aren't the only group that lost out.

The retirement fund for state employees lost around $24 million.

http://www.khou.com/news/STORY.eaf9d2470b.93.88.fa.7c.b6f43b1.html
Published on Friday, December 28, 2001 in the Miami Herald
Say 'Enron' to Social Security Fix
by Bob Ray Sanders

For those who think it is a good idea partly to
privatize Social Security, I have just one word:

Enron.

Enron is the Houston-based energy company
that collapsed this year, sending shock waves
through the financial and political communities.

The company, which filed the largest bankruptcy
case in U.S. history, saw its stock fall from a high
of $90 a share to just pennies per share.

Falling with that stock are the dreams of
thousands of employees who lost their jobs
and retirees who lost their life savings while
many company executives still made off like bandits.

What does all this have to do with Social Security?

A lot.

George W. Bush's campaign platform included
a promise that he would find a way to let you
keep more of your money rather than sending
it all to Washington.

Part of that plan included allowing the taxpayer
to keep a percentage (at least one-third) of the
money paid to Social Security to invest in private accounts.

The president has appointed a commission
and charged it ostensibly to find ways to shore
up the Social Security system.

The commission understood, however,
that its role was also to present a plan that
would address the president's campaign promise.

Since Sept. 11, there hasn't been much
discussion about the commission's work,
but a plan is moving forward.

If you were not convinced before that this
was a bad idea -- reducing the amount
of dollars going into the Social Security
Trust Fund while gambling on the risky
stock market -- just think Enron.

The scene in a recent Senate hearing room
should help members of Congress and the
administration realize that precious retirement
funds should not be used for gambling.

Tearful retirees told members of the Senate
Commerce subcommittee how they had
watched their nest eggs disappear.

A 61-year-old Florida woman said her
Enron stock holdings shrank from
$700,000 to $20,418.

``It may be too late for you to help me,''

she told the panel.

``It is not too late for you to take some
action to make sure this does not happen
 to anyone else.''

While employees remained loyal to their
company by holding on to declining stock,
some company officials were not remaining
loyal to them.

When it was apparent that the Enron stock
was definitely headed for the bottom, investors
in the company's 401(k) plan were not allowed
to sell their stock, but it appears that company
officials did an ``end run'' and dumped about
$1 billion of their own stock holdings.

This year we've seen how fickle the stock
market can be and how it can be manipulated
by bad news (some of it false), economic
indicators and a sneeze from the Federal
Reserve Board's chairman.

Think of those who lost their life savings on
one company's failure, and imagine what
it would be like if millions of people retired
and realized that one-third, or half or any
portion, of their retirement money had disappeared.

That's the fear that some people have if we
move forward with privatizing any portion
of Social Security.

That's my fear.

So, when the subject comes
up again, just remember: ``Enron.''

Bob Ray Sanders is a columnist
for The Fort Worth Star-Telegram.

  \

you are comparing apples and oranges. not to mention lack of research, etc.
(public records :-)
--
====================================================================
If you happen to meet a liberal who does not have his head up his
ass....help him put it back in.  It's the only way to shut them up.... or at
least muffle the noise.
====================================================================

Nobody, who knows anything, recommends putting all your
investment in one company.  Ever heard of diversification, a
liberal sounding word.

David

--
qyrag...@ebpurfgre.ee.pbz

On Sat, 29 Dec 2001 15:39:11 GMT, David Lentz <Ro...@signfile.net>
wrote:

And most enron employees did not.  I suggest you read up on the rules
of their 401k.

Aside from that.  Many of these employees had worked years for a
company that constantly bombarded them with lies about their own
company.  Until this debacle they had little reason to disbelieve the
company.   It was intimated over and over that the best investment was
to load up on company stock.  Even the most conservative investor may
get worn down after time and make the wrong move.

Even if the employees did make wrong moves the big boys should go to
jail for their criminal behavior.  
Thumper

No, you DOPE! He's speaking UDENIABLE FACT!

You just cant STAND the fact that one of Count Dubcula's schemes has
been blown WIDE OPEN and exposed as the SCAM TO DESTROY SOCIAL SECURITY
FOREVER that it was, can you?

--
"We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty. When the loyal opposition
dies, I think the soul of America dies with it."-- Edward R. Murrow

"The danger of the past was that men became slaves. The danger of the
future is that man may become robots."  -- Fromm

"He who joyfully marches to music in rank and file has already earned my
contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the
spinal cord would fully suffice. This disgrace to civilization should be
done away with at once. Heroism at command, senseless brutality,
deplorable love-of-country stance, how violently I hate all this, how
despiceable an ignoreable war is; I would rather be torn to shreds than
be a part of so base an action! It is my conviction that killing under
the cloak of war is nothing but an act of murder." -- Albert Einstein

In article <3C2E1AA2.81A8D...@radiks.net>,

So you are equating the fall of 1 stock to a destruction of
SS.  A better idea is to totally privatize SS.  A diversified
portfolio

  A:  Gets the retiree a better return
  B:  Doesn't rely on taxing the retiree's children to pay for it
  C:  Builds WEALTH that the retiree can leave to his children

      Heritable wealth is the best and fastest way out of
      poverty.

--
It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once. - David Hume
<http://www.webcom.com/thinker> Hypertext editor for creative people.
Kill File: Harry Hope, milton.brewster, kenfran, xona, enrique, Zepp,
           voltaixx, USSmontana, rosell19

news:dickens-4A8F40.16282429122001@news.qwest.net...
    You haven't looked at your year-end mutual fund returns yet have you??

    Which they wouldn't anyway if GWB hadn't broken the lockbox to
reward his wealthy contributors.  Deficits, which Clinton finally
eliminated,
staring us in the face again.

    ....he said as his children stepped on the air hose of his
resuscitator....

Why are you threading your new messages to your original one?

--

Why we can't reason with the leftwing:
Selected "wisdom" from Omaha, NE's mhir...@radiks.net. Check back often for
more examples.
---
"A flag-laden car might as well say "Fuckheaded Hypocrite on Board"."
12/19/01
--
"John AssKKKroft is a Crisco-coated jeezoid who wants to turn the USA into a
concentration camp, where only rich white KKKristian Americans have any
human rights, and all others are merely slaves to serve and submit to the
wealthy in his fascist Utopia.

Oh lordy lordy lordy! I've just given aid and assistence to Bin laden ...

...Come and get me now, you goosestepping KKKoKKKsuKKKers you!!!!!"  12/8/01
---
"WHAT A LYING FUCKING SCUMBAG WE HAVE IN THE FORM OF GW BUSH!! 2004, HURRY
UP AND GET HERE SO WE CAN DEPOSE THIS ASSHOLE!!"  12/16/01
---

news:nCaX7.2685$Cs.563532988@newssvr15.news.prodigy.com...

    The saddest thing about this is the GWBush, as Texas governor, took the
investment of teacher retirement funds out of the hands of a public board
who
maintained oversight and put it in the hands of some of his "financial
friends"
(large contributors) who manipulated it (in secret, no public oversight) to
their own advantage, raking profits off the top for "management".
    Doubt it?? Read the story in Harper's Magazine of ... about a year ago.

"George of the Jungle" <antis...@nospam.forme.edu> wrote in message
news:3c2ecc02$0$7242$4c41069e@reader1.ash.ops.us.uu.net...

In article <3c2e9...@news.eiu.edu>, "Cognitus" <ne...@george.com>
wrote:

Well, golly, I have... You know not all of us are stupid.  A: I don't
have mutual funds I have managed funds.  B: they are doing better
than SS with for me returns less than 0.

The fact that you believe in the lock box suggests that you don't
understand SS.  Let me explain it to you.

 You send in FICA tax.  
 The SS fund buys government bonds with the money
 The money goes into the treasury.
 The Bonds go into a Lock Box
 The Congress spends the treasury money
 The bonds come due
 The SS fund goes to sell the bonds back to the Treasury
 The Treasury doesn't have the money
 The Congress raises taxes to pay for the bonds
 The future taxpayers pay for the SS that you "invested".

 You see it wouldn't matter if they burned the bonds in
 the Lock Box because the cash flow would be the same.
 Without the bonds the Congress would take the money out
 of the general fund and raise taxes to pay.

 You see the common thread.  Taxes are raised for future
 taxpayers in order to pay for SS.

 Now why does it matter whether or not the FICA money is spent
 before it goes into the "lock box" or after the bonds are put
 in the lock box and the money goes into the general fund?

 Its a trick question.

Oh, so your solution to getting your children out of poverty
is to never leave them any money.   Your solution for a single
mother whose children reach 18 and she dies at 65 having not
received a single dime of SS is that all the money that was
stolen from her paycheck reverts to the treasury rather than
her children.  Nice fellow,  I am sure the single mothers
of this country might fell differently.

--
It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once. - David Hume
<http://www.webcom.com/thinker> Hypertext editor for creative people.
Kill File: Harry Hope, milton.brewster, kenfran, xona, enrique, Zepp,
           voltaixx, USSmontana, rosell19

news:dickens-2E1CD2.17382030122001@news.qwest.net...

    You left out one important step.  The government would not need to
sell bonds were it not for the Bush deficit.
    Whether the bonds were purchased by SS or by private investors,
taxpayers will eventually have to pay them off, thus replaying the loan
people (or SS) have made to the Bush administration.

    Where GWB spends it for a bunch of silly stuff, like a so-called
missile defense system, on which we have spend billions and still
doesn't work -- so which is, in reality, a pay-off to the defense
corporations for their contributions to the Republican party.

.... or private investors bonds -- i.e. the "Bush mortgage"  --
bring their bonds in for redemption when due.

    You are dumber than even I thought.  Do you think if all privately held
treasury bonds were burned the government would still have to redeem
them??  Why don't you try it and see.  Go down to YOUR lockbox
tomorrow morning and burn all YOUR bonds; then wait for the
government to pay them off..........  Does the phrase "until Hell freezes
over" come to mind??????

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-000000242jan02.colu...
=la-news-comment-opinions
January 2, 2002

Robert Scheer:
Enron Is a Cancer on the Presidency

Finally, a reporter had the temerity to question
Bush on Friday regarding the ignominious collapse
of Enron Corp. run by Kenneth L. Lay,
a Bush family intimate and top campaign contributor.

Bush expressed concern

"for the citizens of Houston who
worked for Enron who lost life savings"

and added:

"It's very important for us to fully understand the 'whys' of Enron."

Sure is, but did Bush never ask "Kenny Boy"--
his nickname for Enron's chairman--what was going on?

After all,

not only was Kenny Boy one of Bush's major contributors,
but it was Lay and Enron that Bush turned to for critical advice
on how to further exploit U.S. natural resources.

The media, which had hounded Bill Clinton on
his Whitewater connections, have allowed Bush
to maintain the fiction that his--and his father's--
administration had nothing to do with the debacle that is Enron.

Given the intense interest in the list of those
who slept over in the Clinton White House,
it's odd that no attention has been paid to
Kenny Boy's sleepover in the early years
of the senior Bush's White House.

Those early Bush years were crucial for Enron,
beginning with the passage of the 1992 Energy Policy Act,
which forced the established utility companies to carry
Enron's electricity sales on their wires.

At the same time,

Wendy Gramm,

who served under the elder Bush as
chair of the Commodity Futures Trading
Commission, allowed for an exemption in
the trading of energy derivatives, which,
as the Washington Post reported,
"later became Enron's most lucrative business."

Once that was accomplished, Gramm,
wife of Texas GOP Sen. Phil Gramm,
resigned from her government post to take
a position on the Enron board.

As one of the members of the board's
audit committee, she now is expected to
be a key figure in the lawsuits and federal
investigation revolving around Enron's collapse.

Recently, the chief executive of Arthur Andersen,
Enron's outside auditor, told a congressional
committee that the accounting firm had warned
the Enron audit committee of what he termed
"possible illegal acts within the company."

Wendy Gramm is also mentioned in a bank
lawsuit alleging insider trading as having sold
$276,912 in Enron stock in November 1998.

Her response is that she sold the stock to
avoid the appearance of a conflict of interest,
given that her husband was chairman of the
Senate Banking Committee.

Yet she was still very much on the Enron board
nd being rewarded with future stock options when
her husband last year pushed through legislation
that exempted key elements of Enron's energy
business from oversight by the federal government.

Phil Gramm had obtained $97,350 in political
contributions from Enron over the years,
so perhaps he was acting on his own instincts
and not his wife's urgings.

The exemption was passed over the
objection of the Clinton administration.

Wendy Gramm also directs the regulatory
studies program at George Mason University,
which has received $50,000 from Enron since 1996.

Her academic institute is highly influential in
arguing for deregulation, conveniently joining
her corporate and academic interests.

Unfortunately for true-believer deregulators,
the Enron collapse shreds their panacea.

Surely no one,

least of all Wendy Gramm,
who has said she was kept unaware
of the  company's chicanery in hiding debt
and conducting secret private deals to the
detriment of stockholders,

could argue today with a straight face
that Enron was in need of less government
oversight.

The fact is that there would be no Enron as we
know it were it not for Republican-engineered
changes in government regulation that permitted
Enron its meteoric growth.

It's true that the corporation had its allies among
the Democrats; campaign finance corruption
and influence peddling are generally a
cover-all-your-bets bipartisan activity.

But in this case, the amounts given to Democrats
were puny and late, and there's no doubt that Enron
rode to power primarily on the strength of
Lay's influence with the Bush family.

This fact is not mitigated by Enron now hiring
Clinton's former lawyer and various top
Democratic lobbying groups, except to
note that these hired guns have no shame.

The Bush family ties to Kenny Boy Lay
are just too intimate and lucrative to ignore.

There also are at least four Enron consultants
and executives who hold high positions within
the Bush White House, and some of them may
be drawn into the investigations that cannot be
avoided, despite the distractions of the war on terror.

As John Dean once famously said
of the Nixon administration,
there is a cancer growing on the presidency,
but in this case it's name is Enron,
and it won't go away by being ignored.

The Bush Justice Department is "streamlining" its investigation by
having a central command for the Enron case.  Does anyone doubt that
this is an attempt to rein in any maverick Justice Department
prosecutors who may actually look for signs of guilt?  This is the
beginning of the cover-up.  In some future year, we'll have Enron
hearings akin to the old Watergate hearings.  Now if we could just get
Sam Ervin back.