Re: [PEN-L] Lebanon's Labor Unions Call for a Sit-in to Protest Proposed Tax Hikes

[soula avramidis]

Why do matters in the near east seem so simple. what if the government is 
overthrown. you will get:
1. another civil war. 
2. this time it will be sunnis and shiis
3. an obscurantist regime in iran and a theocratic state in israel win from the 
spillage of arab blood.
4. this is not your usual democracy, the government does  not mediate class 
differences. it mediates sect differences. 
5. a civil war further infuses instability making american military presence 
more necessary to world capital.
6. true the government is inept and works for the banking sector, but the 
alternative is not a working class regime secular and democratic.
7. lebanon is a country where politics holds primacy and priority par 
exellence. just imagine that its internal debt is twice the GDP its currency is 
unshaken because its balance of payments is always positive, whilst its imports 
re ten times its exports. why that? because the decision to strike and get more 
instability is intertwined with the regional security arrangement in which the 
US plays a significant role.
8. the government is protecting the private banking interests. now if iran and 
syria can do that i.e. pay dividends and interests on huge loans to them, than 
the government will overthrow itself. but that is not likely. 
9. and i have not mentioned syria a 'socialist country' with one of the highest 
income inequality rates in the world. 
so let us not jump the gun, overthrow yes but replace with what?

- Original Message 
From: Yoshie Furuhashi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: PEN-L@SUS.CSUCHICO.EDU
Sent: Saturday, January 6, 2007 8:51:07 PM
Subject: Lebanon's Labor Unions Call for a Sit-in to Protest Proposed Tax Hikes


Perfect.  International leftists, here's a country where the overthrow
of the government is desirable _and_ feasible. -- Yoshie


Lebanon's labor unions call for a sit-in to protest proposed tax hikes

__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com

Re: [PEN-L] Spinning the Execution of Saddam Hussein

[soula avramidis]

whatever the US does will only be smart in appearance because it is the power 
at the helm of history. the corrosion to empire is deep in its underbelly and 
cannot be easily seen. Am I wrong in thinking that Iran is the operational ally 
of the US in Iraq. None of the Arab commoners are stooges, or naive enough to 
think that the pro-american arab regimes are not the ennemies of the masses and 
that the space of protest that they are allowed is limited and is meant to 
inflict damage on Iran. but for four long years, the mullahs have sided with 
the US. that is thousands of Arab lives. and that is why they are upset. let us 
read beyond the symbolism of street protest. two wrongs make two wrongs. and 
let us steer clear of bashing the arab especially those of the blood bath of 
the fertile crescent in syria palestine lebaonon and iraq. let us corner iran 
in supporting a broadly based people's warfare against imperialism for the arab 
regimes are the remote control police of
 imperialism and even the smallest arab kid i am sure knows this. but is it not 
funny that iran and israel shared similar sentiments in respect to saddam. 

iran is a perepheral neo mecamtilist formation with all trivial elements of 
natiolaism, its racism and fanfare. the battle for iraq is the battle of the 
international working class not the battle for iranian nukes. the pro saddam 
demos will i hope push it into action so that it changes its image and after 
that the US will look stupid in hanging saddam. every smart side has a stupid 
side. please let us not trivilaise complex histroical processes.

- Original Message 
From: Yoshie Furuhashi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: PEN-L@SUS.CSUCHICO.EDU
Sent: Saturday, January 6, 2007 12:11:54 PM
Subject: Spinning the Execution of Saddam Hussein


The execution of Saddam Hussein was the smartest move that Washington
has made, the greatest gift to its Arab clients -- especially Riyadh,
Cairo, and Amman -- in recent times, who badly needed something like
this to deflect their populaces' anger away from their support for Tel
Aviv and Washington fighting against the Palestinians and Lebanese,
even in the midst of Israel's Lebanon War last year.  A concerted
campaign to posthumously rehabilitate Saddam Hussein, shield
Washington from responsibility for his execution as well as for its
wars in the Islamic world, and use the execution in its ongoing
campaign against Iran is on.  Arab commoners who buy this spin deserve
to have their shares of oil money pocketed by the Arab power elite and
financial centers of the multinational empire. -- Yoshie

__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com

Re: [PEN-L] Lebanon's Labor Unions Call for a Sit-in to Protest Proposed Tax Hikes

[Yoshie Furuhashi]

On 1/7/07, soula avramidis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

2. this time it will be sunnis and shiis


This being Lebanon, the divide among the Christians is equally significant.


4. this is not your usual democracy, the government does  not mediate class
differences. it mediates sect differences.


The Lebanese government had a function of freezing the confessional
balance of power at the end of the civil war in Lebanon and keeping
(relative) social peace before the so-called Cedar Revolution.  Not
any more.
--
Yoshie

Re: [PEN-L] Spinning the Execution of Saddam Hussein

[Yoshie Furuhashi]

On 1/7/07, soula avramidis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

the battle for iraq is the battle of the
international working class not the battle for iranian nukes


Nukes are a secondary issue for the US-Israel vs. Iran, to be sure,
just as they were a secondary issue for the US-Israel vs. Iraq -- more
means than ends.  What Washington has in mind isn't a "battle for
Iraq," though.  It has in its sight -- correctly imho -- a battle for
the control of *the entire oil reserves in Iran, Iraq, and the Gulf
states* (as you know, the Gulf states have the biggest proven oil
reserves in the world, and the combined oil reserves of Iran and Iraq
rival those of the Gulf states).  What we need to have is a regional
vision, not a country vision.
--
Yoshie

Re: [PEN-L] Spinning the Execution of Saddam Hussein

[soula avramidis]

i agree but i also add that we need a lot more than regional. more now than 
before especially as the retreat in humanist philosophy and the ideology of 
socilism allow the fundementalist to fill a void. the needs could be 
partitioned at all levels international regional and national... but iraq as 
you may know is a sore spot and in the order of priorities iraq comes before 
the mullah regime. 

- Original Message 
From: Yoshie Furuhashi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: PEN-L@SUS.CSUCHICO.EDU
Sent: Sunday, January 7, 2007 2:05:03 PM
Subject: Re: Spinning the Execution of Saddam Hussein


On 1/7/07, soula avramidis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> the battle for iraq is the battle of the
> international working class not the battle for iranian nukes

Nukes are a secondary issue for the US-Israel vs. Iran, to be sure,
just as they were a secondary issue for the US-Israel vs. Iraq -- more
means than ends.  What Washington has in mind isn't a "battle for
Iraq," though.  It has in its sight -- correctly imho -- a battle for
the control of *the entire oil reserves in Iran, Iraq, and the Gulf
states* (as you know, the Gulf states have the biggest proven oil
reserves in the world, and the combined oil reserves of Iran and Iraq
rival those of the Gulf states).  What we need to have is a regional
vision, not a country vision.
--
Yoshie




__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com

Re: [PEN-L] Lebanon's Labor Unions Call for a Sit-in to Protest Proposed Tax Hikes

[soula avramidis]

yes it is more sectarian than not on all sides. sectarainism goes by name


- Original Message 
From: Yoshie Furuhashi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: PEN-L@SUS.CSUCHICO.EDU
Sent: Sunday, January 7, 2007 1:24:18 PM
Subject: Re: Lebanon's Labor Unions Call for a Sit-in to Protest Proposed Tax 
Hikes


On 1/7/07, soula avramidis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 2. this time it will be sunnis and shiis

This being Lebanon, the divide among the Christians is equally significant.

> 4. this is not your usual democracy, the government does  not mediate class
> differences. it mediates sect differences.

The Lebanese government had a function of freezing the confessional
balance of power at the end of the civil war in Lebanon and keeping
(relative) social peace before the so-called Cedar Revolution.  Not
any more.
--
Yoshie




__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com

[PEN-L] An "Islamic Civil War"

[Yoshie Furuhashi]

Part of the "Islamic civil war" that M. Shahid Alam explains is
Washington and Tel Aviv's support for Mahmoud Abbas and Fatah in their
civil war against Hamas.  See, Washington and Tel Aviv have *a
coherent regional vision,* centered on the control of the Persian Gulf
(the Gulf states have the largest proven oil reserves in the world,
and the combined oil reserves of Iran and Iraq rival those of the Gulf
states) and the Hormuz Straits and other chokepoints of oil supply
routes.  Do the Arab and Iranian peoples and international leftists
have an alternative vision for remaking the Middle East (for remade it
will be, in the next couple of decades -- there is no turning back to
the status quo ante)?  Or are they stuck with country-by-country
analysis only? -- Yoshie


An "Islamic Civil War"
by M. Shahid Alam

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Iraq and Afghanistan were chosen as the first targets -- the easy
points of entry into the war.  They had been ravaged by years of war,
weakened by internal divisions, and, in the case of Iraq, hollowed out
by sanctions.  It was believed that occupation would be easy.  With
friendly regimes in power, the US could start working on regime change
in Iran and Syria.

Occupation was indeed a cake walk.  But little else has been easy.
The Sunni-led insurgency that began within weeks of the fall of
Baghdad has succeeded in derailing US efforts to stabilize Iraq.
Indeed, as Iraq has moved closer to a civil war over the past few
months, pressures within the US are mounting for an American pull out.
In Afghanistan too, after a period of initial stability, a Taliban
resurgence -- operating from liberated areas in neighboring Pakistan
-- now threatens NATO forces through much of eastern and southern
Afghanistan.

In the meanwhile, the US-led war against the region has changed the
map of the Middle East, but in unsettling ways.  Not only has Iran
gained deep influence over Iraq and Afghanistan, it can leverage this
influence to raise steeply the cost of the US occupation in both
countries.  In the meanwhile, with help from Russia and China, Iran
has built a military capability that can threaten US clients on the
Arabian peninsula, shut off the Hormuz Straits to shipping, and launch
missiles that can reach Israel.  In addition, last summer, Hizbullah
demonstrated a new form of guerilla war -- with low-tech rockets,
anti-tank weapons, and sophisticated intelligence gathering -- that
neutralized a determined Israeli offensive.

The Iraq Study Group has described the situation in Iraq "grave and
deteriorating" and recommended a quick drawdown of US forces.  It is
unlikely that the President will take that advice.  Instead, the US,
Israel, and Britain have for some time been working on an alternative
plan when it appeared that their initial plans were being derailed.
The US, Israel and Britain are now working to incite a civil war
between Sunnis and Shias across the Middle East.  As Jonathan Cook
puts it, taking a leaf from Israeli experience in the West Bank and
Gaza, they expect to create "controlled chaos" in the entire Islamic
world.

The battle lines in this civil war have been drawn.  The principal
American-Israeli surrogates in this "Islamic civil war" showed their
colors last July when Israel launched devastating air attacks against
Lebanese civilian targets in response to the capture of two Israeli
soldiers by Hizbullah.  Almost instantly, Cairo, Riyadh, and Amman
condemned the Hizbullah action.  On the opposite side there is the
crescent of resurgent Shia power stretching from Lebanon, through
Syria and Iraq, into Iran.

During his recent meetings with Israeli leaders and Sunni Arab
potentates, according to an AP headline, British prime minister Tony
Blair was working to lay the groundwork for an "alliance against
extremism."  His plan is to erect an "arc of moderation" against the
Shia Crescent, with Iran as the principal "strategic threat" to
Western imperial ambitions.

Iraq is already the theater of this "Islamic civil war."  Last July,
one of the aims of the Israeli destruction of Lebanon's civilian
infrastructure was to spread this sectarian war to Lebanon.  That
gambit failed miserably.  Now Saudi Arabia is threatening to expand
its support for Sunni insurgents in Iraq and destabilize Iran by
raising its oil production.  More ominously, some of its Wahhabi
clerical allies are trying to rouse both Arab fears of Persian
domination and Sunni concerns about the ascendancy of the "heretical"
Shias.

The determining factor in this war will be the Sunni populations under
the thumbs of the Arab potentates.  It is doubtful if the anti-Persian
and anti-Shia rhetoric of the Arab potentates will succeed in swinging
them around to support governments they have long hated, especially
now as their alliance with Israel becomes overt.  There is also the
risk that, in fuelling the Sunni insurgency in Iraq, the Saudis will
strengthen 

[PEN-L] No blood for oil

[Louis Proyect]

Future of Iraq: The spoils of war
How the West will make a killing on Iraqi oil riches
By Danny Fortson, Andrew Murray-Watson and Tim Webb
Published: 07 January 2007

Iraq's massive oil reserves, the third-largest in the world, are
about to be thrown open for large-scale exploitation by Western oil
companies under a controversial law which is expected to come before
the Iraqi parliament within days.

The US government has been involved in drawing up the law, a draft of
which has been seen by The Independent on Sunday. It would give big
oil companies such as BP, Shell and Exxon 30-year contracts to
extract Iraqi crude and allow the first large-scale operation of
foreign oil interests in the country since the industry was
nationalised in 1972.

full: http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/article2132569.ece

---

Blood and oil: How the West will profit from Iraq's most precious commodity
The 'IoS' today reveals a draft for a new law that would give Western
oil companies a massive share in the third largest reserves in the
world. To the victors, the oil? That is how some experts view this
unprecedented arrangement with a major Middle East oil producer that
guarantees investors huge profits for the next 30 years
Published: 07 January 2007

So was this what the Iraq war was fought for, after all? As the
number of US soldiers killed since the invasion rises past the 3,000
mark, and President George Bush gambles on sending in up to 30,000
more troops, The Independent on Sunday has learnt that the Iraqi
government is about to push through a law giving Western oil
companies the right to exploit the country's massive oil reserves.

And Iraq's oil reserves, the third largest in the world, with an
estimated 115 billion barrels waiting to be extracted, are a prize
worth having. As Vice-President Dick Cheney noted in 1999, when he
was still running Halliburton, an oil services company, the Middle
East is the key to preventing the world running out of oil.

full: http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/article2132574.ece

[PEN-L] Spartacist League critique of Burkett/Hart-Landsberg on China

[Louis Proyect]

http://tinyurl.com/vq4my

[PEN-L] Guns versus butter in Chile

[Louis Proyect]

NY Times, January 7, 2007
Chile Copper Windfall Forces Hard Choices on Spending
By LARRY ROHTER

SANTIAGO, Chile — President Michelle Bachelet is 
learning the hard way that it really is possible 
to have too much of a good thing. Record prices 
for copper, Chile’s main export, have given her 
government a multibillion-dollar windfall but 
have also produced unexpected economic side 
effects and set off a sharp political debate about how to use the money.


Within Ms. Bachelet’s center-left coalition — 
mainly her Socialist Party and the Christian 
Democratic Party — pressure has been growing to 
apply the bonanza to the “equality agenda” she 
has promised. But the president and her cabinet 
have been hesitant to do anything that may 
undermine Chile’s reputation for cautious fiscal management.


Chile must apply the unanticipated revenue only 
“in an ethically and economically sound manner,” 
Paulina Veloso, Ms. Bachelet’s chief of staff, 
said in an interview. “You can’t spend a 
fortuitous bonanza the way you can permanent income.”


During the campaign that preceded her election as 
president last January, Ms. Bachelet, a former 
minister of health and of defense, pledged that 
her government would be even more committed to 
social investment than those of her predecessors. 
Voters took her at her word, and when signs of 
change had not appeared by midyear, hundreds of 
thousands of students took to the streets to 
demand an immediate overhaul of the education system.


“Chileans are patient, but one should never abuse 
that patience,” said Ricardo Ffrench-Davis, a 
prominent economist who wrote “Economic Reforms 
in Chile: From Dictatorship to Democracy.” “Ours 
is a country of great inequalities, and the 
perception of Chileans is that we need more social justice,” he said.


Driven largely by China’s seemingly insatiable 
demand for metals of all kinds, the price of 
copper quadrupled from 2003 through 2006, 
reaching record levels at midyear before falling 
to just under $3 a pound at year’s end. That 
increase helped Chile build its foreign reserves 
and buttress its budget surplus, which in turn 
have been factors in the rise in the value of the peso against the dollar.


But that has made Chile’s exports relatively more 
expensive and less competitive, generating 
complaints from producers of wine, fruit and 
other items. Concerns that inflation could be 
fueled have also emerged, with suggestions — 
unpopular with consumers and businesspeople alike 
— that interest rates be raised to prevent an inflationary surge.


To reduce pressure on the peso, some of the 
windfall has been deposited in banks abroad, in 
foreign currencies. Some has been designated for 
an “economic and social stabilization fund” that 
“you draw on when you need it,” said Andrés Velasco, the minister of finance.


Part of the windfall is to help reform the 
privatized pension system. But Mr. Velasco argues 
that Chile should maintain discipline and not 
overspend or assume that the high copper price is permanent.


Unlike other Latin American countries, Chile 
“spends practically nothing on interest payments, 
because we have been able to reduce public debt” 
and instead use the savings for social programs, 
Mr. Velasco. “This is very important and speaks 
of the payoff for fiscal responsibility.”


But that is not what many members of Congress 
want to hear. The Christian Democratic Party, for 
example, organized a commission that concluded 
that part of the price increase was in fact 
permanent and recommended more state investment 
in projects such as rural water supply, sports 
facilities in poor areas and programs for the elderly.


“This can be done,” said Mr. Ffrench-Davis, who 
was a member of the commission. “The Chilean 
economy continues functioning as if the price of 
copper were still 99 cents a pound. We need a 
stimulus. We don’t need to go into debt. We have 
the dollars; we’re awash in dollars.”


The situation has been further complicated by a 
law that guarantees the armed forces 10 percent 
of government revenues from copper. The statute 
has been on the books for decades, but it was 
made more generous during the dictatorship of 
Gen. Augusto Pinochet and has not been amended 
since democracy was restored in 1990.


Since the start of the decade, the Chilean 
military has gone on a buying spree, spending 
$2.8 billion for weapons, ostensibly to modernize 
old equipment. The purchases, which have led to 
expressions of alarm in neighboring Peru and 
Bolivia, include 10 Lockheed Martin F-16 fighter 
planes acquired from the United States, eight 
frigates, two submarines and, most recently, 118 
Leopard IIA4 tanks from Germany.


Two years ago, a study done by three 
international economic research bodies concluded 
that Chile spent more per capita on the military 
than any other country in Latin America: $90.88 
per inhabitant. According to recent estimates 
here, the copper law will result in the armed 

Re: [PEN-L] Spinning the Execution of Saddam Hussein

[Yoshie Furuhashi]

On 1/7/07, soula avramidis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

i agree but i also add that we need a lot more than regional. more now than
before especially as the retreat in humanist philosophy and the ideology of
socilism allow the fundementalist to fill a void. the needs could be
partitioned at all levels international regional and national... but iraq as
you may know is a sore spot and in the order of priorities iraq comes before
the mullah regime.


As long as people think that Iraq comes before Iran or vice versa,
Washington will have its way.

The earlier attempt at regional integration in the Middle East, on the
basis of a mix of state socialism and pan-Arabism, was dashed at the
shore of nationalism -- Egypt, Iraq, Libya, and Syria, contenders for
pan-Arabist regional hegemony, could not get along -- conflicts with
non-Arab Muslims like Iranians, Kurds, and Turks.  Socialists
sometimes supported pan-Arab nationalists but were, more often than
not, repressed by them.  The Six Day War (1967), in which Israel
defeated Egypt, Iraq, and Syria as well as Jordan, and the Camp David
Accords (1978), signed by Anwar Sadat and Menachem Begin, killed
pan-Arabism.  Just as pan-Arabism declined in the Middle East and
economic troubles in the socialist bloc, which eventually led to its
dissolution, began, Islamism, a new ideology for regional integration,
arose: the Iranian Revolution (1978-1979), Hizballah (founded in
response to the 1982 Israeli invasion of Lebanon), and Hamas (founded
in 1987).  That world-historical transition, as well as the fact that
state socialism had little to do with humanism, is what we have to
take into account, whether we like it or not.

The problem of both pan-Arabism and Islamism, as well as of socialism
in the Middle East, is that they get distracted by the biggest
stinking red herring that the empire has ever come up with: Israel.
But the real prize is oil reserves in the Gulf states allied with Tel
Aviv and Washington, and the Arabs and Iranians should never forget
about that even while they fight the Israeli occupation.  If they keep
that in mind, they can potentially overcome their multiple
sectarianisms.
--
Yoshie

[PEN-L] Algorithms R' Us: Chasing the holy grail - the algorithmic arms race

[Leigh Meyers]

...and in case  you've forgotten about Intel's 'floating point' fiasco 
in days of yore...


The trouble with rounding floating point numbers (12 August 2006)
http://www.regdeveloper.co.uk/2006/08/12/floating_point_approximation/

I want no part of any discussion that arises from these articles... It 
is not my bailwick.



The Register » Software » Applications »
Original URL: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/01/07/algorithmic_arms_race/

Chasing the holy grail: the algorithmic arms race
By Bob McDowall, IE4C
Published Sunday 7th January 2007 07:02 GMT

Investment banks and major brokerage firms may or may not be leading the 
innovation in algorithms for securities trading purposes, but they take 
the lead in publicising their innovations in this field.


With trashy names reminiscent of graphic comics such as Dagger, 
Nighthawk, Cobra, Razor and so on, they are rolling these innovations 
out to their client base. Deployment of successful algorithms in 
electronic trading is perceived as an important service to generate deal 
flow from their trading clients.



Equally, it is yet another component of prime brokerage services, 
through which major investment banks and brokerage firms generate deal 
flow from their hedge fund clients. It should be remembered that 
Exchanges, ECNs and Multi-lateral Trading Facilities (MTFs) provide 
algorithmic trading capabilities integrated within their order 
management systems.


These institutions make substantial investment in the quantitative and 
mathematical skills to create the algorithms as well as the programming 
skills to provide commercial applications and integrate them into order 
management and execution systems. More importantly, these firms are 
responsible for the gradual adoption of algorithmic trading technology 
by the buy-side firms. With the exception of some highly specialised 
funds with the research and development resources and capabilities, it 
is highly unlikely that the buy-side would have adopted algorithmic 
trading technology.


A number of investment banks and brokerage houses claim to be leaders in 
the field of algorithmic trading capabilities. The criteria for claiming 
success for an algorithm are somewhat self-selecting. They include 
investment and trading performance, ease of use, accessibility, breadth 
of use across instruments and asset classes.


How durable are the algorithmic models? Are they ephemeral? Does wide 
scale adoption devalue their value? Do the innovators keep the “best 
inventions” to themselves, deploying them strictly on their proprietary 
desks and/or for favoured clients?


Conscious and concerted development of algorithmic trading models is 
about five years old, though the activity has been undertaken since the 
early 1990's but without the technology to give full rein to their 
commercial scope and application. As may be expected, comparative 
measurement of the durable success of algorithmic trading models in 
different market and trading environments is elusive. If it has been 
conducted it has been conducted in private. Some organisations claim 
success of their models over a period of time. It may be logically 
conjectured that “unsuccessful” algorithmic models are quietly dropped 
while successful models and maintained and, where appropriate, enhanced. 
Rather like Official Secrets, it is unlikely that any scientific 
research on the matter will be published at least until it is merely a 
matter of historical record.


What can be said is that unsuccessful models have not been so 
unsuccessful that they have had to be disclosed as publicly attributable 
to substantial trading losses.


Does wide scale adoption devalue their value? Do the innovators keep the 
"best inventions" to themselves, deploying them strictly on their 
proprietary desks and/or for favoured clients?


The “Algorithmic Arms Race” has now reached a stage where there are two 
distinct business models that drive the development of algorithmic 
trading capabilities. The first is driven by the quest for cost 
reduction, operational and trading efficiencies. These are themselves 
influenced by the competition between exchanges, ECNs and MTFs, 
investment banks and brokerage organisations and as they enhance the 
efficiencies and reduce the cost of access to their electronic trading 
services. This is the publicised side of the Algorithmic Arms Race. 
Institutions will publicise the service element of this model, though 
publicising the "trading" or "investment" performance will remain elusive.


The second is "the original model": development of complex and 
sophisticated trading technology which encompasses a greater range of 
events and criteria on which to base trading strategies; not only short 
term but taking a longer term perspective on issues which influence 
markets and economies. The former is likely to encompass the majority of 
financial institutions. The latter will be confined to specialist funds 
and elements of the propr

Re: [PEN-L] Spartacist League critique of Burkett/Hart-Landsberg on China

[Walt Byars]

I think this article was pretty bad. It made no even marginally good
argument that capitalism hadn't been restored in China.

"According to conventional bourgeois public opinion, capitalism has
already been restored in China or is rapidly and irreversibly being
restored. However, as was the case in the former Soviet Union, the
decisive arena in which a capitalist counterrevolution would have to
triumph is at the political level, in the conquest of state power, not
simply through a quantitative extension of the private sector, whether
domestic or foreign."

Nonsense. Whether capitalism has been restored is purely a matter of
whether capitalist relations of production (which can exist in the private
or public sector); sale and purchase of labor power, competition between
capitals, etc..., exist. I think the evidence on China clearly shows that
they do. Chattopadhyay's "The Marxian Concept of Capital and the Soviet
Experience," while focused on the USSR, offers a good framework for
identifying the mode of production in nominally socialist nations or in
the "public sector." It seems to me that capitalist relations of
production clearly predominate in China.

> http://tinyurl.com/vq4my
>

[PEN-L] John Mage on Maoists and Gays in Nepal

[Yoshie Furuhashi]

-- Forwarded message --
From: John Mage <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Jan 7, 2007 1:02 PM
Subject: [lbo-talk] Re: Maoist cleanup drive hits Nepal gays
To: lbo-talk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


Brian wrote:
>> Blue Diamond Society, Nepal's only NGO fighting for gay rights
> met a Maoist leader, Dev Gurung, to try explain the rights of gays,
> lesbians and transgenders to him. The rebel leader reportedly said
> that homosexuality was a byproduct of capitalism. "Under Soviet rule
> and when  China was still very much a communist state, there were no
>  homosexuals in the Soviet Union or China," Gurung reportedly said.
> "Now they are moving towards capitalism, homosexuals may have arisen
>  there as well. So homosexuality is a product of capitalism. " Under
>  socialism this kind of problem doesn't exist."
>
> Some thinking just never dies does it?  Next thing you know "Subways
>  Are For Sleeping" will be revived on Broadway.

Brian, be sceptical of this story. And be sceptical of NGOs until you
know where their money comes from.

It is just Ulhas vomiting up - as always when it comes to Nepal & India -
anti-communist propaganda. The source, MJAkbar's sheet, is unreliable,
and the story itself in a totally yellow journalist style does not quote
the Maoists but hearsay accounts from unnamed third persons presented
inside quotation marks, to fool the careless reader.

In fact, for at least four years the Maoists have had openly homosexual
cadre and boasted of it:
---
Party woman
Ghatna Ra Bichar, 18 June, 2003
...
Five months into the ceasefire, Hisila Yami, Central Working Committee
member and chief of the Women Department of the Maoist party, recently
attended a meeting in Kathmandu. It was her first public appearance in
eight years after she went underground.
...

Yami said nearly 33 percent of the Maoist army were female, and that two
had risen up the ranks to become brigade commanders. "In some cases men
have abandoned weapons and run from encounters, but women have never
done so. We won all the battles that involved a large number of women
guerillas," said Yami.

The party not only arranges weddings between members but has also set up
"childcare centres" around Rukum, Rolpa and other Maoist hotbeds.
Literacy among Maoist women is highly encouraged. Yami also confirmed
the recruitment of homosexuals. In a short conversation regarding
monarchy, Yami said the crown could never be a symbol of Nepal's unity.
Yami wore military green shirt and pants. There was a conspicuous lack
of personal bodyguards.



john mage


--
Yoshie

Re: [PEN-L] Algorithms R' Us: Chasing the holy grail - the algorithmic arms race

[raghu]

On 1/7/07, Leigh Meyers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:



The trouble with rounding floating point numbers (12 August 2006)
http://www.regdeveloper.co.uk/2006/08/12/floating_point_approximation/

I want no part of any discussion that arises from these articles... It
is not my bailwick.




Thanks Leigh for a very interesting article. There is also a link to a
NYTimes article about Google screening job applicants using algorithms.
maybe they can use IQ scores. I am pretty certain IQ scores will correlate
highly with the type of candidate they are looking for..

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/03/technology/03google.html

---snip
Unfortunately, most of the academic research suggests that the factors
Google has put the most weight on — grades and interviews — are not an
especially reliable way of hiring good people.
...

So Google set out to find out if there were any bits of life experience or
personality it could use to spot future stars.

Last summer, Google asked every employee who had been working at the company
for at least five months to fill out a 300-question survey.

Some questions were factual: What programming languages are you familiar
with? What Internet mailing lists do you subscribe to?

Some looked for behavior: Is your work space messy or neat?

And some looked at personality: Are you an extrovert or an introvert?

And some fell into no traditional category in the human resources world:
What magazines do you subscribe to? What pets do you have?

"We wanted to cast a very wide net," Mr. Bock said. "It is not unusual to
walk the halls here and bump into dogs. Maybe people who own dogs have some
personality trait that is useful."

[PEN-L] The Democrats are an Opposition?

[ken hanly]

SO the Democrats seem to saying in effect TINA to
supporting Bush and his surge and paying the bills.
Didn't they ever hear of the slogan: Support the
troops! Bring them home. If they refued to ratify the
money required to keep them in Iraq wouldn't that
force Bush to bring them home?

Cheers, Ken Hanly


Democrats Step Up Criticism of Iraq Plan


By BRIAN KNOWLTON
Published: January 7, 2007
WASHINGTON, Jan. 6 — As the contours emerge of
President Bush’s expected plan to increase troop
levels in Iraq, Congressional Democrats, who now hold
the power to restrain military spending for the war,
sharpened their opposition today — and revealed their
internal divisions.
 Although the Democrats still appear unlikely to
attempt to block a troop increase by withholding
money, Representative Nancy Pelosi of California, the
new House speaker, said today that any additional
spending requests for Iraq would face “the harshest
scrutiny.”

The president’s new strategy, American officials have
said, will call for a rapid influx of up to 20,000
combat troops to Baghdad and a jobs program costing as
much as $1 billion intended to employ Iraqis who now
face widespread unemployment. Mr. Bush is expected to
describe his plan in a prime-time speech on Wednesday
or Thursday.

The Democrats plan to open extensive hearings on the
Iraq war in coming weeks.

Representative Steny H. Hoyer of Maryland, the House
majority leader, said on “Fox News Sunday” that while
Democrats probably would not try to block any new plan
to increase troop levels, “I think it’s too early to
say that” with certainty.

The comments by Ms. Pelosi and Mr. Hoyer appeared to
mark some sharpening of the Democrats’ language.

While Ms. Pelosi and the Senate majority leader,
Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, said in a letter to
President Bush last week that a troop increase would
endanger more Americans for little strategic gain,
Democrats also said they would not seek to stop such
an increase, for fear of seeming unsupportive of the
troops.

Congressional Democrats, nonetheless, were hardly
unified on their political tactics.

Senator Joseph R. Biden Jr. of Delaware, chairman of
the Foreign Relations Committee, said that a troop
surge would be a “tragic mistake.” But Mr. Biden also
said on “Meet the Press” on NBC that Congressional
Democrats would probably be violating the
constitutional separation of powers if they tried to
block the president’s decision, since Congress
authorized the use of force in Iraq.

"It’s unconstitutional to say, ‘You can go, but we’re
going to micromanage,’ ” Mr. Biden said. "As a
practical matter, there is no way to say this is going
to be stopped."

Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the new Senate
minority leader, said he expected to support the
president and he, too, doubted that the new plan would
be blocked.

“I don’t think the Congress will have the ability to
simply micromanage tactics in the war, nor should it,”
he said on Fox. “At the end of the day, I don’t think
Congress will cut off the money for the troops.”

Democratic lawmakers took pains to say that they would
not pull support from American troops already in Iraq.

“I think the Congress will provide everything that the
troops need,” said Representative David R. Obey of
Wisconsin, the new chairman of the Appropriations
Committee.

But, using a phrase heard more than once Sunday, he
said “This Week” on ABC that “there are certainly
going to be no blank checks to President Bush.”

Ms. Pelosi repeatedly referred to the expected plan to
increase troop levels as “an escalation,” a word
seemingly chosen to evoke the Vietnam War, and said
that it would go against both the advice of American
generals and the strong public mood in the United
States.

“We have to see what the president has to say,” she
said on “Face the Nation” on CBS, but then she added,
“It’s not an open-ended commitment anymore.”

Re: [PEN-L] The Democrats are an Opposition?

[Mark Lause]

Ken Hanly wrote, "SO the Democrats seem to saying in effect TINA to
supporting Bush and his surge and paying the bills. Didn't they ever hear of
the slogan: Support the troops! Bring them home."

Heard it, hated it, attacked it.

ML

[PEN-L] Journalist on Somalia: "I beg to differ. The good news came in June."

[Leigh Meyers]

This was not done by “suppressing, with draconian punishments, what 
remained of personal freedoms” — unless you count banning guns and the 
narcotic qat, which rendered half Somalia’s menfolk senseless. The 
courts were less repressive than our Saudi Arabian friends. They 
publicly executed two murderers (a fraction of the 24 executions in 
Texas last year), and discouraged Western dancing, music and films, but 
at least people could walk the streets without being robbed or killed. 
That trumps most other considerations.


Ask any Iraqi.
<...>

The Times January 08, 2007

The Islamists were the one hope for Somalia
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,1072-2535977,00.html

Martin Fletcher

My colleague Rosemary Righter wrote last week that the defeat of 
Somalia’s Islamic courts by Ethiopian forces was the “first piece of 
potentially good news in two devastating decades”.


As one of the few journalists who has visited Mogadishu recently, I beg 
to differ. The good news came in June. That is when the courts routed 
the warlords who had turned Somalia into the world’s most anarchic state 
during a 15-year civil war that left a million dead.


I am no apologist for the courts. Their leadership included extremists 
with dangerous intentions and connections. But for six months they 
achieved the near-impossible feat of restoring order to a country that 
appeared ungovernable.


This was not done by “suppressing, with draconian punishments, what 
remained of personal freedoms” — unless you count banning guns and the 
narcotic qat, which rendered half Somalia’s menfolk senseless. The 
courts were less repressive than our Saudi Arabian friends. They 
publicly executed two murderers (a fraction of the 24 executions in 
Texas last year), and discouraged Western dancing, music and films, but 
at least people could walk the streets without being robbed or killed. 
That trumps most other considerations. Ask any Iraqi.


The Islamists have now been replaced — with Washington’s connivance — by 
a weak, fragile Government that was created long before the courts won 
power, that includes the very warlords they defeated and relies for 
survival on Somalia’s worst enemy.


For the sake of the long-suffering Somali people I hope it can impose 
its authority. But Washington has taken a big gamble, and nobody should 
be surprised if the warlords are soon plundering Somalia again or the 
Islamists are waging guerrilla war.


The Government’s appeal for Somalis to hand in their vast arsenal of 
guns has flopped. The courts’ militiamen have mostly melted back into 
the population, much as Saddam’s army did after the US invasion of Iraq. 
Mogadishu’s powerful Hawiye clan regards with deep suspicion a 
Government led by a Darod, President Abdullahi Yusuf. An African Union 
peacekeeping force is far off and Somalis will not tolerate the presence 
of troops from (“Christian”) Ethiopia for long.


Washington backed military intervention by Ethiopia’s unsavoury regime 
because it regarded the courts as a new Taleban, and accused them of 
harbouring al-Qaeda terrorists. It would surely have done better to try 
engaging the courts.


The US has a record of confronting Islamic movements. It backed Israel’s 
disastrous war against Hezbollah last summer. It never accepted the 
Palestinians’ election of a Hamas Government. It cold-shouldered Iran 
even when the relatively moderate Mohammed Khatami was President. In 
each case it succeeded only in boosting the extremists.


--30--

Re: [PEN-L] Spinning the Execution of Saddam Hussein

[soula avramidis]

it is not who's on first and who's on second. Iraq is a battlefield to which 
Iran is contributing by aiding and abetting the US invasion. I do not think you 
see the severity of the Iranian mistake here. let us not mix by reification the 
world of ideas to the developemnt on the grounds. one thing at a time. the 
Ummah never dies, it just goes to sleep for a while.


- Original Message 
From: Yoshie Furuhashi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: PEN-L@SUS.CSUCHICO.EDU
Sent: Sunday, January 7, 2007 5:12:21 PM
Subject: Re: Spinning the Execution of Saddam Hussein


On 1/7/07, soula avramidis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> i agree but i also add that we need a lot more than regional. more now than
> before especially as the retreat in humanist philosophy and the ideology of
> socilism allow the fundementalist to fill a void. the needs could be
> partitioned at all levels international regional and national... but iraq as
> you may know is a sore spot and in the order of priorities iraq comes before
> the mullah regime.

As long as people think that Iraq comes before Iran or vice versa,
Washington will have its way.

__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com

[PEN-L] Polish archbishop quits over communist links

[soula avramidis]

Do they quit over child abuse or is it just communism which is worst?
Polish archbishop quits over communist links
By Jan Cienski in Warsaw 
Published: January 7 2007 17:37 | Last updated: January 7 2007 18:04
Less than two days after becoming archbishop of ­Warsaw, Stanislaw Wielgus on 
Sunday resigned at the request of the Vatican ­following revelations that he 
had agreed in the 1970s to co-operate with Poland’s communist-era secret police.
The resignation came during a ceremonial mass that had been planned to welcome 
the archbishop.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/cea4535a-9e72-11db-ac03-779e2340.html

__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com

Re: [PEN-L] Polish archbishop quits over communist links

[Eugene Coyle]

He quit over supplying information to the secret police.  US bishops  
cooperate routinely with police agencies and no one objects.



On Jan 7, 2007, at 10:26 PM, soula avramidis wrote:


Do they quit over child abuse or is it just communism which is worst?

Polish archbishop quits over communist links

By Jan Cienski in Warsaw

Published: January 7 2007 17:37 | Last updated: January 7 2007 18:04

Less than two days after becoming archbishop of Warsaw, Stanislaw  
Wielgus on Sunday resigned at the request of the Vatican following  
revelations that he had agreed in the 1970s to co-operate with  
Poland’s communist-era secret police.


The resignation came during a ceremonial mass that had been planned  
to welcome the archbishop.



http://www.ft.com/cms/s/cea4535a-9e72-11db-ac03-779e2340.html

__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

Re: [PEN-L] Spinning the Execution of Saddam Hussein

[Yoshie Furuhashi]

On 1/8/07, soula avramidis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

it is not who's on first and who's on second. Iraq is a battlefield to which
Iran is contributing by aiding and abetting the US invasion. I do not think
you see the severity of the Iranian mistake here. let us not mix by
reification the world of ideas to the developemnt on the grounds. one thing
at a time. the Ummah never dies, it just goes to sleep for a while.


The reformist faction in charge of the elected part of the Iranian
government certainly sought to cooperate with Washington on the
invasion of Afghanistan and the invasion of Iraq.  (That, aside from
economic neoliberalism at home, is the reason I don't favor that
faction in Iran.)  Washington could have very well chosen to work with
Tehran on terms that the Iranian reformists offered, but it
essentially rebuffed that overture (as recently summed up by the
censored article by Flynt Leverett and Hillary Mann -- see below), for
it has its eyes on the prize: regime change in Iran -- one of the few
countries in the Middle East whose governments are not in America's
pocket -- itself.

Even now, the reformist and Rafsanjani factions -- resurgent after the
recent Assembly of Experts and municipal elections -- in Iran would
rather back off from nuclear development, drop support for Hizballah,
Hamas, etc., and make peace with Washington, if only Washington let
them.  Those are the currents to which SCIRI, the most sectarian and
pro-American Shi'i faction in Iraq, is linked.

If Tehran could drop SCIRI, whose militia Washington has recognized as
"legal" unlike Sadr's Mahdi Army, and find Sunni allies in Iraq, that
would be very interesting, but that probably won't come to pass, as
Tehran's policy (the sum of different preferences of all significant
factions of Iran's power elite) is to hedge its bets by supporting all
Shi'i factions plus friendly Kurds in Iraq (that way, friends will be
in power whichever faction of Shi'is comes on top).  Tehran's lack of
Sunni allies in Iraq can very well blow back against Iran, for sure.

On the other hand, though, many factions of Sunni fighters, too, are
quite sectarian, some of which are quite clearly busier killing Shi'i
civilians than US and other troops.

That's essentially the problem of multiple sectarianisms that Iraqis
on all sides have to overcome, to expel the occupier and defeat Qaeda
types at the same time.


December 22, 2006
Op-Ed Contributors
Redacted Version of Original Op-Ed
By FLYNT LEVERETT and HILLARY MANN

The Iraq Study Group has added its voice to a burgeoning chorus of
commentators, politicians, and former officials calling for a limited,
tactical dialogue with Iran regarding Iraq. The Bush administration
has indicated a conditional willingness to pursue a similarly
compartmented dialogue with Tehran over Iran's nuclear activities.

Unfortunately, advocates of limited engagement — either for short-term
gains on specific issues or to "test" Iran regarding broader
rapprochement — do not seem to understand the 20-year history of
United States-Iranian cooperation on discrete issues or appreciate the
impact of that history on Iran's strategic outlook. In the current
regional context, issue-specific engagement with Iran is bound to
fail. The only diplomatic approach that might succeed is a
comprehensive one aimed at a "grand bargain" between the United States
and the Islamic Republic.

Since the 1980s, cooperation with Iran on specific issues has been
tried by successive administrations, but United States policymakers
have consistently allowed domestic politics or other foreign policy
interests to torpedo such cooperation and any chance for a broader
opening. The Reagan administration's engagement with Iran to secure
the release of American hostages in Lebanon came to grief in the
Iran-contra scandal. The first Bush administration resumed contacts
with Tehran to secure release of the last American hostages in
Lebanon, but postponed pursuit of broader rapprochement until after
the 1992 presidential election.

In 1994, the Clinton administration acquiesced to the shipment of
Iranian arms to Bosnian Muslims, but the leak of this activity in 1996
and criticism from presumptive Republican presidential nominee Robert
Dole shut down possibilities for further United States-Iranian
cooperation for several years.

These episodes reinforced already considerable suspicion among Iranian
leaders about United States intentions toward the Islamic Republic.
But, in the wake of the 9/11 attacks, senior Iranian diplomats told us
that Tehran believed it had a historic opportunity to improve
relations with Washington. Iranian leaders offered to help the United
States in responding to the attacks without making that help
contingent on changes in America's Iran policy — a condition
stipulated in the late 1990s when Tehran rejected the Clinton
administration's offer of dialogue — calculating that cooperation
wou

[PEN-L] The Ever-Mutating Iraq Insurgency

[Yoshie Furuhashi]

Bill Marsh, in "The Ever-Mutating Iraq Insurgency" (New York Times, 7
January 2006,
),
says that Al Qaeda reversed its fortune in Iraq, first by blowing up
the Askariya Mosque in Samarra.  By killing Abu Musab al-Zarqawi,
Marsh claims, Washington unwittingly did favor to Al Qaeda: with the
Jordanian leader -- the symbol of Al Qaeda's foreignness to Iraq --
gone, Al Qaeda has found it easier to recruit Iraqis.  It, according
to Marsh, has dominated the "Mujahedeen Shura Council," which has
attracted and absorbed several other Sunni insurgent groups and
proclaimed "an 'Islamic State of Iraq' covering eight predominantly
Sunni provinces and bordering the largely Sunni nations of Saudi
Arabia, Jordan and Syria" on 15 October 2006.  Bad news.

That said, Marsh also points out major Sunni insurgent groups that are
more nationalist than sectarian, unlike Al Qaeda: "At least six other
major Sunni insurgent groups are operating in Iraq.  Although many
share conservative Islamic goals, they remain distinct from the Qaeda
network.  Some are nationalist, rather than sectarian: they are
primarily focused on ousting the U.S., rather than waging a larger
struggle against Shiite Muslims."

For instance, Marsh mentions the "1920 Revolution Brigades," which
"has expressed support for Islamic resistance movements that are not
strictly Sunni, including Shiite-dominated Hezbollah in Lebanon.  The
group's attacks have been aimed primarily at the United States
military and the Iraqi government."

The thing is that such groups as the "1920 Revolution Brigades" on the
Sunni side are not in a position to expel the occupier and defeat
sectarians of their and others' faiths on their own, nor are Moktada
al-Sadr's Mahdi Army on the Shi'i side.  The inability of two sides
(both nationalist but of different sects) to come to even a tactical
unity dooms Iraq to the US occupation for years to come.

--
Yoshie