« April 2004 | June 2004 »

May 2004 Archives

May 31, 2004

A bit chatty for a Gov. Comm.

In the mailbox:

"Okay, okay, okay, so I’m asleep at the wheel today…..thank you to the 150 people who sent me emails gently reminding me that today is in fact, Monday, May 31st, not June 1st. Nonetheless, there is a Kimmitt/Senor briefing today (May 31st) @ 6:00pm"

Well, lord knows I would not want to miss my daily dose of clumsy dezinformatsia. Pity I had meetings.

Posted by The Lounsbury at 06:50 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Filed Under: Jan-Jul 2004

Canaries

As someone noted, canaries in mines:

" It is too early to determine whether Western companies will begin pulling employees out, though some American companies are already reducing their presence in the country. Citigroup, for example, ended nearly a half century of activities in Saudi Arabia last week when it said it would sell its remaining stake in the Samba Financial Group."
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/31/international/middleeast/31OIL.html?hp=&pagewanted=all&position=

However, I note that Citi had plans to oper on its own in KSA, as licensing for fully owned foreign banks should be available soon.

They may, however, be rethinking that. Still, it is a large and lucrative market, with the High Net Worth princes and all.

Posted by The Lounsbury at 09:02 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Filed Under: Jan-Jul 2004

May 30, 2004

On Chalabi

Ah, well, a fine evening doing expense reports. I hate fucking expense reports. I suppose they're necessary (well, they are clearly) but bloody hell, I gots them in multiple currencies and the evil bitch of a controller wants a daily accounting on FX fluctuations, blah blah blah. Fucking Goldie trained bitch. Two hours and I only got two out of four done.

Well, on Chalabi:
This fine article from the Kevin Drum site I think, or something like that:
http://www.newyorker.com/printable/?fact/040607fa_fact1

Of which I focus on the following:
"After attending boarding school in England, Chalabi went to America to study math. Upon finishing his Ph.D., which was in the rarefied branch of geometry known as knot theory, Chalabi moved to Lebanon, to teach math at the American University in Beirut. In 1977, however, Crown Prince Hassan of Jordan invited him to found a new bank in the country, whose financial sector was largely dominated by Palestinians. With the help of royal patronage and of innovations previously unavailable in Jordan, such as consumer credit cards, computerized banking, and A.T.M.s, the company created by Chalabi, Petra Bank, grew impressively. [Interj: mild exageration there] Within a decade, it had become the second-largest bank in Jordan, and Chalabi became a rich and well-connected man in Amman. Like his father and grandfather, he extended easy credit to important benefactors. He boasted to an American friend that he had personally made Prince Hassan, the King’s brother, “a wealthy man.” (Prince Hassan, who continues to regard Chalabi as a friend, declined to be interviewed.) Chalabi lived with his family in the suburban hills outside Amman, in a house of his own design, surrounded by a collection of modern art. His children rode horses with the royal family. .... [omitted]

In 1989, however, Chalabi’s comfortable life collapsed amid allegations of criminality. Jordan’s Central Bank, facing a liquidity crisis, demanded that the country’s banks place thirty per cent of their foreign currency in its accounts. Petra balked, prompting an emergency audit. Chalabi betrayed little outward concern about this sudden turn. Patrick Theros, a former Ambassador to Qatar, who was then stationed in Jordan, had dinner at Chalabi’s home during this period. “He was completely charming, particularly to the ladies—he could talk about any subject,” Theros recalled. Two days later, Chalabi, who had apparently been tipped off about his impending arrest, fled. He forfeited many of his family’s assets, and resettled with his wife, Leila, and their four children in London.

On April 9, 1992, a military tribunal in Jordan delivered a two-hundred-and-twenty-three-page verdict, which concluded that Chalabi was guilty of thirty-one charges, including embezzlement, theft, forgery, currency speculation, making false statements, and making bad loans to himself, to his friends, and to his family’s other financial enterprises, in Lebanon and Switzerland. The Jordanian docket shows that Chalabi was sentenced to serve twenty-two years of hard labor, and to pay back two hundred and thirty million dollars in embezzled funds. An Arthur Andersen audit commissioned by Jordanian authorities found that the bank had overstated its assets by more than three hundred million dollars. In addition, a hundred and fifty-eight million dollars had disappeared from its accounts, apparently as a result of transactions involving people linked to the former management. (Swiss documents obtained by the Newsweek correspondent Mark Hosenball show that Socofi, an investment firm in Switzerland run by the Chalabi family, also collapsed under suspicious circumstances, leading to pleas of no contest by two of Chalabi’s brothers, Jawad and Hazam, in 2000.)

After Chalabi arrived in England, he claimed that the Petra affair had been a political frameup. He said that he was targeted because he had been an outspoken critic of Saddam (an assertion that is not unlike his recent defense in Baghdad), and claimed that he was indicted because the Jordanians were beholden to Saddam for oil and other economic aid. Chalabi, like many Iraqi exiles living in Jordan, had indeed opposed Saddam openly. However, a well-informed American friend of Chalabi’s could not recall other instances of Saddam forcing Jordan to clamp down on his critics there.

John Markham, a lawyer representing Chalabi, recently forwarded to me a previously undisclosed letter, which Chalabi claims is “the smoking gun” that proves his accusers are lying. During the trial proceedings, the Jordanian military prosecutor wrote to the country’s authorities that “the method of dealing with the Petra Bank and its liquidation was the result of personal hatred and envy.” The prosecutor blamed Said Nabulsi, the head of Jordan’s Central Bank. According to Markham, Nabulsi was complicit with Saddam.

In Jordan, banking officials scoff at Chalabi’s claims of innocence. Petra had opened a subsidiary in Washington, D.C., in 1983, and after the bank’s collapse, according to a top Jordanian finance official, investigators combed America for forty-five days, trying to locate the bank’s hidden assets. Almost all the assets listed on the books, the official said, were worthless, except for an auxiliary office that was listed as a repository for valuable bank records. The investigators soon discovered that the “office” was a country estate with a swimming pool, in Middleburg, Virginia. It belonged to the Chalabi family, which was charging the bank a monthly rent. “There was not one business record in the whole place,” the official said. “This man is a vicious liar. There is no end to it. It’s like you find someone killing with a gun in his hand, and he says he’s innocent. He just wears you down.” The official declined to be named, because he feared Chalabi’s influence. “He has more powerful friends in Washington than you or me,” he said, adding, “Really, some of your people are such suckers.”"

Emphasis added. On the very last line, oh yes, oh yes indeed. Just be polished, speak English well and you can so easily charm the fuckers who get all starrey eyed about Arab reform and blah blah.

I note that I know Nabulsi, personally although not well. He is presently in the private sector as the chief executive of a major financial institution here. I have never heard of him being connected with the Sadaam regime and per representations from people I know close to the key principals on this, while there was a personal angle in Nabulsi absolutely loathing Chalabi, it had nothing at all to do with politics or Sadaam, everything to do with personalities.

What I rather found interesting about the article was the items re Chalabi's motivations - i.e. the obession (cited in the article) with recovering the ancient feudal properties. One rather finds this rather more believable than the "democratization" pap that the gullible idiots among the Neo-Cons and their conservative fellow-travellers have lapped up with such enthusiasm.

Posted by The Lounsbury at 10:55 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Filed Under: Jan-Jul 2004

Iraq: The Surreal - Revisions to the Traffic Code

I am glad that the CPA and its Iraqi lackeys are concentrating on important things, like the following:

MINISTRY OF INTERIOR SUMAIDA’IE ANNOUNCES REVISIONS TO IRAQ’S TRAFFIC CODE

Baghdad, Iraq…May 30, 2004 – Iraq’s Minister of Interior, Samir Shakir Mahmood Sumaida’ie has announced recently-completed revisions to Iraq’s National Traffic Code.

The revised Code includes provisions requiring operator licenses as well as vehicle registration, licensing and safety inspections.

The Code stipulates that fines for violations of the Code be paid directly to an accounts officer at the police sector headquarters.

“Citizens often complain to me about the traffic conditions in Iraq – especially in Baghdad,” said Minister Sumaida’ie. “This revised Code will go a long way toward improving traffic and, more importantly, the safety of Iraqi drivers and pedestrians.”

Vehicle licensing and inspection stations will be established at various traffic police offices throughout Iraq. The Ministry of Interior will notify Iraqi vehicle owners of the time and place of their vehicle inspection and registration.

The provisions of the Code will be enforced by Iraq’s traffic police officers. Those vehicle owners and/or drivers who fail to comply with the Code are subject to punishment in Iraqi courts.

The revisions, implemented by CPA Order Number 86, were requested by Baghdad’s Director General for Traffic. The revisions are the first since 1972.

The revised Iraq National Traffic Code is available in Arabic and English at www.iraqcoalition.org.

Emphasis (underline) added.

Of course this is just the kind of asinine posturing that fools the Americans but does nothing to change the situaiton on the ground. When is it going to sink through their fucking thick heads that it's not the laws that are the main fucking binding fucking constraints around here, it's the motherfucking practices on the ground! The issue is not an out of date traffic code - who the fuck pays attention to the fucking laws in this goddamned region anyway you silly ignorant idealistic twits! - the issue is (i) lack of enforcement of what exists, (ii) lack of an idea on the rule of the legal text over the negotiated practice with the police man (the institutionalized (x) dinar 'fee'), (iii) the lack of respect for the system generally! Bloody hell, will these rubes, these wide-eyed do-gooding rubes never learn?

Bloody idiots. Bloody goddamned idiots getting taken to town like fucking innocent virgins right out of bloody damned school.

New goddamned traffic code indeed. Spanking new traffic code, to be ignored just like the old decrepit ones.

Fuck, it isn't fucking Kansas Dorothy.

Edited to Add:

And you wonder why I am supporting the Cuban economy. It's because of arrogantly naive crap like this. Drives me bloody batty.

Posted by The Lounsbury at 04:39 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Filed Under: Jan-Jul 2004

Berg Again

I wanted to note the following:
(a) I found it strange and disgusting to see all the lefty blather around the internet re CIA killing Berg and a great deal of poorly informed "analysis" of the video making mountains out of mole hills (e.g. color of hands, white plastic chairs, orange jumpsuits. As if (i) near identical if not identical orange jumpsuits are not in fact used here by the cleaning crews, (ii) plastic lawn chairs are not the staple of cheap sidewalk cafes....).

(b) The continued reporting led me to conclusively conclude that Berg, well, he was asking to be killed the way he was fucking around a war zone with no security, with a fucking Israeli stamp in his fucking passport and no language. One item I found truly bizarre was his coming in through Tel Aviv. I have no idea what the hell he was thinking. All in all, a twit who may as well have had a fucking kill me sign on his back. Idjits like this make my life more difficult, bloody moron.

(c) A little vanity search turned up a number of hostile comments on myself on this subject. I was amused. Well, sugar and spice I am not. I guess the antiwar blog link brought in some naive tender suckers.

Otherwise, I wonder if a bet on hydrocarbons might not be useful.

Posted by The Lounsbury at 02:17 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Filed Under: Jan-Jul 2004

Saudi Arabia: Mea culpa, Mea Culpa

I thought I would take the occasion of yet further instability and attacks in Saudi Arabia to acknowledge my analysis of the Saudi situation in the past year was wrong.

While I can point to the perniciously negative effects of the Iraq situation, which in conjunction with the seemingly unbounded and pointless bloodymindedness of the Sharon Administration and the spineless acquisence of the Bush Administration, as new drivers to radicalism, my analysis was wrong.

I have written in the past year that that Saudi system was unlikely to be in danger, confidently stating that the tribal relations and patronage networks the Ibn Saud have installed in the KSA would keep things in place.

Given the sustained and bloody operations in KSA, which is something of a tribal police state, I confess I may have seriously misestimated the degree to which current radicalism is placing the old Ibn Saud networks in question, rendering fluid otherwise solid bounds.

There is a direct and serious implication, I may add, for the rest of the world. Given that militants continue to be able to operate with great impunity in the KSA despite Ibn Saud efforts to crack down, one has to lower the discount factor on the possibility of a truly serious incident in the country with the potential to cripple oil production. Given current market circumstances, that would have very, very serious effects.

I already expect the risk premium on oil to rise another couple of percentage points, an actual attack on the infrastructure (the hard production infrastructure, the present attacks are on the soft human infrastructure, more easily replaced) will cause that to leap. Very serious risk factor with very large unknowns (known and unknown unknowns, to use Rumsfeld's much maligned but actually quite astute phrase).

So, there it is, I believe it likely that I misread the circumstances and have to revise my estimation of Saudi stability from high to moderate, with a clear potential for catastrophic incidents.

Posted by The Lounsbury at 02:06 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Filed Under: Jan-Jul 2004

May 29, 2004

Americans, They never do learn. Or how USG manages to sound imperalistic. [Edited]

An extract from something I recently recieved from the US SEC regarding a confrence on financial security in Dubai in about two weeks. The [key], and stupidest, paragraph: [edited to correct accidental deletion]

Case presentations are required: In advance of the program, and no later than June 14, 2004, officials from participating organizations will be expected to prepare and submit to the U.S. SEC a one-page case study related to an enforcement or market surveillance problem/violation that has occurred in their country. On the first day of the program, the case studies will be distributed to participants so that they will have an opportunity to read them and prepare for discussion. During the program, participants will present their case studies, which should include how the issue was resolved or proposals to address the problem/violation.

Emphasis original. Let me draw your attention to the following (this is a conference sponsored by the US SEC, the new "Middle East Partnership Initiative", in English, focused on the Arab world): "officials from participating organizations [supervisory] will be expected to prepare and submit to the U.S. SEC a one page case study related to an enforcement or market surveillance problem/violation that has occurred in their country..

How much more badly concieved this phrasing can be, never mind the issue that outside the Gulf the level of English mastery even at high finance levels drops off radically, and as such expecting people to "prepare and present" for criticism by the US SEC is bloody obnoxious and stupid, I have a hard time emphasizing.

Do these guys have no clue as to how bad their image is in the region, or how this bloody phrasing is going to really fucking irritate people who already think you're pushing, self-centered, arrogant imperialists who think far, far too highly of themselves.

Bloody hell, is there no one in the fucking State Department who knows enough to fucking read this fucking idiocy over and say, "Whoa mates, this is not particularly well conceived mode of expression, why don't we revise it to read a bit better." Or say perhaps the Agenda, which is all the SEC going on and on about how they do things in the US, with the implication that financial institutions and supervisory organisations here don't know fucking jack (which is not that far from the truth, but bloody hell this is diplomacy).

I am consistently stunned by how incompetent US communication skills are in re this region, it's often stunning. This document is being sent to top level financial officials and actors (and a few schmoes such as myself, evidently by accident), who do not particularly care to be lectured at. Some mild tweaking would have led to this reading much, much better, and at little to no extra cost.

Posted by The Lounsbury at 01:34 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Filed Under: Jan-Jul 2004

May 25, 2004

A Quick Note on Dar Fur

In seeing Dar Fur coverage over the past month, I have been consistently annoyed with the characterizations of "Black" or "African" with the meaning of black versus "Arab."

I suppose I should despair of the international media getting this right, but these "Arab" militias are not significantly different in skin color or physical type from the Fur -often they are of similar background, except the nomads seem rather more "Arabized" than the settled people. (For all that the name cited for their militia is hardly Arabic) This is ethnic not racial warfare, and deeper than that, settled versus nomad strife over declinging water resources, tied into of course the larger political conflict.

Ah well, no stupider than those conspiracy theories I have seen of late on the Lefty websites re Berg killing being faked by Americans, because the people involved were "too white." Ignorant twits. Bloody well should visit Jordan and Lebanon before fucking rambling on about "too white."

Posted by The Lounsbury at 02:32 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Filed Under: Jan-Jul 2004

May 23, 2004

Bloody Hell: A little too close - Paris

At Least 5 Killed in Roof Collapse at Paris Airport

Fuck, 2E. I just missed this. It must have collapsed after I left.

Damn.

Posted by The Lounsbury at 12:10 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Filed Under: Jan-Jul 2004

May 16, 2004

In reply to a comment: Trust in Dangerous situs

A comment said:

He displayed a faith in humanity common to all of us who
travel in dangerous places and sometimes must entrust our lives to
strangers.

Speak for your bloody self. I have little to no faith in humanity and placing trust in strangers is about having a realistic appriasal of the situation, and a realization that their interests are NOT aligned with yours.

Humanity, including myself, is a bloody cesspool of selfish hypocritical, survival oriented instincts, some of which also accidentally or by design lead to situational cooperation and trust.

Placing blind trust is a way to get reamed, time and time again.

People like you and him get the suckers reputation, and that ain't the way to survive in these situs, except on the pity basis and I don't do business on the basis of pity.

Bloody hell. Common to all of us indeed.

However, I was entertained by the following from the linked article in the comment:
I suppose Mehdi felt compelled to push the two Anglos together. He said Mr. Nick was a regular who had been coming for weeks, and he seemed to enjoy shouting the American's name: "Mr. Nick, Mr. Nick, Mr. Nick," as if singing an Arabic melody. "Mr. Nick good, Mr. Nick very good."
http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/sptimes/637487341.html?MAC=765715adaf4ec871308735e39fdca4a3&did=637487341&FMT=FT&FMTS=FT&date=May+15%2C+2004&author=JAMIE+FRANCIS&printformat=&desc=A+jolting+awareness+that+I+crossed+paths+with+Nick+Berg

I may observe that the "Nick" in Arabic means "Fuck." (nik, to fuck, the sexual act only, not the expansive English sense).

Posted by The Lounsbury at 10:36 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Filed Under: Jan-Jul 2004

May 15, 2004

A Quick Note: On investment in Iraq

I am dead, long bloody flight, meeting, eating. Dead.

I was however, in a quick scan, amused by this:
U.S. Companies Put Little Capital Into Iraq
Many Firms Interested, but Are Held Back by Security Concerns, Lack of Political Stability
By Ariana Eunjung Cha and Jackie Spinner
Washington Post Staff Writers
Saturday, May 15, 2004; Page A17
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A28157-2004May14?language=printer

Of course, I told you all about these issues ages ago, but I draw your attention to the confirmation in re the unstable political risk environment, the degree to which people more familiar with the region / environment can profit over outsiders, and the idiotic pimping that the DoC fool does in re his having walked around Baghdad - athough I suppose bec. of the Berg angle he interjects with the bit about the "security consultant." A polite term for body guards.

Posted by The Lounsbury at 07:38 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Filed Under: Jan-Jul 2004

May 14, 2004

Last Items on Berg: An UltraMaroon. [Edited to Add link, and comment on art on Arab reactions]

Again, I am sure there will be a a storm of protest, statements that I lack compassion (true enough, I do. For idiots.)

The more detial I read on Berg, the more I think, "What the bloody fucking hell was he fucking thinking?"

Reports have him:
(a) Flying into Tel Aviv then Amman, apparently picking up an Israeli stamp (not at all necessary and a real liability) in the process.
(b) Taking Taxis/Services around, both to get to Baghdad and to travel around Iraq. As if he's travelling in Morocco in the laid back 1960s, and not in a country that had by January already seen most NGOs evacuate most staff for fear of assasination.
(c) Staying out late in Baghdad, until 10 pm, coming home with beers. Taking public transport to the Green Zone and meeting with Americans.
(d) Sporting a short military style cut, looking like, well an American toughie travelling about in Civies.
(e) Shrugging off increasingly dangerous encounters (robberies, detentions) as if they were adventure.
(f) Declining Consular help and urging to get the fuck out of Dodge.

Let me say then that no one deserves to be slaughtered like a cockamamie sheep by an incompetent butcher, as he was, but fucking hell, he might as hell have been walking about with a bloody sign saying "Hi Kill Me, I want to be a Martryr to Cluelessness!"

Why am I so fascintated and horrified by this? I must say it is because having spent the past two years here, sitting on the powder keg, I am keep meeting clueless European and American youth coming through dangerous areas with nary the slightest sense of their own idiocy. I am not talking about simply visiting Jordan, which is not that dangerous (although fucking around in Maan wearing shorts as if you're in fucking Cali is fucking stupid), but rather heading into the territories (yes, yes, I did so, but I was taking a nice fat fee for that. Pity the fucking check did not fucking clear, lying piece of shit. But at least it was, except the detention part, first class).

I was recently reflecting that I think I saved a kid's life when I tore into him just a few weeks ago, perhaps three, for his dumb ass idea of "hitching" to Iraq to look for part time work and see the country.

What is it about these American kids? Now, I like that they're coming out here to learn (as opposed to one whinging little snot who is out here to "learn the language and ways of his enemy" and per his teacher who I know, petitioned the Embassy for armed guards for his little self. What a fucking weak little piece of garbage. I am sure he will return to the States an "expert" on a Jordanian culture he's had no contact with because he was so fucking afraid of the evil Muslims - Pipes profile by the way.), but bloody hell, someone has to teach people the middle route. A bit of fucking attention to one's life. Now, having been to some quite fucked up places, I am not pretending that I have not gambled a bit, or a lot even, but it was at least for money, and bloody hell, I wasn't stupid about it. And at least I blend, and I really fucking blend. That takes the danger down a lot. But these all so American wheat fed fools....

Well, in any case, we have the wonderful folks with the nice shiney new m16s out now, and the funny, fancy comms gear. It's WEF time, and that means the Royal Army is out in force. Not the bloody conscripts with their shoddy shit, or even the Boys in Blue, nope, we gots the Red Berets out every where, with real live ammo in the mag.

Gov't is worried, things are simmering, a little more heat, and ... well I guess the King got his letter in re Palestine for something. Hopefull the DoD morons have been sidelined for the Agency in re comming the danger.

Added:
Obs above, largely but not entirely derived from:
"Loved Adventure"
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A25401-2004May13.html
as well as CNN and other reporting.

Added:
Morley of the WP has this:
The online media in the Islamic world reacted with revulsion to the videotaped beheading of American businessman Nick Berg. "
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A26698-2004May14?language=printer

He only deals with English lang., but I can say the mainstream Arabic language press reaction was substantively similar to the characterizations he gives in the linked art. Mainstream. I don't bother buying the whack shit, so...

Posted by The Lounsbury at 11:33 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Filed Under: Jan-Jul 2004

May 13, 2004

Upcoming Subjects: Iraq and Economics

First, on the Iraq front, we have this beautiful piece of news:

80% in Iraq Distrust Occupation Authority
Results of Poll, Taken Before Prison Scandal Came to Light, Worry U.S. Officials
By Thomas E. Ricks
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, May 13, 2004; Page A10
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A22403-2004May12.html

Do note before the Abu Ghrieb scandal.

" Four out of five Iraqis report holding a negative view of the U.S. occupation authority and of coalition forces, according to a new poll conducted for the occupation authority.

In the poll, 80 percent of the Iraqis questioned reported a lack of confidence in the Coalition Provisional Authority, and 82 percent said they disapprove of the U.S. and allied militaries in Iraq.

Although comparative numbers from previous polls are not available, "generally speaking, the trend is downward," said Donald Hamilton, a senior counselor to civilian administrator L. Paul Bremer. The occupation authority has been commissioning such surveys in Iraq since late last year, he said. This one was taken in Baghdad and several other Iraqi cities in late March and early April, shortly before the surge in anti-coalition violence and a few weeks before the detainee-abuse scandal became a major issue for the U.S. authorities in Iraq. "

Emphasis added.

Silent majority eh? Isn't that the favorite thing that Freidman and the idjits at Tacitus, and others desperately grasping at straws were claiming. Note the timing. Now, care to take a guess as to where the ratings are headed now.

Well, I find some small pleasure in this confirmation of my micro-on-the-ground read of things, but a much larger sense of .... what? It can hardly be said to be disappointment, other than I think the Steel Project is now unalterably fucked, unless we go for a really purely Iraqi angle, but then is the money there? Well, we know some major players with real wasta (connexions of the best kind), but is that enough? And can it swing OPIC risk coverage?

But leaving aside the project, this is rather bad. Rather bad indeed.

No surprise though. I can still hold out the bittersweet hope that a sudden and rather uncharacteristic rush of competence will sweep through the CPA-Iraq (by the way I have a funny CPA idjit story to relate, re a watch and his getting ripped off here, and throwing a hissy fit - his 'rights' and all that. Fuckers never learn. Not in motherfucking Kansas anymore.) however that is something as fantastical as perhaps the CPA's own grasp of the situ.

I said what, a few weeks ago? Off a goddamned bloody cliff. Unfortunately, this ain't Hollywood, and those rocks, they're real.

Well, here's to not getting my head sawed off by a dull blade yet. However, the whole spy joke, not funny now, not funny at all.

Posted by The Lounsbury at 09:18 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Filed Under: Jan-Jul 2004

Our fine little Friedman wakes up

I am thoroughly amused by Friedman, first one has to recall his old column where he saw Iraq as a long ball attempt to transform the region. Only a fool believes in transformation, and his long clinging to the Iraq fiasco's mirages rather confirms his foolishness. Now there is this precious article.

Dancing Alone
By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN
Published: May 13, 2004
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/13/opinion/13FRIE.html

It is time to ask this question: Do we have any chance of succeeding at regime change in Iraq without regime change here at home?

Really? I rather thought the time came sometime in September or October of 2003 when it was painfully clear that the Bush Administration did not have a clue as to what it was doing, nor the ability to question itself to reform its failures.

" .... My mistake was thinking that the Bush team believed it, too. I thought the administration would have to do the right things in Iraq — from prewar planning and putting in enough troops to dismissing the secretary of defense for incompetence — because surely this was the most important thing for the president and the country. But I was wrong. There is something even more important to the Bush crowd than getting Iraq right, and that's getting re-elected and staying loyal to the conservative base to do so. It has always been more important for the Bush folks to defeat liberals at home than Baathists abroad. That's why they spent more time studying U.S. polls than Iraqi history. That is why, I'll bet, Karl Rove has had more sway over this war than Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs Bill Burns. Mr. Burns knew only what would play in the Middle East. Mr. Rove knew what would play in the Middle West. "

Why he would have thought that, given the record in the run up to the war, I have no idea, but wait, he is frank:

I admit, I'm a little slow. Because I tried to think about something as deadly serious as Iraq, and the post- 9/11 world, in a nonpartisan fashion — as Joe Biden, John McCain and Dick Lugar did — I assumed the Bush officials were doing the same. I was wrong. They were always so slow to change course because confronting their mistakes didn't just involve confronting reality, but their own politics.

A valid set of observations, from start to finish - although again, one had to be a bit slow to assume anything positive about Bush.

Why, in the face of rampant looting in the war's aftermath, which dug us into such a deep and costly hole, wouldn't Mr. Rumsfeld put more troops into Iraq? Politics. First of all, Rummy wanted to crush once and for all the Powell doctrine, which says you fight a war like this only with overwhelming force. I know this is hard to believe, but the Pentagon crew hated Colin Powell, and wanted to see him humiliated 10 times more than Saddam. Second, Rummy wanted to prove to all those U.S. generals whose Army he was intent on downsizing that a small, mobile, high-tech force was all you needed today to take over a country. Third, the White House always knew this was a war of choice — its choice — so it made sure that average Americans never had to pay any price or bear any burden. Thus, it couldn't call up too many reservists, let alone have a draft. Yes, there was a contradiction between the Bush war on taxes and the Bush war on terrorism. But it was resolved: the Bush team decided to lower taxes rather than raise troop levels.

Now, as much as I despise Friedman, this is an interesting set of observations, above all in making the connexion between the issue of starving the War (On Terror against the US) to feed the personal, short term goals.

Why, in the face of the Abu Ghraib travesty, wouldn't the administration make some uniquely American gesture? Because these folks have no clue how to export hope. They would never think of saying, "Let's close this prison immediately and reopen it in a month as the Abu Ghraib Technical College for Computer Training — with all the equipment donated by Dell, H.P. and Microsoft." Why didn't the administration ever use 9/11 as a spur to launch a Manhattan project for energy independence and conservation, so we could break out of our addiction to crude oil, slowly disengage from this region and speak truth to fundamentalist regimes, such as Saudi Arabia? (Addicts never tell the truth to their pushers.) Because that might have required a gas tax or a confrontation with the administration's oil moneymen. Why did the administration always — rightly — bash Yasir Arafat, but never lift a finger or utter a word to stop Ariel Sharon's massive building of illegal settlements in the West Bank? Because while that might have earned America credibility in the Middle East, it might have cost the Bush campaign Jewish votes in Florida.

Leaving aside the silliness re Arafat, n.b. the sacrifice of long term interests to the political campaign.

And, of course, why did the president praise Mr. Rumsfeld rather than fire him? Because Karl Rove says to hold the conservative base, you must always appear to be strong, decisive and loyal. It is more important that the president appear to be true to his team than that America appear to be true to its principles. (Here's the new Rummy Defense: "I am accountable. But the little guys were responsible. I was just giving orders.")

Amusing last line that.

Posted by The Lounsbury at 09:06 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Filed Under: Jan-Jul 2004

On the video and on the comments.

I did watch it. It was, as one might expect, awful and one can only be happy that the sound was too bad to fully appreciate the horror.

A thought, I found the chanting of Allahu Akbar peculiar. It rather felt like even these criminal murders had to really work themselves up to do what they did. It certainly is not in any way normal to just shout/chant Allahu Akbar like that, over and over again. Indeed, it strikes me they were chanting to keep themselves going.

In some ways I hope this video is widely seen in the region, it will only reinfoce the conclusion that Zarqawi's people are well-outside Islam, very sick.

Of course the Salafi overboard al-Qaeda types will only get excited about this, but the majority will not - one doesn't even slaughter a goat that way, let alone one's enemy (or let alone an innocent bystander, if a stupid idiot of one).

Of course, as the odd little orgy of bigotry in the comments last night shows, this also feeds into the bigot gallery as well. I wonder where they all came from.

I should add (and I am puzzled this anti-war site links to me, I am no leftist and care not for their stupid neo-communist posturing) that the comments painting the poor bastard as having deserved to die because he was there to "exploit" Iraq as a "capitalist" are equally as inane and stupid as the bigots. The reality is that in a well-run and well-executed occupation of Iraq, people like him (well less clueless to be sure) would have done good, bringing expertise and capital to the table, and helping Iraq build a better future. The mere fact that the CPA is an incompetent, ideological mess does not say in any sense anything to the deep need for Iraq to shed the quasi-socialist mess of an economy and build a positive, free market system. The fact that Bush and Company have badly executed this on a "faith based" system is not "capitalist exploitation" it is simply incompetence of a quite generic kind - well the incompetence of the blind ideologue, be it Right or Left. In general, on the Right we tend to be rather more competent, after all competence makes money, incompetence does not. The extreme Left can indulge itself in its wanking as it wants.

Posted by The Lounsbury at 01:32 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Filed Under: Jan-Jul 2004

Further to Berg - Family

From The New York Times:

U.S. Officials Failed to Protect Slain Civilian, Family Says
By RICHARD LEZIN JONES and JILL P. CAPUZZO
Published: May 13, 2004
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/13/national/13BERG.html?hp

"The family of Nicholas E. Berg challenged American military officials on Wednesday, insisting that the man beheaded by Islamic terrorists in Iraq had earlier been in the custody of federal officials who should have done more to protect him."

This is just plain silly. He went to Iraq, Iraq was clearly a mess, US officials are supposed to baby sit fools? It is hard enough to protect people who know what they're doing, let alone idiots wandering around a war zone without any real connexions or knowledge.

As to this:
"The Iraqi police took Nicholas Berg, 26, into custody on March 24 and held him in a jail that he described in the message as managed by Iraqis with oversight from United States Military Police forces. He wrote that federal agents had questioned his reasons for being in Iraq, whether he had ever built a pipe bomb or had been in Iran.

"They can detain him and deny him his basic civil rights of a lawyer, a phone call or even a charge for 13 days, but they can't get him" on a plane, David Berg said."

Well, if he is in a danger zone, in a foreign country, it seems a bit precious to be speaking to civil rights - although if there was USMP oversight then perhaps we can at least say that procedues were followed:

"Apparently in a response to the accusations that the actions of the military in Iraq exposed their son to worsening danger, the F.B.I. released a statement saying that Nicholas Berg had not heeded warnings and that he had declined assistance in leaving Iraq.

The conflicting accounts continued to swirl around Mr. Berg's detention and release. In Baghdad, a senior adviser for the Coalition Provisional Authority, Dan Senor, repeated that Mr. Berg had never been in military custody.

"My understanding," Mr. Senor said of the Iraqi police, "is that they suspected that he was involved/engaged in suspicious activities. U.S. authorities were notified. The F.B.I. visited with Mr. Berg on three occasions when he was in Iraqi police detention and determined that he was not involved with any criminal or terrorist activities. Mr. Berg was released on April 6, and it is my understanding he was advised to leave the country."

It pains me to say this, but I rather credit our dear Senor, the family needs a bit of a reality check, Iraq is not fucking Kansas.

"The Iraqi police is mentioned frequently, which is, of course, absurd, because there is no Iraqi government right now," David Berg said. "And if you think about it, to be detained by the Iraqi police without the U.S. government's knowing would be tantamount to kidnapping."

Officials did acknowledge the presence of the military police at the jail but said their sole function was to "monitor his treatment."

As for the family contesting that it was the detention's fault that he did not leave in time, well, the idiot had plenty of time and two visits to get over the long distance propaganda, he was an idiot through and through:
The F.B.I. statement, though, said that coalition authorities had offered "to facilitate his safe passage out of Iraq," but that Mr. Berg refused their help.

Recalling his brother's independent personality, David Berg said such a refusal would not surprise his family, although he said he had no way of knowing whether Nicholas Berg had declined help. He had traveled to Iraq, in part, to generate business for his fledgling telecommunications company, which specializes in servicing radio towers. After an earlier visit, Mr. Berg returned to Iraq on March 14.

No excuse, pity the family is deluded on what could be done, but frankly I see no responsibility for his death (ex the silly agitprop from the CPA re investing, but frankly if you pull them aside in private, as I noted in my journal back in Aug and Sep, they will give you a pretty accurate threat assessment) on the part of US authorities, ex of course the generic responsibility for having so badly messed up the entire Iraq fiasco through the gross incompetence.

Posted by The Lounsbury at 01:16 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Filed Under: Jan-Jul 2004

May 12, 2004

Final note on the beheading

I thought I might note that my Iraqi maid, not known for her delicate sensibilities or deep seated concern for American blood (you may ask why I employ a maid who cheers when the TV shows Americans getting killed, but she loves me like a mum - truly a bizarre connexion and perhaps worthy of some study of the rule of the personal over the abstract), found the murder of our innocent fool a bit much. Indeed, unlike the murders of the contractors, she expressed some regret that the "meskine" got whacked.

Of course, she also agreed that the guy not knowing Arabic and wandering around was an act of hamaqa.

Posted by The Lounsbury at 03:09 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Filed Under: Jan-Jul 2004

Beheading, follow on.

In re the Jewish angle noted in the arts by his parents, if the video does not play it up (not clear) they can pretty well count that the Zarqaouie people did not know.

Posted by The Lounsbury at 12:47 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Filed Under: Jan-Jul 2004

On the Beheading, my somewhat cold comments

My comments here will probably offend, but here it goes.

First, let me say that it gives me no pleasure to see this, nor to learn of it, nor would I wish it upon the poor bastard.

At the same time, let me quote this from The New York Tiimes:

" Nicholas E. Berg wanted to help rebuild Iraq. Far from having opposed the war, he believed that the American presence there was a positive thing, his family and friends said. And he saw it as a business opportunity as well.

So defying State Department warnings, Mr. Berg, 26, traveled to Iraq late last year in search of work for his small company, which builds and maintains communication towers and is based in Pennsylvania.

He did not find a job but instead was taken captive by Islamic terrorists. His decapitated body was discovered by American soldiers on a roadside in Baghdad on Saturday. "
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/12/national/12berg.html?pagewanted=all&position=

and this from The Washington Post
The persistent violence contrasts sharply with U.S. officials' optimistic calls for private companies to invest in Iraq. Over the past year, the Commerce Department has conducted a three-continent campaign to promote investment and reconstruction opportunities.

It was at one of those conferences that Berg was inspired to go to Baghdad, his family said. He dreamed of building radio towers in Iraq that would beam reports from a free press.

According to his family, Berg met businessmen at the conference who asked him to inspect radio towers damaged in the war. Berg hoped to make a bid for his company, Prometheus Methods Tower Service Inc., to provide parts and repair services.

Berg's mother said she had begged him to change his mind about the trip.

But Berg, whose family described him as a bit of a rebel, decided that the potential business was worth the risk. He took a flight from New York to Amman, Jordan, on March 14 and then traveled on to Iraq. He did not have a security guard, translator or driver lined up, his mother said, and he decided to stay at smaller hotels not frequented by foreigners.

His e-mails were optimistic, his mother said, but weeks into his trip he still had not found new business. The only trouble he reported to his parents was that he had been detained in Mosul for several days by Iraqi police who were suspicious because he was traveling alone.

The incident forced him to push back his original departure date of March 30, he wrote his parents.

Berg last called his parents on April 9. He told them that his flight home was from Jordan but that a violent insurgency erupting in western Iraq had made driving there impossible.

Hearing nothing further, Berg's family spent the next few weeks searching frantically for information. They opened his e-mail account and sent notes to his business associates. They requested his cell phone records from Iraq. No one had any leads. The next time they heard any news was when the consul called.

According to a clerk at Baghdad's Al Fanar Hotel, on the east bank of the Tigris River, Berg checked in on March 22, left for Mosul the next day, returned to the hotel on April 6 and checked out on April 10.

Berg said he was going home, the clerk said, and walked down Saddoun Street, a major artery, because the road was closed to vehicular traffic. He left behind in his room a yellowed and folded page from a book by Jon Burmeister, a South African writer of thrillers who died in 2001.

The page carries a short prose poem titled "The War That Wasn't." It describes a man named Jericho, who is awakened by machine-gun fire, "his heart hammering thunderously against the ribcage as though trying to escape."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A19048-2004May11?language=printer
Emphasis added.

With the caveat that no one deserves to have their head cut off, nor on camara above all, this guy was a fucking fool. Reminds me of that Tacitus and his idiotic simple minded trip through the region (and his neo-Bolshevik commentary on the "false consciousness" or "dhimmitude" - as if he even understood the term, which he does not). Look at me, I'm going to the Middle East to learn about the Islamic savages....

Let me put it this way, this fellow was a moron. Sorry, sounds cold, but anyone wandering around as described above in Iraq, given the news post Summer 2003 is a fucking moron. I recently had to tell some idealistic kid here, an American engineer, fresh graduate, who wanted to hop a fucking taxi from Amman to Baghdad to look for work that if he did so, he should write a motherfucking will. Fucking clueless motherfucking Americans waltzing around like dumbass do-gooders in motherfucking Kansas. Wake the fuck up, Dorothy, there are a good (if minority) number of cold ass people who are far too happy to cap your innocent, "oh I'm an American and we do good" ass.

What did this clueless idiot do wrong?

First, he obviously did not speak the langauge, did not know the region. But the good old US of A was bringing democracy and all that, time to teach the natives. Wonderful fucking idealism. But this is not fucking Kansas, this is a fucking dangerous region, and it is not for amateur hour to fucking wander around a country you don't know, that you have no support in, and that you don't know people in, that you have no goddamned connexions to keep you fucking safe. Bloody hell, staying in low-end hotels, no connexions, no saftey.

I can do this sort of shit, but I know the fucking place, and I also know that you need to get protection. Good bloody fucking Lord, what kind of clueless git does this? And in motherfucking March?

What is it, does no one in the fucking States have a fucking clue that, hey, guess what, being an American does not get you the love nowadays, and fuck, you should before wandering into a fucking war zone, have some support?

Bloody hell, I just got an offer to go to Baghdad for some consulting with a Fund there, and while for the right money I migth do it, I would not fucking take a motherfucking taxi from Amman, and not have any gooddamned support.

Emblamatic of the utter cluelessness that is American engagement with the Middle East.

Posted by The Lounsbury at 12:46 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Filed Under: Jan-Jul 2004

May 11, 2004

Convoy from Amman whacked, Iraq

So say the Sats.

Posted by The Lounsbury at 11:15 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Filed Under: Jan-Jul 2004

On Torture

I continue to think of that line from The Battle of Algiers, by Col. Mathieu. Interesting.

True. Accept the consequences or not.

Posted by The Lounsbury at 11:14 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Filed Under: Jan-Jul 2004

Airstrikes for Airstrikes sake?

I remain utterly puzzled as to why the American forces believe that airstrikes in urban areas is (a) useful and (b) acceptable. The destruction of the as-Sadr HQ strikes me as use of force in the absence of a real strategy.

Posted by The Lounsbury at 11:11 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Filed Under: Jan-Jul 2004

A positive note re the prison issue

I thought I should note that in a number of recent conversations that I have had, in re the prison issue, that in addition to expressing outrage, etc. re the events, Arab interlocutors of various stripes have also commented favorably on the US system allowing this to be debated, etc., and drew unfavorable contrasts in re their own system.

I would not go as far as to say this chain of events is or could be truly positive, or the "example" blather of President Bush is in fact effective, but there is a chance here, a real chance, of rescuing something from this. That is, if the rot is rooted out, then some face may be saved. Iraq is still a bloody accident, but perhaps some face to be saved.

Posted by The Lounsbury at 12:32 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Filed Under: Jan-Jul 2004

May 10, 2004

The Battle of Algiers

For a rather long time I pimped this film as a key and accessible document to understand what could happen in Iraq. It appears with the latest revelations that sadly that was all too prescient.

This quote sadly expresses the situation:
" "Beyond abuse of prisoners, there are other photos that depict incidents of physical violence towards prisoners, acts that can only be described as blatantly sadistic, cruel and inhuman," Mr. Rumsfeld said. "There are many more photographs and indeed some videos. Congress and the American people and the rest of the world need to know this.""

Well, perhaps the Pentagon learned the wrong lessons when they finally screened that film, or rather Wolfowitz had already learned the wrong lessons,

Posted by The Lounsbury at 01:04 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Filed Under: Jan-Jul 2004

May 09, 2004

CPA-Iraq Achieving New Levels of the Surreal

Just to prove that the fearless PR machine that is the CPA has its finger on the pulse of the news cycle and really understands exactely how to communicate:

BREMER MEETS WITH IRAQI WOMEN

EDUCATORS AND ATTORNEYS

Baghdad – Iraqi women educators and lawyers met with Ambassador L. Paul Bremer Friday morning to discuss security and the role of women in the political process. During the meeting, Bremer advised the members of the Future Society for Iraqi Women to participate in the nomination process for the upcoming Independent Electoral Commission. He also encouraged the group to educate women on the importance of getting involved in the economy by taking advantage of micro loans which could be used to start small businesses.

“The meeting was perfect. We appreciate his advice to nominate women to be a part of the Electoral Commission. Now the most important part is for us to follow through,” said Hanna Murad, Deputy President of the Future Society for Iraqi Women.

The Future Society for Iraqi Women is composed of lawyers and educators who have come together to provide legal assistance for women who have been victims of abuse and torture. They conduct information and education programs for women in the area of legal rights, promote women in government work to reduce discrimination against women, and fight against the imposition of religious law. The group has organized a Legal Defense Fund for women and has become involved with the Transitional Safe House for abused women.

Wonderful, a bunch of marginal liberal women met Bremer, and were impressed. I can sleep well at night.

Posted by The Lounsbury at 06:44 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Filed Under: Jan-Jul 2004

In more practical matters - CPA has 'prioritized' its reconst work

I am told in this press release that the PMO (That is the DoD's "Project Management Office" aka the place that never returns phone calls from practical investors):

PMO PROJECTS PRIORITIZED WITH IRAQI PARTICIPATION

BAGHDAD, Iraq (May 7, 2004) – As the Program Management Office begins the $18.4 billion program of constructing and restoring Iraq’s infrastructure, it does so through a long-standing partnership with the Iraqi people.

In September of 2003, PMO leadership began outlining the work of revitalizing the essential services of the country. PMO representatives met with local Iraqi officials and area governing councils to create an initial list of projects.

Since that time, dozens of meetings have taken place in pursuit of this goal. Director David Nash and team have met with tribal leaders, governorate leadership, provincial councils, ministers, city officials, local chambers of commerce, business leaders, and community activists in order to seek their help in identifying those crucial projects that would benefit the highest number of Iraqis in each region of the country. Each of the projects fall into one of the following six sectors: security and justice, water resources and public works, electricity, buildings/health/education, transportation and communications, and oil.

In addition, Director Nash has traveled to 16 of the 18 governorates thus far to meet local officials in their home cities to continue the coordination of this historic effort. The final two Governorate meetings are expected to occur within the next several weeks.

“Each of these meetings has given me and the rest of the staff here at the PMO a better idea for the specific priorities for each of the governorates,” Director of PMO David Nash said. “Without the participation of the Iraqi people, these efforts to rebuild their country would fail. Iraqi participation is a vital component to our work as it is to Iraqi’s who live here and understand what needs to be done to improve their lives.”

Well, don't I feel so fired up I could just go out and round up some innocent Iraqis and molest them for fun and profit.

Glad they spent the time "prioritizing because lord the fuck knows they had plenty of fucking time to do so. Vital work and all that.

Posted by The Lounsbury at 06:43 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Filed Under: Jan-Jul 2004

May 06, 2004

Thoughts on the Iraqi prison torture scandal

Last night I had a long convo with a local business magnate (the sort of fellow who the royal family comes to his birthday parties) about Iraq.

He had an interesting comment to make in regards to the issue: "Why did they take pictures"? Going on to say everyone understands occupying armies are abusive, that things will happen in violence and war, however it struck him, fellow Arabs as particularly heinous to take pictures, like cheap porn.

There may be a key gap that pushes the issue to a higher level of disgust - the pictures and the style of the pictues playing into the worst characterizations of American society as depraved.

Posted by The Lounsbury at 02:06 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Filed Under: Jan-Jul 2004

May 02, 2004

And in the realm of the surreal again

While I can't get my hands on data from the CPA, at least I can rest easy knowing that they are distributing footballs:

to honor the birthday of the prophet muhammad

(may peace be upon him), the coalition gives soccer balls out to children

Hilla, Babil Province, Iraq. In support of the national holiday honoring the birthday of The Prophet Muhammad (PBUH), the Coalition Provisional Authority is giving more than 950 soccer balls to Iraqi children, schools, and sports clubs in South Central Iraq. The soccer balls are being distributed through the Democratic Iraqi Gathering, the Polish Coalition Forces, and the Coalition Provisional Authority.

As friends of the Iraqi people, the Coalition wishes Iraqis the very best for this holy occasion and a memorable day for the Iraqi children. We will continue to support the Iraqi people as they move toward a sovereign and democratic Iraq.

Posted by The Lounsbury at 06:32 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Filed Under: Jan-Jul 2004

May 01, 2004

Off the bloody cliff

Exhausted, rather too much to do to comment properly. I was unaware of the Iraqi prisoner story for a good two days after the CBS News broadcast. Have not had the occasion to see the Arab Sats directly, but am led to understand that it is a frenzy.

This is nothing short of a disaster, and will be a long term problem.

The climb down in Fallujah is ambiguous, but frankly after the bluster, the posturing, it looks weak, it looks like a capitulation.

I am frankly amazed at the bumbling incompetence that the US has reflected in the past few weeks, even by the standards I saw with CPA over the past year or somewhat more.

While an invasion of Fallujah would have been madness, but speaking loudly and carrying a small stick which proved unusable, the Americans have come off as fools, weak fools. This will indeed embolden the opposition.

I sometimes ask myself, can the present Administration engage Iraq in ways that are any worse? The answer is of course yes, but this mish mash of strong talk, ambiguous action (weak then strong then weak) is making a hash out of policies that might, just might have worked. Spoilers.

I note that this is having blow back in the business world. This past week I had trouble getting meetings, for all that there was prior interest. Spoke to a local origin comrade, tells me he spoke with the same people, who told him they did not want to deal with Americans now. Sensation is there, the US is in the process of truly and substantively damaging its real interests, not the airy theoretical ones but real interests.

I am really getting frustrated, having a hard time seeing how to get around this fiasco. Perhaps should work for the Dutch.

Posted by The Lounsbury at 04:01 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Filed Under: Jan-Jul 2004