Afghan elite 'plundered $900m' from leading bank - Democratic Underground

Image via CrunchBaseAfghan elite 'plundered $900m' from leading bank - Democratic Underground

A coterie of well-connected Afghan businessmen and politicians may have plundered as much as $900m from the country's biggest commercial bank, three times the amount of earlier estimates, and the equivalent of about 7 per cent of Afghanistan's total gross domestic product.

Kabul Bank's funds were treated like personal accounts, it is claimed by several well-known members of Afghan society. Mahmoud Karzai, a brother of the Afghan President and prominent shareholder in Kabul Bank, told The New York Times that the bank's former chairman lent himself about $98m (£62m) to buy one of Afghanistan's airlines, and then used deposits to subsidise the carrier in an attempt to drive rivals out of business. Yet so difficult has the hunt for the missing millions become that the very same man, Sherkhan Farnood, had been brought in to help trace the missing cash.
Related articles

* Bright symbol of renewed hope tarnished by a greedy, corrupt elite
* Search the news archive for more stories

Officials say the value of questionable outstanding loans written by the bank is far greater than originally thought – and auditors poring over the lender's books think up to $800m is {b]potentially unrecoverable.{/b]

Read more: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/afghan-eli...

---

The last line of the article is quite telling.

"It's a meticulous account of the workings of kleptocracy, but from a Western perspective perhaps the most terrifying part of the tale is the motive. The businessmen, politicians and officials – the cream of Afghan society – are milking Afghanistan for all they can. Why? Because they don't believe their country has a future."

Related articles

• Afghan elite 'plundered $900m' from leading bank (independent.co.uk)
• Afghan minister calls for Kabul Bank graft probe (seattletimes.nwsource.com)
• Kabul bank's losses twice the $300m admitted, says Karzai's brother (guardian.co.uk)
• Afghan minister calls for Kabul Bank graft probe (sfgate.com)
• Afghan minister calls for Kabul Bank graft probe (ctv.ca)
• Afghan minister calls for Kabul Bank graft probe (foxnews.com)
• Lender Disputes Kabul Bank's Losses (nytimes.com)
• Charges urged in Kabul Bank case (bbc.co.uk)
• Losses at Afghan Bank Could Be $900 Million (nytimes.com)
• Kabul Bank woes downplayed by central bank (cbc.ca)

World reacts to Mubarak's announcement - CNN.com

World reacts to Mubarak's announcement - CNN.com

World reacts to Mubarak's announcement

By the CNN Wire Staff

February 2, 2011 5:53 a.m. EST

ElBaradei outraged by Mubarak's speech

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

• ElBaradei: "This is clearly an act of deception"
• Moussa: "We have to build on what has been offered today"
• Obama: "An orderly transition must be meaningful, must be peaceful and it must begin now"
• Protesters: "Down, down, Mubarak!"

(CNN) -- Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak announced Tuesday that he would not stand for re-election during presidential elections scheduled for September, but neither would he step down early. Following are reactions to the news:

Mohamed ElBaradei, opposition leader:

"This is clearly an act of deception. This is a person who doesn't want to let go. You have seen what the city looks like, what the people want. And they continuously try to play tricks. He is unfortunately going to extend the agony here. He continues to polarize the country. He continues to get people to be even more angry. Whoever gave him that advice gave him absolutely the wrong advice. Not at best to be a lame duck person, he's going to be a dead man walking. I don't really understand what is behind that other than a further six, seven months of instability."

Ayman Nour, 2005 presidential candidate:

"It was very depressing. It does not suit the events that are happening in Egypt. The president said he would not run for elections again but that was a given already before he gave the speech. He did not at any point in his speech reject the possibility that his son could run for president. The speech has fired up the crowd and all of the people in Tahrir Square are angrier than ever. I call on all the leaders and intellectuals around the world to call on President Mubarak to step down because he will lead the whole region into destruction, chaos and disaster."

Mohammed Abu Elelaa, deputy chairman of the Pan-Arab Nasseri Party:

"The first of minimum demands that we -- along with other opposition parties -- agreed on today before any dialogue with the current government begins is that the president must resign. After that, we can sit down for talks. People in Tahrir Square and all over the country demand the regime's fall. What he (Mubarak) said misrepresents the truth and justice the protesters are calling for. Staying in power until September is not good enough."

Mohammed Habib, deputy chairman of the Muslim Brotherhood

"The president's speech was more of an attempt to appeal to the emotions of people than anything else. After 30 years during which corruption and diminishing the strategic role of Egypt in the region became the norm, I do not feel it is time to appeal for people's emotion. We should say thank you to him and get out. His reign had positives but was immersed in negative policies, including moving civilians to military courts, using live ammunition and rubber bullets against protesters, and facilitating fraud elections. So far there are 150 martyrs and more than 3,000 injured in the latest protests. Eight million have so far demonstrated against the regime, and we should be proud of that. Even if he resigns and installs Omar Suleiman it may be better than him staying in power. But he did not do that. Why does he want to stay in power for three or four more months! He ruled for 30 years. Give it up and leave it for someone else."

ElBaradei: Mubarak 'a dead man walking'

Mubarak under fire

Mubarak's remarks deceptive?

Obama on Egypt: Change must happen now

RELATED TOPICS

• Egypt
• Hosni Mubarak
• Barack Obama

Amre Moussa, secretary-general of the Arab League and former Egyptian foreign minister:

"They want him to step down now, and he decided to step down later, within months, and to step down, to stay in Egypt. I think that all those demands that he should step down now, or he should depart, do not mean that he should leave the country necessarily. We have to build on what has been announced today. I trust that the debate will be very intense but very objective in the next couple of days or so."

Barack Obama, president of the United States

"We have spoken out on behalf of the need for change. After his speech tonight, I spoke directly to President Mubarak. He recognizes that the status quo is not sustainable and that a change must take place. Indeed, all of us who are privileged to serve in positions of political power, do so at the will of our people. ...

"Through thousands of years, Egypt has known many moments of transformation. The voices of the Egyptian people tell us that this is one of those moments. ...

"What is clear and what I indicated tonight to President Mubarak is my belief that an orderly transition must be meaningful, must be peaceful and it must begin now. ...

"The process must include a broad spectrum of Egyptian voices and opposition parties. It should lead to elections that are free and fair, and it should result in a government that is not only grounded in democratic principles but is also responsive to the aspirations of the Egyptian people."

U.S. Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vermont, and chairman of the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on the State Department and foreign operations:

"President Mubarak's decision to stand down from future leadership of the government is welcome, but his continued role in Egypt's transition is unrealistic. The Egyptian people, long denied the chance to freely and fairly choose their leaders, today are voting with their feet, their courage and their voices. Their overwhelmingly nonviolent and steady show of strength has conveyed confidence and won the empathy of people of goodwill across the globe. They are fed up with one-party rule, a repressive police force and a corrupt and stagnant economy. They have the right, as do all people, to decide who their leaders should be, and the sooner that process begins the better. The current government has no credibility to oversee that process. The United States has much at stake in Egypt's future and in our relationships with the people and the governments throughout the Muslim world. The welcome restraint and professionalism shown by the Egyptian Army so far is a testament to the long relationship between our two countries. But we should do what we can to support a transition to democracy including, if it becomes necessary, withholding aid to the government."

Protesters in Cairo's Tahrir Square immediately after the speech:

"Down, down, Mubarak!"

Related articles

• World media reacts to Mubarak's exit plan (cnn.com)
• World media reacts to Mubarak's exit plan - CNN International (news.google.com)
• The Ticker: The Atavist; Gawker redesign; Video contests; Mubarak's exit plan; Louisiana seafood (mediabistro.com)
• Mubarak supporters surround Anderson Cooper and crew in Cairo, reportedly punch anchor - CNN producer (huffingtonpost.com)
• Anderson Cooper Just Got Beat Up By Pro-Mubarak Thugs in Cairo [Violence] (gawker.com)
• Report: Mubarak Will not Seek Re-election (outsidethebeltway.com)
• Former Asst Sec of State: Violence caused by 'rent-a-crowds,' Mubarak supporters obviously hired (americablog.com)
• Mubarak's Re-Election Plans Draw Mixed Response (cbsnews.com)
• Anderson Cooper And CNN Crew Attacked By Pro-Mubarak Mob In Egypt (mediaite.com)
• Mubarak Supporters Fight Protesters... Then Hug? (newser.com)

Hullabaloo

Image via WikipediaHullabaloo

Thursday, January 13, 2011

The Message

by digby

That billboard was apparently in Tucson until Monday morning and was wisely taken down.

This gun fetish is the real problem. Seriously, it's time to take a breather with this. Nobody's going to take anyone's guns. But they are dangerous weapons and there needs to be a little less waving around of these things.

I was at the drug store earlier today and a couple of guys were in there with guns strapped to their legs. They were speaking very loudly (and calmly, I must say) about their politics and the view that it was unfair to blame the Arizona shooting on gun owners. That's fine. They have right to say what they want. And I guess they have a right to wear guns to buy aspirin. But let's just say the combination pretty much ensures that nobody's going to disagree with them. For some reason that doesn't strike me as particularly heroic.


.
digby 1/13/2011 05:00:00 PM Comments (81)

Just Words

by digby

Chris Kromm at the institute of Southern Studies takes up the issue of whether or not violent rhetoric in this must read piece. He notes this is not a new discussion and that there's fairly recent evidence to look at:

After a failed run for governor as a liberal, Wallace resuscitated his career by becoming a staunch opponent of integration and the "integratin', scalawaggin', carpetbaggin' liars" that favored change. His message: When it came to the federal government, "resist them to the hilt" in defending the Southern way of life.

As Howell Raines of The New York Times wrote after Wallace's death, many believe his demagoguery had deadly consequences:

On the stump, Mr. Wallace always had a ready answer for the murder epidemic that hit Alabama after his election. He personally did not condone violence. But as civil rights leaders pointed out, that begged the question of the impact Mr. Wallace's rhetorical violence had on the gross and simple minds of back-alley racists.

[...]

The evidence seems to support King and others who argue there was a connection: As Raines notes, 12 people were killed in civil rights-related slayings during Wallace's first term between 1963 and 1966 -- a product not only of Wallace's escalating rhetoric, but also his famous unwillingness to prosecute the murder suspects.

That wasn't that long ago. And this was the message:

Several commentators have noted the similarity of today's Tea Party to the Wallace campaigns. Indeed, the principles of Wallace's American Independent Party in 1968 read remarkably like a Tea Party manifesto:

A new party is urgently needed today because the leaders of the two existing parties, Democrat and Republican, have deserted the principles and traditions of our nation's founding fathers. Both of the existing parties have become the proponents of big government, crushing taxation, dictatorial federal power, waste and fiscal irresponsibility, unwholesome and disastrous internationalism, compromise with our nation's enemies, and authoritarian regimentation of the citizens of this Republic. Control of the government, under the domination of these two existing parties, has left the hands of the people our government was created to serve.

Even George Wallace's son -- a candidate for Alabama state treasurer in 2010 -- said of the Tea Party, "It does remind me of my dad's campaigns ... They are conservative, they want less government and they will make their voice known in November."

The Tea Party is only implicitly racist. Times have changed. But then that message wasn't explicitly racist either, was it?

I urge you to read the whole post. This is an old story in American life and it's foolish to pretend that it hasn't resulted in violence in the past. We fought a war over this. In recent years its been co-opted by very powerful wealthy interests who use it to advance their interests, which is a little bit new. (Economics always played a part, but it's only since the Big Business party launched the Southern Strategy that we've seen a true coalition.)

Read that manifesto for the American Independent party and tell me that it isn't pretty much a straight line from then to now. This is an All American ideology which has always been ready to take up arms. It's what they do.

Related articles

• Op-Ed Columnist: United in Horror (nytimes.com)
• Second coming of Wallace or Goldwater? (politico.com)
• The murky line between extremism and mental illness (seattletimes.nwsource.com)
• Andrew C: Hullabaloo: Begging For Grown-ups (digbysblog.blogspot.com)
• Palin to tea parties: 'Take over' GOP (politico.com)
• Morris W. O'Kelly: Tucson Tragedy Demands Discourse Recall (huffingtonpost.com)
• Tea Party 'Endangers Health' of American Democracy: El Pais, Spain (themoderatevoice.com)
• Andrew C: Hullabaloo: Useless Metaphors (digbysblog.blogspot.com)
• Playing politics with tragedy (theglobeandmail.com)
• "Right Wingers Defend Hate Speech While Tea Party Takes Advantage of Arizona Shooting To Raise Money" and related posts (liberalvaluesblog.com)