www.news-star.com By JENNIFER PITTS SNS Staff Writer

Over the last couple of months, each fill-up at the gas station has pulled a little more hard-earned cash out of nearly every American consumers' pocket.

On Dec. 23, Loves Country Store on Kickapoo was selling unleaded gasoline for $1.29 per gallon, said Loves Public Relations Director Jenny Love Meyer. Two months later, that price has jumped more than 25 cents a gallon to the current price of $1.55.

In the world of trade, the speculation of war seems to be playing out on Wall Street where it's being traded as a commodity, said Meyer.

"Speculation has driven prices," she said. "World event happenings can drive the price up or down."

Tecumseh Phillips 66 owner Dwight Wise also said the increase has something do with speculation.

Gas prices have escalated 25 cents a gallon in the last two months.   "We're paying high prices for speculation," he said. "I think all of this price increase is baloney. It's price gouging. Some increase I understand, but not this."

As he understands it, Wise said gasoline used to be sold according to supply and demand, rather than as a commodity where speculation can become a factor.

Phil Hall, owner of MacArthur 66 Auto Repair and Service, said speculation is why he quit selling gasoline two years ago on Sept. 11.

"Every gas station around here jacked their prices up and they didn't know why they just jacked them up," he said.

One gas station along Interstate 40 was selling unleaded gasoline for $3.50 a gallon, he said.

"That's when we decided we were going to quit selling," Hall said.

Meyer said speculation is only one factor involved in rising prices.

"There's a lot of different things that go into the price of gas," she said.

Of the $1.55 per gallon price at the pump, 49 percent is the cost of crude oil, 29 percent is taxes, and 12 percent is refining costs, Meyer said. The remaining 10 percent is made up of transportation costs and retailer markup.

The oil strike in Venezuela has inflated the world price of crude oil, she said. The strike began months ago and is currently being resolved, she said.

"Venezuela is not a huge producer of oil, but it was enough to increase the world price," Meyer said.

A hard winter in the eastern portion of the United States also has contributed to the price increase, she said.

"They use heating oil that comes from crude oil," she said explaining it has contributed to a higher demand for the product this year. "This has not been a good winter for the cost of fuel."

If the United States engages in war with Iraq, she said she believes the price will continue to increase, depending on a few other variables.

She said it depends on if and when a declaration of war is made.

"Timing is part of it," she said explaining there are typical times of year when less gasoline is being produced. "In spring, there is a time when refineries shut down for a transition from winter fuel to summer fuel. There is less product out in the market during that time."

Less product means higher prices, she said.

"Unfortunately, I think the price will go up if we go to war with Iraq," Meyer said.

When asked if the price of gasoline could top $2 per gallon, Meyer said, "I hope not."

www.globeandmail.com By JUDITH TIMSON Saturday, February 22, 2003 - Page B2 Closing Markets

Friday, Feb. 21

S&P/TSX -7.48 6558.63 DJIA 103.15 8018.11 S&P500 11.07 848.17 Nasdaq 17.79 1349.02 Venture 7.17 1102.2 DJUK 1.47 151.27 Nikkei -137.38 8513.54 HSeng -139.62 9250.86 DJ Net .35 40.05 Gold (NY) -1.30 351.80 Oil (NY) +0.84 35.58 CRB Index +1.55 248.09 30 yr Can. +0.02 5.51 30 yr U.S. +0.05 4.85 CDN$ buys US$ -0.0005 0.6643 Yen +0.3400 78.9000 Euro +0.0016 0.6159 US$ buys CDN$ +0.0011 1.5054 Yen +0.6000 118.7800 Euro +0.0031 0.9272

The day I stopped worshipping at the altar of convenience was the day our son came home with the shocking news that his bank accounts had been emptied out in a debit card scam. A careful money manager, he still had his card tucked safely in his wallet, the PIN number known only to him. But that didn't stop it from being copied while he made a purchase, and then used in a series of transactions that took place in Venezuela, of all places.

"Been travelling lately?" asked a puzzled teller when he went in to inquire about his account. He was lucky. There was no way any bank official or fraud squad gumshoe could believe that a 17-year-old who demonstrably had been in chemistry class in Toronto had engineered those transactions. He also had parents who were aggressive in calling both police and bank officials. All his money was quickly reinstated.

Still, it felt like a spooky international caper movie, one in which none of us wished to star. And it changed our minds about the casual use of debit cards to make purchases.

Canadians are the most frequent users of debit cards "in the universe," according to one bank official, with close to 2.5 billion transactions a year. One Interac official said: "People can leave home with their keys and their banking card and know they don't have to worry about anything else."

Oh yeah? While banks are loath to release figures about how much debit card fraud is going on, they do admit it's enough to be worried about, and it's growing. Police have no difficulty calling it an epidemic. In most major cities, in places as varied as pizza outlets and gas bars, arrests have been made in debit card scams, most of which involve using fake equipment to copy cards and PIN numbers.

But we don't really want to think about this, just as we don't want to think about credit card fraud, or identity theft in general. It's too unsettling. It gnaws at our sense of security; it cuts into our fast-paced lives. It erodes even our pride in progress. Paranoids might characterize it as a technological footrace between the dark forces and the light -- as fast as we come up with ways to make our financial transactions quicker and easier, the bad guys are right behind us, coming up with ways to steal our money.

Just last week, a company in Omaha admitted that a hacker had gained "unauthorized" entry to millions of credit card numbers -- some of which may be held by Canadians -- and these accounts are now at risk. Philippa Lawson is legal counsel for the Public Interest Advocacy Centre in Ottawa, which is preparing a report on all identity theft -- the unauthorized use of personal information, which includes debit card fraud. Ms. Lawson says that while she's never heard of a debit card case in which people don't get their money back, it is still "a disaster for the people it hits -- it totally turns your life upside down."

Even well-informed, diligent consumers are not aware they could be on the hook if they cannot prove fraud. Banks and other institutions only voluntarily honour a code of restitution. Police and financial institutions are issuing security advisories urging consumers to beware of shoulder-surfing, and even to change their PINs if they've had the same one too long. But Ms. Lawson says it's unreasonable to tell consumers to change their numbers frequently. "How many passwords can the human brain remember?"

The truth is, we don't want to change our lives. We want the big easy, and we're prepared to put up with what we still consider the remote possibility of being robbed in exchange for the ease of transaction. Still, the onus is on the consumer to be vigilant at cash machines or in stores. A clerk should never be allowed to swipe a debit card beneath eye level, or even swipe it twice; when a card is in play, the owner should never take his or her eyes off it.

It's also up to the card owner to note not only account activity but lack of activity. If a purchase did not go through, it may mean a fake machine was used, and a PIN could be in peril. It sounds dire. "But think back years ago," says Sara Feldman, a spokeswoman for the Interac Assocation. "Back then you could go to the bank, take out $30 and be mugged on the street. You'd never get that back."

There's always some consolation. judithtimson@hotmail.com

washingtontimes.com By Tom Carter THE WASHINGTON TIMES

     Cuban agents have increased harassment of U.S. diplomats in recent months in a campaign that includes house break-ins, vandalism and crude acts of intimidation, the State Department says in a memo warning U.S. foreign service officers of tough times if they are posted to the island. Top Stories • Iraq ordered to destroy missiles • 'Gutsy' Dean rouses Democrats with call to arms • G-7 looks to the United States to lift world economy • 96 die in nightclub fire • Mugabe 'at home' during French summit • Officials to increase spot inspections • After snow, the deluge

     Similar acts of harassment are being reported by organizers of Project Varela, a recent petition drive calling for free speech and free elections in the single-party communist state, according to news reports from the island.       The memo obtained by The Washington Times lists three pages of "officially sanctioned provocation," including the "leaving of not so subtle messages behind, (including unwelcome calling cards like urine or feces)."      A declassified version of the memo was distributed on Capitol Hill last month.      "Harassment comes in many forms including: Petty theft, unlocking doors and windows, leaving doors and windows open and air conditioners running when USINT personnel are away," according to the memo. The memo describes U.S. diplomats as being subjected to "campaigns of 'sexual advances' ... when their spouses are out of the country."      USINT refers to the U.S. Interests Section, which operates in Havana as an unofficial American Embassy in the absence of formal diplomatic ties between the United States and Cuba.      In Washington, the Cuban Interests Section, which serves as Cuba's diplomatic outpost in the United States, declined to comment for this report.      The memo postulates that harassment of American diplomats is being stepped up in proportion to their increased contact with the dissident community, a policy promoted by the Bush administration.      "There has always been some level of harassment, but the Cubans are turning the screws. They are sending a message," said the U.S. official on the condition of anonymity.      The official said many of the 51 U.S. diplomats posted to Cuba have come under increased scrutiny by an estimated 4,000 to 5,000 Cuban agents "devoted to the U.S. target."      The Cuban agents seem to be particularly interested in disrupting the lives of U.S. diplomats involved in public diplomacy and outreach.      For example, American diplomats are providing copies of Mark Twain novels, economics 101 textbooks and other educational materials to independent libraries.      "Slowly, but increasingly, the libraries are becoming the center of civil society," the official said.       U.S. officials report the constant calling and hanging up of home telephones and cell phones, the "penetration of houses," breaking into cars and switching radio settings to revolutionary propaganda stations.      According to a former U.S. diplomat, who spent two years in Havana, the family cat of a U.S. economics officer was found with its head bashed in.      U.S. diplomats are required to rent houses provided by the Cuban government. All are alarmed and bugged.      The official said Americans often wake up to an alarm going off and investigate, only to find doors open and muddy footprints on the floor.      One diplomat woke to find his daughter's backpack taken from a room while the television, video recorder and other electronic equipment remained untouched.      "This was not a thief. This was a message. 'We can get in your house, your home. We can get to your child,' " the official said.      On another occasion, a couple had a private discussion in their home about their daughter's susceptibility to mosquito bites.      The next day they returned home to find all their windows open and the house filled with mosquitoes.      In some cases, American diplomats have come home to find someone had urinated on the floor, or defecated "and left it there," the official said.      Excrement is also used by Cubans to harass dissidents.      Last week, more than 100 supporters of Cuban leader Fidel Castro gathered outside the home of Jesus Mustafa Felipe, an activist with Project Varela.      The crowd threw paint and excrement at his house to protest his views, according to wire service reports.      On Tuesday, Mr. Felipe and another Project Varela activist, Robert Montero, were sentenced to 18 months in prison.      The Miami Herald reported that 19 other Project Varela activists were detained Tuesday.      "Threats and acts of aggression and repudiation [directed at Varela activists] have been orchestrated by state security and the Cuban Communist Party," dissident Oswaldo Paya, the leader of Project Varela, said in a statement distributed by the University of Miami's Cuba Transition Project.      The Varela petition drive gathered tens of thousands of signatures urging multiparty democracy and other reforms. The effort has won several prestigious human rights awards. Mr. Paya and the entire project have been nominated for the 2003 Nobel Peace Prize.      "When the pope visited Cuba, he said, 'Don't be afraid.' The people of Cuba are losing their fear of the regime," said the State Department official. "The Cuban government is trying to reinstitute that fear."

worldnetdaily.com

Posted: February 22, 2003 1:00 a.m. Eastern Editor's note: Last month marked the 44th year of Fidel Castro's dictatorial rule of Cuba. To discuss this anniversary and prospects for change in Cuba are Agustin Blazquez, a documentarian of Communist Cuba whose recently released "Covering Cuba 3: Elian," which is available through www.CubaCollectibles.com; Enrique Encinosa, a historian and news editor of WAQI radio in Miami, whose books include "Cuba: The Unfinished Revolution"; Servando Gonzalez, author of "The Secret Fidel Castro: Deconstructing the Symbol" and most recently, "The Nuclear Deception: Nikita Khrushchev and the Cuban Missile Crisis"; and Juan Lopez, a political science professor at the University of Illinois and author of the recently released "Democracy Delayed: The Case of Castro's Cuba."

By Myles Kantor

Question: On Jan. 8, 1959, Fidel Castro entered Havana after Fulgencio Batista left Cuba for the Dominican Republic. What's your response to the claim that Castro's occupancy of power 44 years later reflects popular support? Ted Turner, for instance, claimed at the Harvard Law School Forum in March 2001 that "most of the people that are still in Cuba like him."

BLAZQUEZ: What I have learned from sources inside Cuba is that 90 percent of the general population despise the regime. The rest is part of Castro's privileged ruling elite who, for personal economic and security reasons, are afraid of the consequences inherent in the collapse of the regime. His longevity is not a factor of popular support. It is a factor of his highly repressive totalitarian machinery that controls all aspects of life in Cuba. Since the law forbids freedom of speech and association, the democratic opposition forces in Cuba are unable to carry their message to the rest of the population or outside Cuba without incurring significant risk.

Thus there is a generalized lack of confidence that any opposition actions can bring about change. Contributing to the maintenance of the status quo is the lack of support from outside Cuba. The general ignorance of the American public and the rest of the world of the real Cuban situation is due to the rampant misinformation distributed by the left-wing-controlled mainstream news media. It generates insensitivity and a lack of international solidarity for the cause of the liberation of Cuba. Therefore, it is a serious roadblock to freedom.

ENCINOSA: If Castro has so much popular support as Ted Turner claims, why doesn't he allow opposition political parties and free elections? The facts indicate he has no popular support but maintains power based on repression and fear. Over 15,000 Cubans have been executed by firing squads, thousands more have died at sea escaping, tens of thousands have been guests of his concentration camps and almost 2 million – out of 11 million – have escaped to exile.

GONZALEZ: Though it is impossible to know the extent of support for Castro – opinion polls in totalitarian countries are pretty unreliable – I don't think that Cubans in Cuba like Castro. Though it is true that in the very first months of the popular revolution – of which Castro was just one of its many leaders – the majority of the people supported it, as soon as Castro managed to get total control this support began to diminish. Though in the last couple of years the dislike of the Cuban people for Castro is more and more evident, and they express it more openly, for many years they feared repression and disguised their feelings as best as they could. But, in several opportunities, Cubans have expressed their anti-Castro feelings by voting with their feet. This was evidenced when Castro opened the gates in the port of Camarioca in September of 1965 and again during the Mariel boatlift of 1980, when close to 125,000 Cubans precipitously escaped from Castro's proletarian paradise. I am convinced that if tomorrow Castro would open the gates again, in less than six months no less than half of the Cubans would escape from the island.

There is, however, at least one kernel of truth in Turner's words. In 44 years of Castro's tyrannical rule, no major anti-government rebellion has occurred. Save for an initial strong opposition, only a relatively minor incident in the summer of 1994, the so-called Habanazo riots, has been reported. Therefore, even if Cubans don't like Castro, it seems that they don't hate the tyrant enough to risk their lives trying to get rid of him.

Contrary to common belief, liberation from Castro's tyranny is not a difficult thing to accomplish, but is has a high price. To do it, Cubans don't need freedom of association or civil liberties. They don't even need guns. They only need to supply their blood. A spontaneous rebellion would force the Castro regime to bring tanks to Havana's streets and would end in several thousand Cubans massacred by Castro's army. This would destroy the myth of Castro's popularity and inflict a mortal blow to the tyranny. Unfortunately, Cubans obviously value life more than freedom, and they are not willing to pay the ultimate price for it.

In his much-quoted dictum, "Give me liberty or give me death," Patrick Henry expressed it brilliantly. People who value life above freedom sooner or later will become slaves. Unfortunately, this seems to be the case of the Cuban people.

LOPEZ: Under dictatorships, it is not possible to conduct a reliable public opinion survey to determine what percentage of the population supports the dictatorship. However, there are various indirect measures to assess the degree of support for the Castro government among citizens in the island. These proxies suggest that the support for the Cuban government is very low. Whenever the opportunity to leave Cuba has come up, as in 1980 with the Mariel episode and with the rafters in 1994, there have been endless streams of people wanting to get out. Only force has put an end to the migrations. Indicators of social anomie, like high rates of suicide and alcoholism, repeated spontaneous protests (for example, to complain about poor services and breakdowns in the supply of basic necessities), and small-scale strikes (to demand unpaid wages or for other reasons) are further evidence of discontent.

Then there are the facts that the dictatorship does not want free elections, suppresses free speech and freedom of association and is terrified of the possibility that mass protests could develop. Any government that is confident of enjoying majority support does not oppose free elections. Castro is even afraid of holding a referendum, as the Varela Project asks. It should be clear, for those who want to see, that mass mobilizations carried out by totalitarian regimes to orchestrate a facade of public support are just exercises in mass coercion. Many signs also indicate that there is considerable discontent with the regime among members of the Communist Party, the armed forces and other state institutions, for example, defections abroad, widespread corruption and even expressions of criticisms.

As for Ted Turner's comment, the most likely explanation is that he is a conscious supporter of the Castro dictatorship. No wonder some people refer to CNN as Castro's News Network. Evidence shows that CNN news reports are highly biased in favor of the Cuban government. Other possibilities are that Turner is an idiot or one of Castro's uninformed foreign dupes. But I think that the first explanation is more accurate.

...... worldnetdaily.com

www.forbes.com Reuters, 02.22.03, 2:17 AM ET

ABU DHABI, Feb 22 (Reuters) - UAE Oil Minister Obaid bin Saif al-Nasseri said on Saturday that OPEC would act to cover any break in Iraqi supplies if war erupts, but said it was too early to say whether the cartel would suspend its output quotas. The Organisation of Petroleum Exporting Countries has repeatedly sought to assure jittery oil markets that it stands ready to fill any shortage resulting from an interruption of Iraq's two million barrels per day (bpd) of exports. "If something drastic happens, then we have to discuss that event and take necessary action," Nasseri told reporters after meeting his Russian counterpart Igor Yusufov in Abu Dhabi. "The producers will carry out their responsibility." OPEC, due to hold a policy meeting on March 11, has raised output limits twice this year to cover for an unexpected strike in Venezuela, with most members -- except Saudi Arabia and the UAE -- now pushed to full capacity. A Gulf source said earlier this week that OPEC kingpin Saudi Arabia would support a temporary suspension of quotas if an attack on Iraq halted supplies from the world's eighth largest exporter. OPEC Secretary General Alvaro Silva said on Friday that a suspension of the quota system had yet to be discussed. UAE's Nasseri also said it was too early to look into this option. "On March 11, we have to review the market situation... and the price," Nasseri said. "Then if we see there is no need to change the ceiling, we will be happy to continue with it." "But if there is a need to change the ceiling, whether to raise or reduce it, then we have to take that action which will help stabilise the market and get a fair price." OPEC agreed last month to raise its output ceiling by 1.5 million bpd to 24.5 million bpd to cover a shortage from strike-bound member Venezuela.