www.granma.cu March 6, 2003.

Comrade deputies; Distinguished guests; Dear fellow Cubans:

We have just come back from traveling around the world, on a trip without a moment’s rest or respite. It had to be done. On February 24 and 25, in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, an important summit meeting would be held, in the midst of the almost certain threat of war in Iraq and the aggravation of the international economic crisis. It was also necessary to make visits to very close friends like Viet Nam and China, scheduled for the days before and after the Summit, and to make an inevitable stopover in Japan, from where I had received invitations from important and valued friends.

...........We explained and offered documented information to many of them about the fascist coup in Venezuela, and the damage caused to the world with the boycott of the production of three million barrels of oil a day, a production that was virtually shut down but is now recovering thanks to the overwhelming victory of the Bolivarian people. We also explained the risks involved, for both the rich and poor nations, in a war in such a critical area as the Middle East. We shared with others our belief that it might still be possible to avert this war, if Iraq were able to demonstrate not only to the Security Council, but also to legislators from all over the world -including those of the United States, where many have doubts, and of Great Britain, Spain and Italy, its most unconditional allies, where many are opposed-- to demonstrate to the parliaments, to the leaders of the non-aligned countries and to the leaders of social organizations that Iraq has complied and is complying with each and every one of the requirements included in the UN Resolution. ............ I want to thank all of you, comrade deputies, and our dear people, on behalf of the Council of State, for the trust you have placed in us once again, and on my own personal behalf, after 50 years of revolutionary struggle, which did not begin precisely on the day of the first battle. We all know that time passes and energy is running out.

Perhaps the endless struggle trained us for such a long battle. I think that the secret may lie in the power of a great dream, of endless enthusiasm, and of a love for our noble cause that has grown with every day of life. But life has its own inexorable laws.

I promise that I will be with you, if you so wish, for as long as I feel that I can be useful, and if it is not decided by nature before; not a minute less, and not a second more.

Now I understand that it was not my destiny to rest at the end of my life.

Long live socialism! Long live independence! Long live peace!

www.wtol.com

TOLEDO -- It may be the perfect time to turn down your thermostat a few degrees and start carpooling. According to AAA, gas prices are up $.50 a gallon from last year. Making matters worse, analysts predict gas prices will jump to $2.00 a gallon this summer, even if we don't go to war with Iraq.

The reasons? More oil is being used to produce heating oil because of a cold winter, Americans are driving more and flying less and we are sending 80,000 barrels of oil to Venezuela every day-- that's a country that usually supplies oil to the United States.

Analysts had previously said an end to a strike in Venezuela would mean a glut of oil, but now supplies are so low they don't think a change there will have much of an impact on rising prices.

The soaring gas prices are not very popular with drivers. Many have complained that these prices are driving a hole in their pockets and that it's becoming too expensive to drive almost anywhere and making it difficult to make travel plans.

"I think they're ridiculous to tell the truth. I travel all the time. I'm in the gas station 2-3 times a week. I'm spending quite a bit of money," said Jason Johnson. "I think they're a joke. They're taking advantage of us," said Tom McGuire.

Industry analysts say consumers should get used to the prices and even expect to pay more in the coming weeks. They say we might have to wait until April before we see some relief at the pump.

usinfo.state.gov 07 March 2003

(He describes energy challenges in Russia, Caspian, Africa, Gulf) (3970)

Conflict in Venezuela has damaged its reputation as a reliable oil supplier, and all parties to the ongoing political turmoil there must work together to restore confidence, stability and rule of law, U.S. Under Secretary of State Alan Larson says.

"The damage done cannot be repaired overnight," Larson said in March 4 remarks in New York.

"And when the Venezuelan parties show a commitment to seek reconciliation and restore their position as a reliable partner of the United States, they will find a willing and ready partner in the United States," he said.

Aside from Venezuela, Larson described also challenges facing other major energy suppliers in Russia, the Caspian region, West Africa, North America, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf.

He expressed concern that growing opposition in Russia might jeopardize passage of legislation allowing production sharing agreements that would promote more foreign investment, citing the need to bring technology to Russia's frontiers.

Russia needs to adopt many other reforms, he said, including strengthening rule of law for business, allowing competition in energy and transportation, improving its technology and moving domestic oil prices to world levels.

Around the Caspian, Larson said, the key issues are completing the South Caucasus natural gas pipeline, improving the investment climate and bringing Kazakhstan oil into the East-West Energy Corridor.

In West Africa, he said, bribery threatens the hope of using oil and gas production to stimulate national economic development.

"We have an interest in helping West African nations solve these problems, not just out of altruism but also self-interest," Larson said. "West Africa will not be a fully reliable supplier if its energy sectors are corrupt."

The countries of the Gulf should not view the rise of other oil-producing regions with alarm, he said, because rising world demand will require expanded supply all around. He said Gulf producers should open their economies to expanded private investment and let market forces set price and production levels.

Following is the text of Larson's remarks: (Note: In the text "billion" means 1,000 million.) (begin text)

Reliable Supplies of Energy for a Growing World Economy

Alan Larson, Under Secretary for Economic, Business, and Agricultural Affairs Remarks to the Energy Forum, New York University New York, New York March 4, 2003

Good evening. Thank you for the opportunity to come to the Energy Forum to discuss the important and timely issue of international energy security. Energy remains a vital ingredient in the modern industrial economies where roughly one billion of the world's people live. Over the next 50 years, rapid economic progress in the rest of the world will require expanded supplies of energy, including oil and gas.

There no longer needs to be, of course, a one-for-one correlation between in economic output and energy inputs. In the United States, for example, we have reduced energy consumption per dollar of GDP [gross domestic product] to less than 60 percent of its 1973 level.

We can also help developing countries achieve growth in a less energy-intensive fashion than we experienced over the past 200 years. Nevertheless, it would be naïve to believe that continued strong economic growth in the United States and dramatic progress in reducing global poverty can be achieved without substantially increased supplies of energy.

I am not suggesting, of course, that growing world energy demand must lead inexorably to commensurate growth in greenhouse gas emissions. The U.S. is pursuing aggressive R and D [research and development] initiatives on such technologies as fusion, the next generation of nuclear fission, carbon sequestration and hydrogen.

The transportation sector has been the Achilles' heel of oil conservation. Ethanol has made a dent and the Administration is encouraging through tax incentives the expanded use of energy-efficient hybrid vehicles. Moreover, President Bush announced in his State of the Union address that the United States will more than double the amount of money spent on hydrogen technology research and the development of fuel cells to over $1.2 billion. We are actively seeking international partners for these technology initiatives.

Over the next generation, however, oil and natural gas will continue to play a central role in the world economy and international energy markets. We must find more oil and gas supplies, and these supplies must be reliable and made available at prices that permit sustained economic growth.

Long before "globalization" had become the defining concept of our era, the people in this room realized that the oil market was global, that energy independence was a mirage and that energy security had to be pursued in cooperation with friends and allies.

We knew that two-thirds of the world's known oil reserves were in the Middle East.

We knew that imports were supplying roughly half of our oil needs and an even greater share of the needs of some of our most important allies and economic partners.

We knew that OPEC [Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries] nations were providing roughly one third of the total oil exports but also controlled two-thirds of world reserves.

And we knew that oil supply shocks in any region of the world would have an impact on our economy through the instantaneous operation of international oil markets.

Reliability Through Diversification

Energy investments are costly, risky and require long-term commitments. For that reason, neither companies nor countries can have all of their eggs in one basket. Recognizing this reality, American energy security policy has sought to encourage like-minded policies toward energy, emphasizing the expansion and diversification of energy supplies. We also have sought to broaden the scope of operation of market forces, both in our own economy, where energy price controls and archaic regulatory practices once diminished our energy security, and also in oil-exporting countries, where restrictions on foreign investment and government control of production decisions add additional layers of uncertainty.

At the moment, there are interesting possibilities for expanded oil and gas production from the Caspian region, Russia, West Africa and North America. There also is the prospect of increased oil and gas production in the Middle East. Finally, depending on political events there, Venezuela could be a source of expanded oil and gas production. American policy aims to give the private sector the best possible chance to exploit these opportunities by reducing the political uncertainty that otherwise might scare off the necessary investments.

Let me provide a few examples of what we are doing internationally to promote diversification, reliability and energy security.

Russia

Russia already is an energy super-power. Expanded oil and gas production in Russia can make a major contribution to its own economy and to a well-balanced global supply mix. We welcome strengthened energy ties with Russia, and their expanded energy production in the coming years could enhance U.S. and global energy security.

To achieve its full potential, Russia will need to strengthen its corporate governance and legal/regulatory framework for business, improve the foreign investment climate, allow competition in the transportation system, open Gazprom and Transneft up to reform and competition, improve its technological capabilities and move domestic energy prices to world levels. These reforms are also critical in furthering Russia's desire to accede to the World Trade Organization.

Enactment of legislation for Production Sharing Agreements [PSAs] would also open the door for greater foreign investment, including in technologically challenging frontier regions. However, we are concerned by recent actions that indicate growing opposition to PSA legislation. It also will be necessary to embrace competition and private investment in oil and gas transportation systems. Investment in oil and gas production will fall below potential if investors fear that Transneft and Gazprom have a hammerlock on the pipeline system. We also encourage Russia to have a positive attitude toward the development of multiple pipeline projects for the transportation of Caspian energy to Western markets.

Through the programs of Ex-Im Bank and OPIC [Export-Import Bank of the United States and Overseas Private Investment Corporation], we are providing financing and insurance to reduce the political risk of energy investments. We look forward to working with Russia as it strengthens its ties with the International Energy Agency.

The Caspian

The Caspian basin has tremendous potential, offering the possibility of production increases from 1.6 million b/d [barrels per day] in 2001 to 5.0 million b/d in 2010. This will represent the largest non-OPEC production growth in the world. The key issues in Caspian energy development at the moment are: 1) to complete the second pillar of the East-West Energy Corridor by developing the South Caucasus natural gas pipeline; 2) to improve the investment climate throughout the region; and 3) to bring Kazakhstani oil into the East-West corridor. To achieve its promising potential, it will be necessary to establish a new network of pipelines for transporting Caspian resources to Western markets and establish reliable investment regimes.

American policy has made significant headway in creating an East-West energy corridor from the Caspian to the Mediterranean. We support efforts to build multiple pipelines to strengthen the sovereignty and economic viability of the new nation states in the region and to allow the Caspian Basin to contribute new energy supplies for the world market on commercial terms. We welcome the groundbreaking on the Baku/Tbilsi/Ceyhan oil pipeline that will allow energy from Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan to reach world markets at competitive prices; and last week's announcement that the South Caucasus gas line, running from the offshore Shahdeniz gas field in Azerbaijan to central Turkey, is a "go."

Kazakhstan needs to work particularly hard to ensure that investors are given an open, fair and transparent environment. We are pleased that the dispute that clouded the TengizChevron project has moved toward closure. Our efforts in the Caspian are intended to complement -- not detract from -- our support for Russia's efforts to develop its energy export potential. We all win when transparency and free market conditions prevail.

West Africa: Significant Potential

West Africa is one of the world's fastest growing sources of oil and gas. Nigeria is currently the fifth largest supplier of crude oil to the U.S. Oil reserves generate a large share of government revenue in countries such as Nigeria, Angola, Gabon, Equatorial Guinea, Republic of Congo and Cameroon. Emerging potential producers, such as Sao Tome, Chad and Mauritania, also will begin producing significant new oil supplies in coming years.

Democratization and the development of responsible governing institutions are particularly important in reducing oil-related conflicts and promoting African supply stability. Accountability and transparency are necessary to ensure that oil revenues benefit the population and support development. Growing oil and gas production could be an engine for national economic development in these countries, but this will not happen if energy development is accompanied by corruption, rent-seeking and the suffocation of other economic sectors. We have an interest in helping West African nations solve these problems, not just out of altruism but also self-interest. West Africa will not be a fully reliable supplier if its energy sectors are corrupt.

Substantial foreign direct investment is needed to develop African energy resources both onshore and offshore deepwater. We support this process by encouraging the reforms needed to improve the investment climate. We have negotiated a bilateral energy cooperation framework agreement with Nigeria. We favor the World Bank's involvement in independent monitoring arrangements in the Chad-Cameroon pipeline project.

Another sign of our commitment is the opening of our new embassy in Equatorial Guinea. This new mission will support our ongoing work in the areas of energy security, human rights, and good governance in Equatorial Guinea.

We also will ensure vigorous enforcement of the OECD [Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development] Convention to prohibit bribery in international business transactions, an agreement that internationalizes the main elements of the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. We are prepared to explore new partnerships to help West African countries make good on their commitment to good governance, transparent business practices, sound economic policies and market-based regulation.

North America: Energy Integration

Here in North America, we are strengthening our energy cooperation with Canada and Mexico. Senior energy experts from the three North American governments recently released a North American "Energy Picture" report that, for the first time, jointly measures the energy stocks, trading balances, and energy flows in the continent.

In the last few years, Mexico has begun to allow independent power producers (IPPs) to sell power to the public grid. Energy consumption in Mexico is expected to grow by 25 percent during the next five years; IPPs could attract the required investment in new generation and transmission infrastructure.

What often goes unrecognized is that North American energy trade is a two-way street. Mexico is becoming an important source of our oil imports. At the same time, the U.S. is a net natural gas exporter to Mexico, and our refineries supply over 15 percent of Mexico's refined petroleum products.

The reliability of North American energy trade is enhanced, of course, by geographic proximity. But more important than geography alone is the rule of law and predictable investment conditions created by NAFTA [North American Free Trade Agreement], integrated pipeline networks, closer cooperation between our governments and energy companies and long-term reliable supply relationships. Our policy is to deepen further this framework of rule of law and predictable investment conditions in North America even as we seek to build similar frameworks in other regions.

Saudi Arabia and the Gulf Producers

The Middle East holds some two-thirds of proven world oil reserves. The size of its reserves combined with its low production cost guarantees that the Middle East will continue to play a pivotal role in the world market. Despite frequently expressed concerns about "dependence" on the Middle East, our economy clearly benefits from these supplies. Without them, we would expend scarce economic resources to secure the energy we need at higher cost to our citizens and economy.

Producers of the Persian Gulf, therefore, are a vital part of a reliable energy supply system. Saudi Arabia plays a key role in global oil markets as the world's largest oil exporter. Moreover, the Saudis support international energy security by maintaining considerable excess production capacity that can be brought on line quickly in the event of a serious supply disruption anywhere in the world.

Saudi Arabia and the other major Gulf producers like the UAE [United Arab Emirates] and Kuwait repeatedly emphasize their commitment to be reliable suppliers. Saudi Arabia's own efforts in working with other major producers to offset the Venezuelan disruption is an example of its leadership role.

A policy of diversifying global oil supplies should not be interpreted as diversifying "away" from Saudi Arabia or other Gulf producers. Gulf producers will continue to have an indispensable role in the world market, and we encourage them to increase foreign investment and steadily expand supplies. What we seek is better balance and a more flexible, resilient oil market that responds to price signals.

In this regard, we believe Gulf producers would do well to open their economies to more private investment so that oil capacity could grow and oil supply could respond more fully to shifts in demand. The high prices of the last two years have been a drag on the world economy. OPEC's fear of a price collapse made it too slow to expand production.

I would encourage Gulf producers to view the expansion of oil and gas investments in Russia, the Caspian, West Africa and North America with equanimity. There is room in the market for these supplies and for continued, even expanded, supplies from the Gulf. The best response for Gulf producers in the long run is to open their economies to expanded private sector investment and allow greater scope for market forces to establish price and production levels.

Natural gas could be a good place to start. Once stranded for local or regional use, natural gas has become a globally traded oil substitute in certain key markets. For example, Saudi Arabia is contemplating a large-scale natural gas investment program that could involve several international oil companies.

The Saudi initiative would substitute gas for oil in producing electric power and desalinated water for the domestic market. If successful, this Saudi initiative also could serve as a bellwether for foreign direct investment in other sectors of that economy and expand economic growth and employment opportunities for Saudi Arabia's burgeoning population. Although the final shape of this proposed foreign direct investment in the Saudi energy sector is not yet clear, this investment would contribute to global energy security by expanding energy supplies and diversifying by fuel.

Qatar, another key Gulf state, has vast natural gas reserves. Working together with major international energy companies, the Qataris are becoming leading exporters of liquefied natural gas (LNG) to developing countries in Asia. In the UAE, the successful Taweelah power and water privatization project is another example of the dynamic role foreign investment can play in the energy sector.

We support these positive private investment initiatives because they expand and diversify energy sources, provide opportunities for American companies and foster economic growth in strategically important countries.

Venezuela

Closer to home, Venezuela and the United States have also enjoyed strong historical energy ties. Traditionally, we had considered Venezuela to be one of our most reliable oil partners, and we still very much want this to be the case. Venezuelan oil policy, until recently, has been built upon a reputation of reliability to international markets, which was of great mutual benefit. Through World Wars, politically inspired embargoes, and global dislocations, Venezuela found that its national interest was best advanced through maintaining a reputation of reliability.

Unfortunately, through a collective failure to come to consensus within the boundaries of their political system, it has been clearly demonstrated that Venezuela's democratic institutions and its reputation in the United States as a reliable supplier appear no longer matters of primary importance to President Chavez, PDVSA or the political opposition. Venezuela's turmoil has come at a difficult period for the world economy.

U.S. firms continue, of course, to be hard at work in Venezuela, and CITGO continues to operate in the U.S. as a commercial entity. The benefits that these reciprocal energy investments bring to both parties, and to the relationship, are clear to me, but they do not seem to be clear in Caracas.

The United States will continue to work to help Venezuelans resolve their political differences. The key to reverse the severe economic and political decline in Venezuela is a renewed dedication to find a constitutional, democratic, peaceful and electoral solution to the crisis. Democracy and the rule of law are essential elements of a sound investment climate. We are disturbed by measures taken by President Chavez and the Government of Venezuela that can only be seen as polarizing the conflict and eroding Venezuela's democratic institutions. We urge the Government of Venezuela and the Venezuelan opposition to engage in the dialogue facilitated by OAS [Organization of American States] Secretary General Gaviria under OAS Permanent Council Resolution 833.

However, until a sincere political compromise is achieved, and the level of rhetoric lowered, world energy markets simply cannot view Venezuela with the same certainty that they once did, and, sadly, neither can the United States. The damage done cannot be repaired overnight. We hope that Venezuelans, both in the Government and those involved in the strike, will take the necessary additional steps to restore confidence, stability and rule of law. And when the Venezuelan parties show a commitment to seek reconciliation and restore their position as a reliable partner of the United States, they will find a willing and ready partner in the United States.

Emergency Preparedness and the Role of Gulf Producers

Close cooperation with energy producers and consumers builds our collective emergency preparedness. In the event of a serious disruption, we will look to producers to make a maximum effort to use spare capacity to replace lost supply. We are intensifying consultations with our partners in the International Energy Agency (IEA) and, if necessary, we are ready, willing and able to make an appropriate emergency response, primarily based on coordinated drawdown of strategic stocks. The 26 IEA members collectively hold over 1.3 billion barrels of government-controlled stocks, representing 114 days' import coverage.

Here in the United States, the President has authority to draw upon our Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) to counter a significant disruption in supply. The SPR contains almost 600 million barrels of crude oil. In the event of a drawdown, DOE can deliver oil to the market in 10-15 days, pumping at a maximum rate of 4.3 million barrels per day for up to 90 days, then at a declining rate thereafter.

Iraq and the Oil Market

Since we are talking about possible oil supply disruptions, let me say a word about Iraq. UN Security Council Resolution 1441 found Iraq to be in "material breach" of Security Council Resolutions. It called for immediate and complete cooperation and gave the Iraqi regime one last chance to give up its weapons of mass destruction and disarm. Iraq has failed to seize that opportunity. The credibility of the UN Security Council is now at stake.

This is not "about oil." As Secretary of State Powell said on November 18, "Iraqi oil belongs to the Iraqi people .... The United States is not going there to start dividing up that which belongs to the Iraqi people." Should military action be required to enforce UN Security Council Resolutions, the United States will work to ensure that Iraq's oil sector is protected from acts of sabotage and that its proceeds are applied for the benefit of the Iraqi people. Iraq's oil and other natural resources belong to all the Iraqi people -- and the United States will respect this fact.

We should not and need not allow short-term concerns about the oil market to dissuade us from following the resolute policy we need to protect global peace and security. One of the most important reasons why we have an energy security policy is to allow the President to advance American national security requirements without letting foreign oil suppliers hold us hostage.

Looking to the future, a vibrant, independent and responsible Iraqi government -- free of weapons of mass destruction and at peace with its neighbors -- will contribute to the stability of the international oil market, as well as the political stability of the region. That is and should be the goal, for the U.S. and for the international community.

Conclusion

In the long run we need new technologies that can fuel our economy without posing threats to the environment or our national security. In the interim, our international energy policy must address the familiar challenges posed by a hydrocarbon-based economy where oil reserves are concentrated in various challenging regions of the world.

Energy security is advanced by sustained improvements in the investment climates in Russia, the Caspian, Africa, and in our own hemisphere, as well as by improved investment opportunities in traditional regions such as the Gulf and Venezuela. We are placing special emphasis on making the integrated North American market work better. To counter short-term, physical disruptions, we increased the SPR to 600 million barrels; stand ready, with our IEA allies, to deploy a collective response if needed.

We intend to engage intensively with energy partners all over the world to diversify supplies, improve investment opportunities and assure that market forces work as transparently and efficiently as possible. Like the war on terrorism, achieving energy security will not be achieved by one dramatic breakthrough but rather by sustained, patient and determined efforts. Thank you very much.

(end text)

(Distributed by the Office of International Information Programs, U.S. Department of State. Web site: usinfo.state.gov)

This site is produced and maintained by the U.S. Department of State's Office of International Information Programs (usinfo.state.gov). Links to other Internet sites should not be construed as an endorsement of the views contained therein.

www.vheadline.com Posted: Friday, March 07, 2003 By: Cecil Kirkman

Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2003 19:16:24 -0500 From: Cecil Kirkman cecilkir@cox.net To: Editor@VHeadline.com Subject: Re: VHeadline letter

Dear Editor: Reference the letter from Mr. Steven Hunt: Maybe I missed something or maybe you missed something in mine. I asked Mr. Kaminski to outline just exactly what the US policy should be and to spell out exactly the actions the US should take to be a peace loving and moral nation.

I would ask the same of you. It is easy to criticize ... it is easy to see the faults in others. But facing one's own shortcomings and presenting a better way... positive things ... are not so easy, are they?

But I ask the same from you, Mr. Hunt. Show us a better way. I cannot follow you if all you can do is hate, condemn, and see the bad things of life.

I would like to know the positive things that will occur if I follow your teachings ... is that asking too much?

Also, you are an expert at putting words into other people's mouths and misconstruing what they have to say. I did not ask Mr. Kaminski to leave the country, nor anyone else. I merely said I do not understand why anyone so bitter and unhappy with the country in which they live, would want to stay here and continue to be so unhappy and bitter.

And, as for me leaving, why? I am happy here and proud of my country. Why in God's name would I want to leave just because I disagree with my neighbor on some things?

And please, do not lecture me about the guaranteeing freedom of speech.

You wrote: "By the way -- freedom of expression was not "given" to us by elites; it was won by the little people that put their asses on the line and suffered state sponsored terror. Many people have been imprisoned, thrown out of work, or otherwise persecuted."

Mr. Hunt, you are addressing a man who served in the United States Air Force for over 26 years. I and my family have been shot at, escaped bombings by the skin of our teeth. I have held and consoled my children and explained to them that it was only a few fanatical Moslems that wished us harm.

If you read my bio, you know that I spent over 7 years in the Middle East living and working with Moslems. I married one and we have been together for over 40 years, happily married and have three wonderful boys (well, men now).

Mr. Hunt, I am one of those "little people that put their asses on the line"... for you, Mr. Hunt. I did it for you, that you might live in freedom and say what you want. And I can tell you for sure, I never suffered state-sponsored terror from any government. The vast majority of Moslems that I know (and there are many), are my personal and good friends and they all love America.

As for 90% of the world's population disagreeing and seeing our confrontation with Iraq as a war crime that will see the death of thousands of innocents, forgive me if I doubt your figures. I would be very interested in how you arrived at your figure. Where did you find that figure?

I also wonder this: A little over a week ago, there were mass demonstrations against an Iraqi war held in many cities around the world. Millions of people turned out to demonstrate. It was all coordinated so very well. The gathering and starting points were all predetermined. The route the parade was to take was laid out. At the end, there were stages constructed, loudspeakers and microphones at the ready. In almost every place, celebrities were scheduled to be there.

Famous singers and actors/actresses were present. A well-staged and awe inspiring event. But the whole thing raised certain questions in my mind. Who planned this demonstration? Other demonstrations that well-staged usually take months of planning and preparation ... usually about a year to plan and coordinate. And sponsors ... who sponsored these demonstrations? If the demonstrations are to have any credibility, they need to speak up and tell us stupid, lying Americans who they are.

I cannot agree or follow a group blindly unless I know who they are and what they advocate. I don't really want to know what they are against ... I want to know what they are for. Maybe you know, Mr. Hunt. If you do please let me know. I would appreciate it ... and I mean that sincerely.

Another thing about the demonstrations puzzled me. The official count given in the media, was that over 5 million turned out ... some said 6 million. OK, we know how the media is, don't we, Mr. Hunt. They would not tell us the real number. So let's say there were 10 times as many as the media said ... let's see, take the high figure (6 million), multiply that by 10 and we get 60 million people, right?

Well, every source I can find tells me that the world population is 6 billion. Well, if 60 million were at the demonstrations, where were the other 5 billion, 940 million people?

Of course, we know that the 2 billion people in the great country of China, which is a beacon of light and intelligence and democracy and freedom to the world, does not allow demonstrations unless they are state-sponsored. If you don't believe what happens to those who cross the state in China, ask the poor demonstrators in Tinnamen Square. The ones still alive (few of them) can tell you what happens if you criticize the government there. How would you fare there, Mr. Hunt?

I would suggest that you not live there. Nor Mr. Kaminski. Anyways, I digress. So getting back to my point. Because the 2 billion Chinese are not allowed to demonstrate, let's deduct them from the equation. That leaves 3 billion, 940 million not accounted for. Can you see why I sorta doubt what you say when you tell me 90% of the world's population believes the US is guilty of war crimes.

Did you know, Mr. Hunt, that the United States asked permission from every country ... for permission for our planes to fly over their country, if we needed to?  Did you know that, even though we could fly across most of them with no interference at all if we so desired, we will not do so if they object?

You don't believe me? Well, let me tell you that when I was in the Air Force, I was flying from Turkey to Germany on an Air Force plane. It was a passenger plane with no guns or ammo. The pilot before leaving Istanbul asked permission from Bulgaria, Yugoslavia, Austria, and Switzerland for permission to fly over their country. We sat on the plane in Istanbul for over 5 hours waiting for replies. Bulgaria, Yugoslavia, and Austria denied us permission. So we asked Greece and Italy ... again permission denied. Did we fly over them anyway? No. We  respected their wishes, and we had to fly out of Istanbul, down the Turkish coast to the Mediterranean Sea, around Greece and around Italy and up across France to Frankfurt. ... it was way outta way and took us hours longer.

Does that sound like a country that does not respect other countries, Mr. Hunt?

Our country spends billions of dollars ... billions of dollars, Mr. Hunt, developing guided bombs that can hit with pin-point accuracy. Do you know why, Mr. Hunt?

Most other countries do not spend one dime developing such weapons. Why?

Because, Mr. Hunt, they are designed to hit targets and spare the civilian structures around them. We could build many more daisy cutters and very cheaply bomb buildings in a city and wipe them out if we had no concern for civilian casualties. I know what I am talking about ... I was a part of the planning. I am not telling you what a government told me to say ... I am telling you what I know from first hand experience.

• Yes, civilians do get killed in a war, Mr. Hunt. It is unavoidable. But if America did not care and spend billions, thousands more would be killed than do.

Now do not misunderstand me. I am not telling you to think like I do. I am not telling you to shut up. I put my life on the line, to give you the right to speak up, and say what you believe. So once again, do not put words in my mouth. I disagree with you but I do not tell you to shut up.

It does not bother me that we disagree.  But what does bother me, is the vile words and language you use to attack me ... why? Because you disagree with me.

I put my life on the line for you ...and you (figuratively) spit in my face and call me dirty names. Polite people would say thank you for the thought, but I disagree with you. But I guess to you, you are just telling it like it is, without regard for my feelings. For I am nothing but a stupid, blind idiot who knows nothing.

You wrote: "Mr. Kirkman, you subscribe to the vile patriotism that is blind and morally defunct -- you demand that we obey and not be angry or critical at the gross hypocrisy we see."

Again, you put words in my mouth that I did not utter.

For you see, Mr. Hunt, although I disagree with you, I have never ... and will never demand that you obey and not be angry or critical at the gross hypocrisy that you see.

And I have never and will never tell you to shut up. NEVER.

For the more you talk and the more people you talk to, the more you become your own worst enemy.

Respectively yours, Horace C. Kirkman Cecilkir@cox.net

www.forbes.com Reuters, 03.07.03, 9:10 AM ET By Alistair Scrutton CARACAS, Venezuela, March 7 (Reuters) - To gauge how much business travel to tropical Venezuela has fallen amid political and economic chaos, just walk into a hotel lobby and take the temperature. It can be chillingly cold. "I visit two or three lobbies a day in Caracas' main hotels and mostly there's a frightful chill," said Hugo Arriojas, president of Venezuela's national hotel federation. "The air-conditioning is on but the lobbies are empty of visitors, there's too few human bodies to warm these places up," he said. "And hotel porters complain about the cold because they've nothing to do but wait." Caracas' hotel occupancy rates -- a barometer of investor interest in this oil-rich nation -- have plummeted to record lows of 15 percent in the last month, according to the federation. That is half from a year ago and compares with average rates of about 60 percent in 1999. Visitors are so few that many guests praise quick room service. "When an ordered sandwich arrives in five minutes you know you're one of the few guests," said one U.S. businessman. It is the latest sign of how foreign firms are shunning Venezuela, once known as the Saudi Arabia of Latin America. In the 1990s, the oil-rich country was a magnet of investment not only in the energy sector -- when oil fields were opened up to foreigners -- but also in telecommunications and manufacturing. Over the last year Venezuela has suffered crisis upon crisis as Chavez, an ex-paratrooper turned fiery "revolutionary," survived an April coup and a recent strike which slashed output in the world's No. 5 oil exporter. Even after the strike, foreigners are not flocking back. "In 32 years in the hotel business I've never seen so few businessmen coming to Caracas," said Arriojas. Hotel occupancy rates are at 5 percent in the country's Caribbean resorts. One of the few big foreign investment deals in the last six months was in the energy sector where U.S. oil major ChevronTexaco (nyse: CVX - news - people) and Norway's Statoil <STL.OL> signed a deal to develop natural gas in the offshore Deltana region. HARD GOING EVEN FOR THE TOUGH Most investment by foreign oil firms, which account for about a fifth of the country's oil output, have stagnated since Chavez introduced a nationalistic oil law two years ago. "The oil sector is used to difficult conditions (like Central Asia) but even these guys are worried about business conditions here," said Jose Gregorio Pineda, chief economist at the Venezuelan-American Chamber of Commerce. It is not just oil. When the Venezuelan-American Chamber held its annual meeting this year, the number of members who attended was about 300, about half a year ago. Even before the two-month strike that ended last month, new foreign investments had tumbled. According to the latest data available, investments totaled $246 million in January to September last year, down 58 percent from the previous year. And way below the $1.5 billion before Chavez came to power in late 1998. Returning executives are few in numbers and cautious. Having survived the strike, foreign executives are now angry at new state currency controls in which dollar purchases will need special government permission. The new mechanism's details have still not been ironed out, meaning most businesses have been unable to buy new imports for over six weeks. "Most businessmen tell me they've battened down the hatches in a wait-and-see mode," said one diplomat. "These currency controls have just paralyzed them with uncertainty." For example, the UK faces losing its biggest export market in Venezuela -- $120 million in annual whiskey sales -- after Chavez railed against the imported spirit, implying he would not grant permission for it to be imported under new controls. Unpredictable policies have generated rumors that have added to a fearful investment climate. Executives speculate officials may confiscate dollars when travelers leave the airport or that foreign trips may be limited to three a year. Many executives have sent families home. At one top English-language school, enrolment has fallen by a third. Embassy cocktails, the traditional hub of potential business deals and intelligence-gathering, are now rare events. "Business has become almost impossible. It's basically a matter of keeping our company's brand name in the country. But business? Just about zero," said one foreign executive of a medical equipment supplier, who asked not to be named. "We're doing more business these days in Central America (one of the poorest regions in the continent). I'm even thinking of moving there," the executive added. Outside one major hotel in Caracas, its taxi drivers had given up the ghost and gone to play dominoes rather than wait for a possible client. The lobby was empty. "The world has forgotten about us," said Miguel, a porter.