Educate Yourself

Week in Review
For the week 9/11/2006 - 9/15/2006
Brian Trumbore
President/Editor, StocksandNews.com

Following are various opinions and thoughts on the anniversary of 9/11 as well as the ongoing war on terror.

"Since the horror of 9/11, we have learned a great deal about the enemy. We have learned that they are evil and kill without mercy - but not without purpose. We have learned that they form a global network of extremists who are driven by a perverted vision of Islam - a totalitarian ideology that hates freedom, rejects tolerance, and despises all dissent. And we have learned that their goal is to build a radical Islamic empire where women are prisoners in their homes, men are beaten for missing prayer meetings, and terrorists have a safe haven to plan and launch attacks on America and other civilized nations. The war against this enemy is more than a military conflict. It is the decisive ideological struggle of the 21st century, and the calling of our generation.

"Our Nation is being tested in a way that we have not been since the start of the Cold War. We saw what a handful of our enemies can do with box-cutters and plane tickets. We hear their threats to launch even more terrible attacks on our people. And we know that if they were able to get their hands on weapons of mass destruction, they would use them against us. We face an enemy determined to bring death and suffering into our homes. America did not ask for this war, and every American wishes it were over. So do I. But the war is not over - and it will not be over until either we or the extremists emerge victorious. If we do not defeat these enemies now, we will leave our children to face a Middle East overrun by terrorist states and radical dictators armed with nuclear weapons. We are in a war that will set the course for this new century - and determine the destiny of millions across the world."

"One of the main reasons for the founding of the United States was to establish freedom, particularly freedom of religion. Our enemies oppose freedom, particularly freedom of religion. This was made shockingly clear by the recent gunpoint 'conversion' of the two kidnapped journalists in Gaza. The terrorists don't want to understand and co-exist alongside Western democracies. There are those over the past 30 years, and even to this day, who want to negotiate with the fanatic Islamic terrorists. But the fanatics don't want to negotiate. They want to establish a world in which everyone practices a perverted version of their religion. They want to return to a time before the modern age, to a world in which women have no rights and religious dissent is met with death.

"These attacks are about a radical form of Islam that views our very existence as a grave threat. This is not a debate over values or policies. This is not a border dispute. This is a war over the preservation and expansion of the modern world.

"We must realize the depth of the danger we face and the determination of our enemy. We have increased attention on air security. We have extended the USA Patriot Act, which has given us a greater opportunity to detect terrorist plots before they occur. We now receive much more help from other countries, such as Pakistan, including banks sharing information about money flow inside terrorist organizations. That information was vital to revealing this summer's airline terror plot in Britain.

"As we continue to focus on what we've learned, we must also focus on goals for securing our future. We must improve our intelligence. We must commit to restoring a human intelligence base. We must increase our port security and expand the cooperation of other countries. We must ensure at least a minimum level of emergency preparation in every community in America.

"If we remain steadfast in our commitment to these goals, we will succeed. We will make the world safe for the practice of all religions, including Islam. After all, the majority of Muslims are peaceful and law-abiding - they too have been victimized by the radical minority.

"On the 10th anniversary of Sept. 11, 2001, I hope the world will visit the hallowed ground of the World Trade Center and see a soaring memorial to those who were killed there, as well as those in Washington, D.C., and Shanksville, Pa. A fitting tribute will pay honor not only to the victims of the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, but also to the spirit of freedom.

"There is a reason thousands of rescue personnel rushed into enormous danger to save men and women who were strangers to them. The reason was respect for the value of human life. It can also be described as love - the kind of love expressed in a biblical phrase, 'Man has no greater love than to lay down his life for his friend.' This respect for human life and love for others, including strangers, form the core of Western civilization. It is the driving force that helped us create freedom.

"What I learned from Sept. 11, 2001, is that free people have much greater strength than they realize. Ultimately, free people prevail over oppression."

"America is much stronger today than we were five years ago. We have new homeland-security structures up and running, improved intelligence agencies - and the most experienced military in the world.

"The dishonest nature of domestic politics and the media's irresponsibility obscure the fact that no one - not even the terrorists - now believes that our enemies can win a global victory. The terrorists are no longer fighting for conquest - they're running a salvage operation.

"Does that mean everything's perfect? Of course not. As noted above, some terrorists will manage to hit us again. But if attempt No. 500 succeeds, it doesn't mean it wasn't worth stopping the other 499. Yet, after the next attack, we'll hear no end of trash- talk about how the War on Terror 'failed.'

"The truth is that we're winning. Hands down. We just can't afford to revert to yesteryear's weakness and indecision.

"What should we worry about? Plenty. First, the unscrupulous nature of those in the media who always discover a dark cloud in the brightest silver lining. They're terror's cheerleaders. Second, the rabid partisanship infecting our political system - when 'getting Bush' is more important than protecting our country, something's wrong.

"A third concern is the Internet's empowerment of fanatics, conspiracy-theorists and all of the really good haters - on both extremes of the political spectrum. If there's one thing all responsible citizens, conservative, centrist or liberal, should agree on, it's that all extremism is un-American.

"On this September morning, let us dedicate ourselves to living for the values the hijackers feared: freedom, tolerance, human dignity - and the invincible strength of our democratic society. The greatest tribute we can pay to the dead of 9/11 is to be good Americans."

"In the immediate aftermath of Sept. 11, Mr. Bush's declared enemy was al-Qaeda and the allied Taliban regime in Afghanistan; later he defined an 'axis of evil' that lumped together Communist North Korea, Iran and the secular Iraqi dictatorship of Saddam Hussein. Now he perceives both al- Qaeda and Iran, as well as affiliates like the Lebanese Hizbullah movement, as collectively making up 'a worldwide network of radicals that use terror.'

"One problem with this view is that it acknowledges but skates over the enormous differences between Sunni terrorist networks and Iran. In Iraq, al-Qaeda is literally at war with proxies of Iran, which in turn is a sworn enemy of the Taliban. Mr. Bush asserts that 'the Shia and Sunni extremists represent different faces of the same threat'; in fact the Iranian regime does not threaten, as does al-Qaeda, to launch devastating attacks on the American homeland. Its interests are more nationalist and regional than ideological and global. There is a wide gap inside the regime between extremists like President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and moderates like former president Mahammed Khatami, who on Thursday delivered a speech at Washington National Cathedral calling for dialogue between the West and the Islamic world.

"The danger is that Mr. Bush's flawed definitions will lead to flawed strategy. While the threat that Iran will acquire nuclear weapons must be confronted - as should the nuclear threat from North Korea - Tehran's Islamic doctrine has not proved a major danger to the world, or even the region, over the last quarter- century. Mr. Bush rightly said that 'it is foolish to think that you can negotiate with' al-Qaeda. But as the State Department's recent diplomacy reflects, negotiation - or long-term containment - may be the best option for Iran.

"Mr. Bush seems to understand better than he did five years ago that diplomacy and the promotion of democratic values are as important to winning the war as military action. But in insisting on maintaining the CIA's secret prisons and in asking Congress to cancel some of the protections from abuse granted prisoners by the Geneva Conventions, he risks perpetuating and compounding one of his greatest errors. As senior U.S. generals now state publicly, abusive interrogation techniques are ineffective and counterproductive; they do not produce reliable intelligence. At the same time, they make it impossible for the United States to obtain full cooperation from key allies in Europe and elsewhere, damage its reputation round the world, and make it more likely that captured Americans will be tortured.

"Mr. Bush could do the country a great service by using the remainder of his term to put the war against terrorism on a sustainable long-tem course. But lumping disparate threats together, insisting on tactics that alienate allies and violate fundamental American values, and using the war as a partisan bludgeon makes for an unpromising start."

"The last year has seen some setbacks, which go far to explain the overglum mood surrounding the current anniversary. Yet it is by no means clear that those failures owe to some flaw in the overall U.S. strategy as opposed to tactical mistakes and the simple fact that we are fighting a determined, resourceful enemy that is itself adapting to our moves. The victory for Hamas, the troubles in Iraq, the uncertain outcome in the recent war in Lebanon, and above all the renewed aggression of Iran all pose major challenges. Mr. Bush's party may pay a price for those setbacks in November, though the president has begun to fight back.

"We're glad he is doing so, because the great challenge for this presidency is to remind Americans that the threat they face is undimmed even as the events of September 11 recede in memory?.

"On September 12, 2001, we wrote with some optimism about the 'resilience' of modern industrial democracies. That resilience has been proved time and again the past five years, and the challenge is to prove it again for the next five, or 50, if that's what victory requires."

So where do I stand? We're losing. We have failed thus far in Iraq; we blew an opportunity to begin to reshape the landscape throughout the region by not immediately establishing law and order there. We have lost the battle for the hearts and minds through episodes such as Abu Ghraib, which many Americans still fail to understand in terms of the long-range ramifications. Iran's influence has grown exponentially and they're on the verge of a bomb, while North Korea's Orcs continue to slave away in their own bombworks, and Afghanistan is on the verge of becoming a failed state.

And then there's the issue of Lebanon, where the White House is guilty of gross negligence in failing to even lift a finger for the fledgling government there, post-Hariri's assassination, which in turn led directly to the incredibly destructive war between Hizbullah and Israel. And to make matters worse, once Lebanon was destroyed we had the gall to offer help in rebuilding it, which now isn't even forthcoming.

But are we safer here in America? Yes. Absolutely. And in the broader war on terror, the United States has taken down many of al-Qaeda's senior leaders, though even here the recent agreement between the Pakistani government and the tribes in Waziristan hardly bodes well for any further high-level captures there, in a region where everyone knows bin Laden and Zawahiri are hanging out.

But is President Bush, as he said once again at his press conference on Friday, "doing everything necessary to protect the people"? No.

And that's the crime of it all. Yes, we've improved security in some areas, but not nearly enough with regards to two big targets, air cargo and the ports. Then you have items like I brought up the other week, where Amtrak has something like 300 police officers?for the entire system. Or security at our chemical plants. [I think the nuclear ones are reasonably secure from what I've studied.]

In the end, though, it all comes down to weapons of mass destruction. Critics of the White House say the administration is continually scaring the American public, but as one who was worried about this kind of attack before the first attempt to take down the World Trade Center in 1993, you will never find me in that camp.

Another view, one I don't totally share, from Natan Sharansky, former deputy prime minister of Israel and current member of parliament, in an op-ed for the Los Angeles Times.

"In the summer of 2000, Russian President Vladimir V. Putin told me a story that I have been unable to get out of my mind. We were meeting in the Kremlin, and I raised the grave danger facing the world from the transfer of missile technology and nuclear material to the Iranians. In Putin's view, however, the real danger came not from an Iranian nuclear-tipped missile or, for that matter, from the lethal arsenal of any nation-state.

" 'Imagine a sunny and beautiful day in a suburb of Manhattan,' he said. 'An elderly man is tending to the roses in his small garden with his nephew visiting from Europe. Life seems perfectly normal. The following day, the nephew, carrying a suitcase, takes a train to Manhattan. Inside the suitcase is a nuclear bomb.'

"The threat, Putin explained to me a year before 9/11, was not from this or that country but from their terrorist proxies - aided and supported quietly by a sovereign state that doesn't want to get its hands dirty - who will perpetrate their attacks without a return address. This scenario became real when al Qaeda plotted its 9/11 attacks from within Afghanistan and received support from the Taliban government. Then it happened again this summer, when Iran was allowed to wage a proxy war through Hizbullah in southern Lebanon and northern Israel. But this time, the international community's weak response dealt the global war on terror a severe blow?.

"(Iran) has paid no price for its proxy's actions. No military strikes on Iranian targets, no sanctions, no threat whatsoever to Iranian interests. On the contrary, in the wake of the war, there have been renewed calls in the democratic world to 'engage' Iran.

"Symptomatic of the moral myopia in the West is the farce worthy of Orwell: Former Iranian President Mohammad Khatami, under whom students were tortured after a 1999 crackdown at Tehran University and whose rule was marked by the continued stifling of dissent, spoke Sunday at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government on 'Ethics of Tolerance in the Age of Violence.'

"The Iranian regime's intentions are clear. It calls for 'wiping Israel off the map' and tells its followers to 'imagine a world without America.' It seeks to dominate the Middle East. By failing to hold Iran accountable for its brazen support of Hizbullah, the free world has undermined a central pillar in the war on terror and given the Iranian regime a huge weapon for achieving its ambitions. Now the mullahs know they can attack a democratic country with impunity.

"Considering the apocalyptic fanaticism of Iran's leader, it is an open question whether the current regime in Tehran is capable of being deterred through the threat of mutually assured destruction. But given how the world has responded to Hizbullah, the point may be academic. For surely Iran would be better served by using proxies to wage a nuclear war against Israel. And if there is no accountability, why stop with Israel?

"The road to a suitcase bomb in Tel Aviv, Paris or New York just got a whole lot shorter."

I noted in the initial days following 9/11 that it was going to be a dirty war requiring creative thinking, especially in terms of players like Russia. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld was one in particular who touted this theme, but then we didn't follow through.

"President Vladimir Putin's instantaneous and flawless reaction to (9/11) created the possibility for a fundamental change in Russia's relations with the United States and with the West as a whole. The Kremlin sided with the White House, offering moral support and practical assistance. It is not important what was guiding Putin - sincere solidarity with the United States, hope for preferential political and economic treatment, the conviction that terrorism represents an enormous threat, or the desire to legitimize its own campaign in Chechnya, as many of its detractors claimed. Whatever the case, it was a sweeping gesture.

"Later events showed that the administration of U.S. President George W. Bush took this reaction as a given. Washington was unable or unwilling to understand that gestures from another great power - and one with interests very much at odds with those of the United States - should be answered in kind. The overriding impression was that the shock of 9/11 deprived the United States of its capacity to pick up on subtle diplomatic gestures. The nation and its leaders focused entirely on their own fears and on the measures needed to overcome them. Here we are talking not just about U.S. relations with Russia, but the United States' behavior in the international arena in general, including toward its allies.

"The chance for a breakthrough in U.S.-Russian relations that existed following 9/11 and roughly until fall 2002 was missed. Washington calmly and deliberately put into effect its own agenda, disregarding outside objections and failing to take seriously whether its agenda matched the interests of the rest of the world.

"The greatest destructive potential for relations between Russia and the United States - and for Moscow's pro-Western course in the international arena in general - was the Bush administration's main ideological tenet of tying global security issues to the cause of advancing democracy. Outside partners found it hard to swallow a neoconservative ideology that organically combined genuine democratic messianism with adherence to definite U.S. geopolitical ambitions. In this sense, Russia was a particularly difficult case?.

"In the final analysis, Russia has come to the conclusion that the global war on terrorism is simply a new arena for unfolding global competition, and the accompanying phenomenon, labeled 'promoting democracy,' is a tool in that competition. Thus, Russia should not just sit back, but take advantage of the opportunities presented by today's complex global situation. Arms sales to Iran, Syria and Venezuela, for example, are often seen as anti-U.S. political moves. In fact, they are pure business and not at all personal, especially given that Russian capitalism is young and rapacious, as young capitalism was everywhere else in the world two centuries ago. If there is a quick buck to be made somewhere, that's where we'll make it because that's what everybody else does, and the only difference is that we're more open about it and have not yet learned how to dress greed for gain in idealistic language."

[On his attendance at a briefing President Bush gave for a few columnists on Tuesday.]

"(Bush) opened the session by declaring, 'Let me just first tell you that I've never been more convinced that the decisions I made are the right decisions,' and he grew more self-assured from there. I interview politicians for a living, and every time I brush against Bush I'm reminded that this guy is different. There's none of that hunger for approval that is common to the breed. This is the most inner-directed man on the globe?.

"All of which prepares him to think about the war on terror as a generations-long struggle. He asked us to think about what the world could look like 50 years from now, with Islamic radicals either controlling the world's oil supply or not. 'I firmly believe that some day American presidents will be looking back at this period in time, saying, 'Thank goodness they saw the vision,'' he said.

"Sitting between busts of Lincoln and Churchill, he continued, 'My hope is to leave behind something - foundations and institutions that will enable future presidents to be able to more likely make the tough decisions that they're going to have to make.' [Ed. Huh?]

" 'Ideological struggles take time,' he said, explaining the turmoil in Iraq and elsewhere. He said the events of weeks or months were just a nanosecond compared with the long course of this conflict. He was passionate on the need for patience and steadfastness. He talked about 'inviolate' principles written upon his heart: 'People want you to change. It's tactics that shift, but the strategic vision has not, and will not, shift.'

"He was less personal and less assertive when talking about those tactical decisions made day to day.

"We are now at a moment when many of the people who support his long-term goals, and who have stuck with him as the situation in Iraq has deteriorated, fear the war is irreparably lost. The general view among many Republicans is that Bush set out grand goals, but never committed resources commensurate with the task?.

"(On) troop levels and other tactical issues, Bush defers to Gen. George Casey, who is in Iraq. He asks questions but does not contradict the experts. If Casey asked for two more divisions tomorrow, Bush would deliver, regardless of the political consequences. But Casey does not ask (and maybe none are available).

" 'Then I picked the wrong general,' Bush says bluntly. 'If he's wrong, I'm wrong.'

"When asked if he should have expanded the military back in 2003, to give the current commanders more manpower, Bush used words that were uncharacteristically jargon-ridden: 'The notion of warfare has changed, and therefore, we're modulizing the army so that it becomes more operational and easier to move.' That sounds more like a transformation briefing paper than the president.

"In other words, when Bush is strategizing goals, he is assertiveness on stilts. When he is contemplating means, he defers to authority.

"And the sad truth is, there has been a gap between Bush's visions and the means his administration has devoted to realize them. And when tactics do not adjust to fit the strategy, then the strategy eventually gets diminished to fit the tactics.

"On September the 11th, we learned that America must confront threats before they reach our shores - whether those threats come from terrorist networks or terrorist states. I am often asked why we are in Iraq when Saddam Hussein was not responsible for the 9/11 attack. The answer is that the regime of Saddam Hussein was a clear threat. My administration, the Congress and the United Nations saw the threat - and after 9/11, Saddam's regime posed a risk that the world could not afford to take. The world is safer because Saddam Hussein is no longer in power. And now the challenge is to help the Iraqi people build a democracy that fulfills the dreams of the nearly 12 million Iraqis who came out to vote in free elections last December?.

"We will not leave until this work is done. Whatever mistakes have been made in Iraq, the worst mistake would be to think that if we pulled out, the terrorists would leave us alone. They will not leave us alone. They will follow us. The safety of America depends on the outcome of the battle in the streets of Baghdad."

This was a controversial passage in the president's speech as Democrats complained Bush was politicizing the 9/11 anniversary.

Neocon William Kristol, editor of The Weekly Standard, took the other side and went even further in an op-ed for the Washington Post.

"Administration spokesmen have jettisoned talk of 'staying the course' in Iraq in favor of 'adapting to win.' If those words are to have meaning, the administration can't simply stay the course on current troop levels. We need to adapt to win the battle of Baghdad. We need substantially more troops in Iraq. Sending them would be a courageous act of presidential leadership appropriate to the crisis we face."

That's not likely to happen and this week our military said it was at risk of losing western Iraq, the Anbar province. The bloodshed in Baghdad increased again as well.

But more importantly for the long run, support for a new constitution that basically calls for three autonomous regions appears to be waning because the Sunnis see themselves as being cut out of the process and with no guarantee they will receive a fair share of the oil revenues. The Shiites, on the other hand, want autonomy like the Kurds have. And as for the Kurds, they've been removing the Iraqi flag from their government buildings. [They also continue to wreak havoc in Turkey with another terrorist attack there killing 10 last week.]

Meanwhile, Iraqi Prime Minister Maliki traveled to Tehran. This is how the Tehran Times covered the visit.

"Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei said here on Wednesday that Iran feels obliged to support the Iraqi government and nation in practice.

" 'We hope that one day the Iraqi nation will regain their rightful place and take the financial and human capital of the country into their own hands with the withdrawal of the foreigners,' Ayatollah Khamenei told Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki?.

"The Leader expressed regret over the suffering and hardships that the Iraqis are experiencing every day, saying, 'Some of the hardships are related to the actions of the former dictatorship and some are related to the presence of the occupiers in Iraq.

" 'With the withdrawal of the occupiers, a great proportion of Iraq's problems will be resolved. Therefore, we hope for their speedy withdrawal.'"

"Iran has made the utmost efforts to help establish security in Iraq in the 41 months since the collapse of Saddam's dictatorship.

"Iran's actions have prevented the outbreak of all-out sectarian and ethnic strife in Iraq and have also prevented the violence from spilling over the border into neighboring countries.

"The presence of the occupiers in Iraq has hindered the process of establishing security in the country, making it one of the most serious challenges facing the Iraqi government.

"In addition, the occupying forces are trying to justify their presence in Iraq by fanning the flames of sectarian strife and fomenting insecurity, whereas their withdrawal would allow the Iraqi government to implement its national plan to establish a consensus between all Iraqi factions."

On the nuclear weapons program issue, Russia and China won't even support strong language against Iran for failure to suspend uranium enrichment, even though the Aug. 31 deadline to do so is long past. This is the UN "Security" Council?

Next week Iran's President Ahmadinejad will be in New York, along with the likes of Presidents Karzai and Musharraf.

Which leads me to Afghanistan, where the violence has been unrelenting and NATO forces, mostly the Brits and Canadians, are under constant fire as they heroically tackle the job of rooting out the Taliban from their southern stronghold. The Canadians have lost 16 soldiers in just the past three months.

NATO's military leaders have called for more contributions, yet Turkey said 'no,' a distressing development. Finally Poland said it would contribute 1,000 but they won't be on the ground until February and it needs to be noted the U.S. is looking to cut its own force further as, it was hoped, NATO's troop levels rose. Former presidential candidate John Kerry made some hay this week by calling for more U.S. forces in Afghanistan, while continuing to advocate a deadline for Iraq.

Vice President Dick Cheney said last Sunday on "Meet the Press," "The fact is we've made major progress in Afghanistan."

No we haven't. Yes, we have a democratically elected government, and that is indeed an accomplishment, but at the same time President Karzai's good friend, a high-ranking provincial governor, was assassinated and then at the man's funeral a suicide bomber killed another six. That's symptomatic of recent developments. Plus we all know the opium story and the Taliban has obviously returned.

Even more worrisome was the comment of a British general on the ground there; "The battle for the hearts and minds is being lost."

And to top it all off we had the release of a surveillance photo showing a group of up to 200 Taliban fighters in southern Afghanistan, amassed for a funeral, and some moron in the Pentagon, or on the ground, said we couldn't take them out.

On to Lebanon, a rapidly failing state. British Prime Minister Tony Blair, himself failed, was booed vociferously on a visit to Beirut. Shia/Hizbullah supporter and Parliament Speaker Nabbi Berri blasted Blair and Grand Ayatollah Fadlallah called Blair "persona non grata" for his support of President Bush and the Israeli assault on his country. What irks the Lebanese is the fact that Blair, like Bush, was slow to demand an immediate ceasefire.

For his part Hizbullah's Hassan Nasrallah said "This Tony Blair is an associate in the murdering," and said this of Prime Minister Fouad Siniora who welcomed Blair.

"You bring (Blair) home to me and to my family and you give him a great reception? If there was an invitation extended to Tony Blair to visit then this is a national disaster."

And so what we have here is the beginning of the end of the democratically elected government of Lebanon. It would seem it's only a matter of time before the Siniora government succumbs to a coup, even as key players like Hizbullah and Amal say there are no plans to topple the government.

Druze leader Walid Jumblatt begs to differ, and he brings up the point that any change is really about protecting those responsible for the assassination of Rafik Hariri, i.e., Syria. Jumblatt also called for the reinforcement of the Lebanese Army, but don't look for Washington to act too speedily on the request.

There were a few good developments on the building of a UN peacekeeping force, however. France contributed a heavy tank division and Germany is deploying 2,400 naval personnel to patrol the waters. [But no ground troops because the last thing Germany is about to chance is a conflict with Israeli troops?you understand, something about the history between the two peoples.]

On the other side, though, Iran is supplying devastated South Lebanon with new power generators, so guess whose loyalty they're winning over?

As for Israel itself, Prime Minister Olmert and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas could soon be squaring off in direct negotiations as Abbas and Hamas' Prime Minister Haniyeh reached an agreement on a coalition government, with Abbas being granted the power to deal with Israel directly as the Palestinians' representative. In turn the Palestinians are hoping the international community will finally lift the financial sanctions levied on it after the election of the Hamas government. Virtually zero foreign aid has been forthcoming ever since.

On 9/2 in this space, as oil closed the week at $69.24, I concluded falling prices "could be a huge boon for Republicans come November." As oil continues to swoon, now $63.33, this is becoming clearer and clearer. $2.50 at the pump (as it's approaching in most places), and soon to be lower, certainly makes us feel better as consumers and while the president deserves zero credit for the decline, it's kind of funny how many want to give it to him. [And no, there is no conspiracy.]

By now you all know the reasons why we're all getting a break these days, including on natural gas. No hurricanes is the biggest reason. I'll tell you what really surprises me in this regard. We know the Gulf of Mexico is like a giant warm bath, so why hasn't one developed right there? I mean hurricanes form in the Gulf all the time. Frankly, it's kind of astounding, and great for Gulf coast residents.

So with zero hurricane-related disruptions, and with crude and other products in record supply in terms of inventories, the other two big reasons for the price having held above $70 until now are speculators, of which there are many, and Iran.

Speculators come and go, and at light speed, but the Iranian situation is far from disappearing from the radar screen. It's just as if the controllers have turned away for a moment and we can only hope that when they refocus one of them doesn't go, "Uh, what's that blip?"

Of course I'm being a little ornery here, but you get the point. As I noted in the opening discussion Iran is proceeding on its merry way to nukedom and no one, least of all Russia and China, is stopping it.

But just as in the case of North Korea, after a while it's easy to take your eye off the ball. Baseball has its dog days of summer and in geopolitical terms these past few weeks, since the Aug. 31 deadline for Iran to stop its uranium enrichment, have been the world's equivalent.

There is another factor tugging on oil, however, and that is the threat of a slowdown in global economic activity. OPEC, the International Energy Agency, and the Energy Information Administration have all been ratcheting down their demand forecasts for the 4th quarter and 2007. Nothing drastic, mind you, but enough to make one think; what would happen if the United States tips into recession?

Seeing as I'm in the recession camp (not a good one to be in this week, I'll admit), and believing demand could drop rather significantly, I'm staying away from my once favorite sector, oil stocks. But, at the same time I'm beginning to lick my chops because at some point they'll bottom.

For now, though, consumers are feeling better, as evidenced not only in some of the sentiment numbers but also in politically oriented surveys.

Plus, the data on August consumer prices was tame and retail sales rose (albeit tepidly) when the reverse was forecast. Throw in the decline in energy prices and there is zero reason for the Federal Reserve to raise interest rates when it meets this coming week.

Actually, the IMF raised its estimate for global growth in 2007 from 4.9% to 5.1%. The United States is expected to grow at a 2.9% clip (nirvana in terms of stocks and bonds as it's far from too hot so the Fed would continue to be held at bay), while China is still looking at 10% growth and India 7.3%, all with little inflation, again, according to the IMF.

Goodness gracious. Is the IMF worried about anything? Well actually they are?.U.S. real estate, and the potential the global property bubble could unwind across the board.

Back in the U.S., housing analyst Ivy Zelman of Credit Suisse, who has been bang on in her analysis thus far, said "We believe that the housing market is still in the early innings of a hard landing that will likely take several years to develop."

--The stair-step pattern in the markets continued. Since the week ending Aug. 4, we haven't had two straight in the same direction for the Dow Jones. But as was the case this week, the gains have far outweighed the losses. This time the Dow gained 1.5% to close at 11560, or a mere 162 points from the all-time high of Jan. 2000. Nasdaq is back to 2235, just 2800 shy of its record mark?..sorry.

The U.S. trade deficit hit another record in July, $68 billion, but this time concern was muted because of the fall in oil prices since that date which will lead to lower import figures in future data.

As for the U.S. budget deficit, it was $64.6 billion in August, or 26% higher than a year ago, but with one month left in the fiscal year the overall figure for 2006 is expected to still come in well below '05's $318 billion.

Individual income-tax receipts are up 12%, year over year, while corporate income taxes are up 29%; but as to the latter you've learned this is totally because of the huge profits turned in by the oil companies.

On the CPI front, while the figures for August were tame, ex-food and energy the core CPI is up 2.8%, year over year; still above the Fed's target for price stability.

Both Saudi Aramco and ExxonMobil officials attempted to refute the peak oil adherents, saying they've heard this tune before and the world is still awash in black gold.

I used to agree with this, though over the past two years I've been converted to the Church of Depleting Fields. [We throw good 'end of the world' parties, by the way.]

Now granted, today's technology, as best exhibited the other week by the deepwater find in the Gulf of Mexico, could enable us to squeeze oil out of earth's last molten magma, I guess, but it ain't cheap to drill for it and unless the price of crude remains high there is zero incentive for the oil companies to commit vast sums.

That's point one. Point two is I keep looking at the situation in Mexico, where production continues to slide, or the North Sea, also in decline. Again, technology will help, but the costs are enormous.

I haven't turned on my AC or heat for over five weeks now at home. It's been this way throughout the entire New York area. Like, hey, no wonder natural gas is at $5, off its December high of $15.48.

And the Los Angeles Times had an interesting piece on the shortage of workers, rigs and seismic equipment. There were 4,000 rigs in 1981 and today the number is less than half this. People forget the down periods in this business. Like the 15-year one that began in the early 1980s. Over one million were laid off.

Lastly, here's an example of the economics in the industry today, also courtesy of the L.A. Times. To drill its recent Gulf of Mexico test well that led to claims of a giant find, Chevron paid $216,000 a day to lease Transocean's Cajun Express rig. The fee will rise to $460,000 a day from 2007 through 2010.

--Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson attempted to put his stamp on U.S.-China trade relations. In what was labeled a "landmark speech" by the Financial Times, Paulson said he would tell his counterparts in Beijing during an upcoming trip that "We want you to succeed."

"The United States has a huge stake in a prosperous, stable China," said Paulson, "a China able and willing to play its part as a global economic leader."

"The biggest risk we face is not that China will overtake the U.S. but that China will not move ahead with the reforms necessary to sustain its growth."

Paulson emphasized that while he appreciates China's long-term issues, it needs to "show more flexibility in the short term."

And speaking of the here and now, the U.S., European Union and Canada are filing a complaint with the World Trade Organization against China's import tariffs on auto parts. It's the first time the three have teamed up in a dispute with Beijing.

This is what continually amazes some of us. China "has refused to change its policy of charging an average 25% levy on imported auto parts," while at the same time applying a "local content" requirement on those with factories in China - such as General Motors, of at least 40%, which totally violates the rules China pledged to follow when it joined the WTO in 2001. [Wall Street Journal]

--Ford Motor Co. is offering buyout packages to all 80,000 of its hourly workers while eliminating up to 14,000 white-collar positions by 2008 (4,000 of which were previously announced) as well as doing away with its dividend. As part of its restructuring plan, Ford is following in the footsteps of General Motors, which saw 35,000 accept its own buyout offers. GM now says it will be able to cut about $9 billion in annual costs. Ford is looking for similar success. Shares in Ford, however, fell 12% on the latest bad news.

--Daimler-Chrysler surprised the Street in saying it expects its Chrysler division to lose nearly $1.5 billion in the third quarter, far greater than initially expected. The stock fell about 7%.

--Hewlett-Packard Chairwoman Patricia Dunn announced she will step down in January, with CEO Mark Hurd assuming the additional slot as H-P deals with the now criminal probe into media leaks and obtaining of reporter and director phone records, or "pretexting."

"The phone records scandal boiling up at Hewlett-Packard brings back some intensely unpleasant and infuriating memories for this columnist.

"Four years ago this month, my own phone records were stolen, and in exactly the same way the phone records of various H-P board members were stolen earlier this year: by private investigators who used the Internet and fake e-mail addresses to jive AT&T into handing them over.

"These days, the practice is known as 'pretexting' - a nice, sanitizing word that masks the demonic criminal scheming that's really behind it. Yet whatever word one uses to describe it, the skullduggery still amounts to stealing. And with the war on terror increasingly benumbing Americans to the relentless erosion of their civil liberties, the organized theft of telephone records has become one of the fastest growing and least prosecuted crimes in cyberspace."

--Bristol-Myers Squibb CEO Peter Dolan was forced to resign, following a pitiful five-year reign that was capped off by the incredibly mishandled attempt to settle a patent dispute involving Bristol-Myers' top drug, Plavix.

Now it's assumed Bristol-Myers is on the block and the Star- Ledger reported Schering-Plough is a potential acquirer.

--Apple Computer launched a number of new initiatives, including a movie service involving 75 full-length Walt Disney Co. films sold over its iTunes store. In conjunction with this, Apple will sell a new device, iTV, that will display movies and television shows over the Internet on television sets. And Apple is expanding its iPod line.

Sales of iPod and iTunes song and video downloads accounted for 45% of Apple's $4.37 billion in revenue for the 2nd quarter, and iTunes has 88% of the market for legal downloads in the U.S.

Meanwhile, Microsoft launched its long-awaited competing product, Zune, reception for which is unknowable at this time.

--With all the talk of the 9/11 anniversary, Wall Street's disaster planning was once again a topic of conversation and no doubt the Street has taken a number of significant steps. For example, the Bank of New York "has built two identical data centers, one 40 miles from its 1 Wall Street headquarters and (another) 750 miles away."

"Each is a replica, just waiting for the other to fail," says Don Monks, BoNY's vice-chairman. [Financial Times]

--An economist in Madrid, Lorenzo Bernardo de Quiros, was quoted in the Journal as saying "Spain is headed for a first-class beating, and the only question now is when it will come." He's talking about real estate, of course. Housing prices here have more than doubled since 1997 and the sector has accounted for 20% of the new jobs created in Spain since 1995. But while renewed activity in real estate is confounding experts, the fact is millions of homes sit empty, even as construction picks up again. Economist Quiros says "This uptick is sending exactly the wrong signal to Spanish families. Instead of acting rationally and preparing for a tougher climate ahead, they are still acting like the party will never end - and that will make the ending all the more painful." Spain has built more houses than France, Britain and Germany combined for the past five years straight. I've noted before that many Europeans have second homes here.

--American Express will allow some high-end clients to charge down payments on condominiums. So buyers will be able to earn reward points! I'm going to have to see if I qualify because maybe I'll buy a condo just to get an upgrade to my George Foreman Grill.

--As much as I believe in the bursting of the real estate bubble, the fact in the New York area is Wall Street bonuses are once again going to be huge this year so you'd think some higher-end homes may hold up better than most.

--Russian President Vladimir Putin said he is committed to expanding exports of oil and gas to Asia over the next 10-15 years; from its current 3 percent to 30 percent. Of course this raises further concerns in Europe, but, fear not, Putin said Russia would continue to "behave in a responsible way." Right. --Hedge funds account for 45% of annual trading volume in emerging market bonds and 47% of annual volume in distressed debt. [Investment News] At some point this blows up.

--Merck suffered another setback with its anti-inflammatory drug Vioxx, as the Journal of the American Medical Association published a study that said the talked of heart and kidney dangers from use of Vioxx can occur from the first day of usage, not just after long-term use.

--Slumping Dell Computer delayed release of its fiscal 2nd quarter financial report and suspended its share repurchase program due to a federal accounting probe looking into results since 2002.

--Mars candy company is expanding its line of "heart healthy" snacks; new versions of CocoaVia that are rich in flavanols and plant sterol additives designed to lower cholesterol and improve blood flow. Here at StocksandNews we get our flavanols by eating a chocolate-covered donut each morning, refrigerated first for up to two hours, then consumed during the opening of the "Today Show."

--McDonald's reported its same store sales in Europe were way up (though stagnant in the U.S.), and shares are now at a five- year high. Well I've been admiring the commercials Mickey D's has been running for its new "snack wrap" and I had to try out the product.

I give it an 'A'. But only if they keep the price at $1.29. Two of 'em does make for a good snack or light lunch. Throw in some Breyers Reese's Peanut Butter Cups Ice Cream and you're one happy camper.

--Back in 2001 and in succeeding comments I labeled the Segway an "idiotic" invention. Basically, I can now rest my case as the manufacturer recalled every one of its dumb scooters because of a glitch that could cause riders to fall off and kill themselves. Actually, no deaths have been reported, just six injuries, but the problem occurs when folks attempt to push the scooter past its maximum speed. I guess they think they're on the Bonneville Salt Flats.

This isn't the first time Dean Kamen's invention has had a glitch, by the way. I was writing of another three years ago.

My portfolio: I haven't done anything recently. Just chilling out; carbon fiber play in one hand, 'puts' on a mortgage originator in the other, as well as assorted flotsam. My 80% cash / 20% equities recommendation doesn't look as good these days, but I'm shy of the S&P 500 by only a few points.

Vatican: Pope Benedict XVI is a true scholar and he clearly knew the implication of a passage he employed in a speech at a German University this week. Questioning the concept of holy war, he quoted Emperor Manual II of Byzantine, present-day Istanbul, where the Orthodox Christian empire ruled in the 14th century.

"Show me just what Muhammad brought that was new and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached."

Needless to say, Muslims were none too pleased and so the Holy War has begun. [Half-kidding.] I'll have more on this next time.

"Islamist terror is a deadly threat we have barely begun to address. Yet religion-fueled fanaticism in the Middle East shouldn't surprise us: The tradition pre-dates the Prophet's birth by thousands of years.

"What should amaze us isn't the terrorists' strength, which has limits, but the comprehensive failure of Middle Eastern civilization. Given all the wealth that's poured into the region, its vast human resources and all of its opportunities for change, the mess the Middle East has made of itself is stunning.

"Beyond Israel, the region hasn't produced a single first-rate government, army, economy, university or industry. It hasn't even produced convincing second-raters.

"Culturally, the region is utterly noncompetitive. Societies stagnate as populations seethe. To the extent it exists, development benefits the wealthy and powerful. The common people are either ignored or miserably oppressed - and not just the women?.

"Since the Renaissance, the West fixed its gaze on the future. Islamic civilization sought to freeze time, to cling to a dream of a lost paradise, part Islamic Baghdad, part Babylon.

"Shocked awake over the past few centuries, some Middle Easterners realized they had to change. But they didn't know how. Modernization sputtered out. Pan-Arabism foundered on greed and corruption.

"The shah tried to buy the 'good parts' of Western civilization, but the pieces didn't work on their own. Next, Iran tried theocracy - government by bigots. Didn't work either.

" 'Oil-rich' Saudi Arabia has a per capita GDP half that of Israel's (whose sole resource is people). Dubai has shopping malls - selling designer goods with Western labels.

"Today's fanatics can hurt us, but can't destroy us. Their fatal ability is to drag their civilization down to an even lower level.

"The problem is that the Middle East hasn't been able to escape the Middle East."

Pakistan: As alluded to above, President Musharraf cut a deal with tribal leaders in North Waziristan, whereby he'll withdraw the Pakistani Army from the area in return for promises by the militants they won't try to kill him.

"Why would Mr. Musharraf strike this deal? The simple answer is that his army was defeated in its attempt to eliminate the al- Qaeda sanctuary by force; since launching the campaign in 2003, it had suffered more than 500 killed. Mr. Musharraf, who tried to dress up his maneuver by visiting Afghanistan the next day, said he was worried about a full-scale uprising in the area. Though he didn't say so, the general is surely hoping that the truce will add to his personal security?

"The cost of his decision will be borne by American and NATO troops in Afghanistan, whose commanders already say that the ability of Taliban and al-Qaeda fighters to retreat to Pakistan greatly complicates the challenge of defeating their escalating attacks. So why did Vice President Cheney call Mr. Musharraf 'a great ally' just days after his separate peace? Administration officials seem more willing to forgive their autocratic friend than they are domestic critics of the war on terrorism."

South Korea: President Roh Moo Hyun was in Washington for talks with President Bush and the two leaders vowed to restart the stalled six-party talks on North Korea's nuclear weapons program. But on other issues Bush and Roh (pronounced 'Noh') were themselves stalemated.

It boils down to the fact the U.S. wants to maintain a hard line with Pyongyang while Roh is following in the footsteps of previous South Korean leaders who desire to pursue a "sunshine" policy with Kim Jong Il.

"Could Seoul and Washington be sliding toward an 'amicable divorce,' as some Korea-watchers are terming it? Under this view, this week's White House summit?is marriage counseling. Expectations are low, as prickly agenda items are plentiful: the timing of the transfer of wartime Korean troop control to Seoul (an idea that the Pentagon has almost gleefully embraced); increasingly frayed Seoul-Tokyo relations; shaky negotiations for a South Korea-U.S. free trade agreement; and Mr. Roh's re- establishment of emergency foot aid, along with verbal niceties for Kim Jong Il?.

"For more than half a century, Pax Americana has ruled on the peninsula. But today, even South Korea's opposition Grand National Party, for all its hawkish rhetoric, doesn't really envision a military option for dealing with North Korea. It will take more than a frosty summit?to stimulate some real fear among the Korean people about who's protecting their interests and ensuring their security."

Jin Ha Hwang, member of the opposition Grand National Party, in an op-ed for The Wall Street Journal

"First, the security situation on the Korean peninsula is more fragile than ever. It was only March of this year when the commanding general of the U.S. Forces Korea, Gen. Burwell B. Bell, testified at the U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee that 'North Korea poses a variety of threats to regional and global stability.'

"Second, a transfer (of military authority) might encourage North Korea to step up its rogue tactics. For the past half-century, North Korean leaders have persistently called for the withdrawal of American troops and dismantlement of the Combined Forces Command. Pyongyang has also continuously insisted that it would not discuss any military issues with a Seoul that does not even have wartime control over its military. The North's regime would undoubtedly see the transfer as a victory, and use it to strengthen their otherwise dissipating domestic legitimacy?.

"Even as politics may have changed on the Korean peninsula, the security situation, in terms of the need for deterrence, has not changed one bit. North Korea's asymmetric threats still pose a grave danger to South Korea's security, as well as to countless U.S. economic and political interests. What about the possibility of a major crisis like the North's sudden collapse? Now is the time to keep the alliance intact and strengthen its combined defense capabilities."

The problem is a majority of young people in South Korea obviously have zero memories of the Korean War and as I told you when I was there in the spring, they are hopelessly na?ve.

On the other hand, the North is incapable of invading the South, by my reading of the situation. It comes down to whether or not Kim Jong Il wants to commit suicide in launching a missile and artillery barrage on Seoul?or missiles on Tokyo. It's also about the men behind Kim. Who are they?

That said, the U.S. should turn over control to Seoul and withdraw its forces. We'll still have more than ample firepower in Japan and Guam to immediately counter any move by the North. The deterrent thus remains in place.

China: Both the United States and the European Union condemned China's latest efforts to muzzle the distribution of foreign news, saying it viewed the rules with "great concern."

New regulations, as announced by Xinhua, China's biggest news agency, will require international services such as Reuters and Dow Jones to censor information distributed inside the country. And it bans agencies from selling directly to banks and other financial service companies. China can now revoke the licenses of any found distributing content that "harms China's national security or honor," or "hurts ethnic feelings."

"(Why) muscle in now? Perhaps Beijing's political elite feel threatened. Freedom of information is unsettling to any authoritarian state. In recent years Beijing has alternatively creaked open, then slammed shut, the television industry and lifestyle magazines. In recent months, the Communist government has also floated new rules restricting reporting of natural disasters and riots; increased oversight of local television broadcasters; convicted New York Times news assistant Zhao Yan and Singapore's Straits Times reporter Ching Cheong, and so on?.

"The reformers among Beijing's elites need to explain to their colleagues that returning to old habits of censorship won't protect their future."

And then you have the likes of Cisco, Oracle, EMC and Motorola; all of whom have been supplying software to the Chinese government that allows them to spy more effectively on its citizenry.

"The scramble to sell technology to Chinese law enforcers seems, for starters, to be at odds with the intent of an American export law enacted after the massacre of hundreds of pro- democracy demonstrators in Tiananmen Square in 1989. The Tiananmen sanctions prohibited the export 'of any crime control or detection instruments or equipment' to China."

But today the Commerce Department has done little more than block the sale of handcuffs, yet at the same time the State Department estimates the Commies are holding at least 260,000 people in "reeducation" camps.

Just another example of how the U.S. government, be it the administration of Bill Clinton or George W. Bush, is nothing more than a bunch of hypocrites. It's all about the money, of course.

Taiwan: 200,000 protested over the corruption scandals enveloping President Chen Shui-bian, urging him to resign, but follow on protests were greatly diminished.

And on Wednesday, Chen said that after being rejected for UN membership for 14 years in a row as the "Republic of China," he "will bow to the obvious and apply next time as 'Taiwan.'" Chen knows the application will be derailed by China.

Separately, China lodged a protest over a visit by members of Israel's Knesset to Taipei.

Russia: President Vladimir Putin told a group of journalists at one of his private dinners that he was definitely stepping down in 2008. You won't convince me of this until it actually happens.

And there was the tragic case of Russian Central Bank official Andrei Kozlov, who was assassinated in Moscow.

Kozlov had been leading the charge to clean up Russia's corrupt banking system where money-laundering has been part of doing business. He was his country's chief financial reformer and was known to close down two or three banks a week.

Some said this was a personal blow to Putin. I'm not so sure it's that easy. He's sold out others before.

Syria: The government of Bashar Assad deserves some credit for foiling a terror attack on the U.S. embassy in Damascus, but the bigger picture is still troubling. How did the terrorists, armed with grenades and machine guns, come as close as they did?

Mexico: After over two months of protests, Leftist Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador appears to be backing down from his threat to create an alternative government after his call for a total recount of the July presidential vote was denied by the Electoral Court. Lopez Obrador now realizes many in his coalition, such as those in the middle class, are abandoning his cause and instead he is going to try to become the leader of a 'shadow government' where he could continue to criticize Felipe Calderon. Lopez Obrador promised not to exploit Saturday's Independence Day parade as had once been feared.

Ukraine: New Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych, as expected, told NATO his nation was putting membership in the alliance on hold, though Ukraine still wants to be part of the European Union. Yanukovych added that the NATO issue would have to be submitted to the people by referendum and as I've written before, Ukraine is split 50-50 on this.

India: A proposed alliance between India, Brazil and South Africa on exploring "peaceful uses of nuclear energy" may actually convince the U.S. Congress to approve the nuclear deal between Washington and New Delhi. The reason is Brazil and South Africa are part of the 45-member Nuclear Suppliers Group, which regulates nuclear material. The organization has to say yes for the U.S. to supply technology to India.

Canada: According to an Ipsos-Reid poll, 22 percent of Canadians, and 26 percent of young people, believe the attacks on the United States on 9/11 had nothing to do with Osama bin Laden and were actually a plot by influential Americans as part of a wider plan to profit from the aftermath. Yikes.

[Separately, at least the attack on Dawson College in Montreal wasn't terror-related?.just another deranged wacko. Kudos to the Montreal police for handling an awful situation as well as they did.]

"A number of Nigerian politicians have been conned out of thousands of dollars by people selling papers purporting to certify them as 'corruption-free.'

"The scam follows a warning by Nigeria's anti-graft agency that anyone guilty of corruption would be banned from contesting next year's elections.

"Conmen have been impersonating agency officials, donning dark suits to look the part."

Dow Jones +1.5% [11560]
S&P 500 +1.6% [1319]
S&P MidCap +1.7%
Russell 2000 +2.9%
Nasdaq +3.2% [2235]

BUYandHOLD does not offer or provide any investment advice or opinion regarding the nature, potential, value, suitability or profitability of any particular security, portfolio of securities, transaction or investment strategy. Any investment decisions you make will be based solely on your evaluation of your financial circumstances, investment objectives, risk tolerance, and liquidity needs. The securities mentioned above are being used for illustrative purposes only and should not be regarded as an offer to sell or as a solicitation of an offer to buy. The securities markets are subject to the risks of fluctuating prices and the uncertainty of rates of return and yields inherent in investing. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. The opinions expressed above are not necessarily those of BUYandHOLD, Freedom Investments, its officers, directors or any of its affiliates.

The BUYandHOLD website contains links to third-party websites on the Internet. BUYandHOLD provides these links to these websites only as a convenience to users of the website. Links on the BUYandHOLD website are not endorsements by BUYandHOLD or Freedom Investments, implied or express, of the linked sites or any products, services or links in such sites; and no information in such sites has been endorsed or approved by BUYandHOLD. Linked sites are not under the control of BUYandHOLD or Freedom Investments, and we are not responsible for the contents of any linked site or any link contained in a linked site. No information contained in the BUYandHOLD website or accessed through any linked site, or any link contained in a linked site, constitutes a recommendation by BUYandHOLD or Freedom Investments to buy, sell or hold any security, financial product or instrument. Information accessed through linked sites is not, nor should be construed as, an offer or a solicitation of an offer, to buy or sell securities by BUYandHOLD or Freedom Investments. BUYandHOLD does not offer or provide any investment advice or opinion regarding the nature, potential, value, suitability or profitability of any particular security, portfolio of securities, transaction or investment strategy, and any investment decisions you make will be based solely on your evaluation of your financial circumstances, investment objectives, risk tolerance, and liquidity needs.