It's Not Google. It's That Other Big I.P.O.. Salesforce.com might just prove to be the hottest public technology offering this side of Google, becoming the Microsoft of the 21st century. By Gary Rivlin. [New York Times: Technology]

Web sites are rapdily become the next generation platform for exnterprise and commerical software development - which is being made possible by open APIs and open source standards.  O'Reilly will be running a conference on this topic in October, called Web2.0. Check it out.

6:37:18 PM    

They've Apologized. Now What? [New York Times: International News]

The column's conclusion:

That there are no good options at this point is fast becoming a cliché. Mr. Holbrooke, an adviser to the Kerry campaign, said that the administration must now explicitly concede that the American presence in Iraq is illegitimate and illegal in the eyes of the Arab world and turn affairs over to the United Nations. Then the administration can maneuver behind the scenes to ensure that the interim Iraqi government installed after June 30 quickly invites American troops to begin a phased withdrawal over an extended period. Such a request could hardly be refused.

But Mr. Bush and Mr. Blair see Iraq as a fight to deliver the Middle East from Al Qaeda's poisonous ideology by opening up Arab society and linking it to the West. They point to the 2,300 schools rehabilitated, the $32 billion pledged for reconstruction, the higher-than-expected oil revenues in recent months and the relative strength of the new currency. A withdrawal on their watch, even a phased one, looks unlikely.

Their goal, however, has never looked more elusive. Abu Ghraib is not My Lai. Nothing like the infamous massacre of Vietnamese civilians took place in the Iraqi prison. But it is assuming something of the mantle of that tragedy - a vivid stain on America's conscience. How the United States can recover the moral authority with which much of the world still yearns to vest it will depend on its choices over the next few weeks. The battle for Iraq now begins again, for the third time, and on tougher terms than ever.

6:32:02 PM    

Jim has appeared in this blog previously. He's well worth reading....

------------------------------------------------- Subject: alternative Americas -- First Principles

[As I have watched -- and somewhat participated in -- the last several decades of our continuing national evolution, I've thought more and more about these things, below. Perhaps they are blatantly obvious to all who might read this -- or perhaps it IS worthwhile to state them for CONSCIOUS consideration. Perhaps it IS valuable, from time time, to consider First Principles -- the axioms on which we base our lives and our actions. Or perhaps it's just theoretical prattle, that you can forget as soon as you see it. But maybe not. So ...]

Is the America we have now -- meaning, provincially, the USA (which thus ignores the majority of the American landmass) -- the one we really want? Is it the one of which we can and do feel most proud? Is it the model we most-prefer to pass along to our children?

Consider some alternatives -- which ones are most important for our individual and collective well-being and future?

Do we want an America (USA) that focuses on and most-rewards corporations ... or communities?

Which success is most important to our individual and collective well-being -- the success of corporations, conglomerates, cartels and multi-nationals ... or the success (by any measure!) of our neighborhood, local, state, regional and national communities?

Which approach to interaction between individuals, and between organizations, produces the results we more desire -- the results that are most fulfilling to all who participate, and of which we can be most proud -- competition ... or cooperation?

What most-benefits us, individually and collectively -- winning ... or sharing?

Which traits do we most-respect (and most-reward!) -- self-benefit ... or consideration and compassion?

On which foundations do we most-desire for our community, corporate and political leaders to base their decisions and their actions -- expediency of the moment ... or consistent principles?

Conglomerate or community? Competition or cooperation? Winning or sharing? Self-benefit or compassion? Expediency or principles?

Which kind of a nation do we have? It's said that a nation most-rewards, those characteristics it most-favors? So ... which of the above alternatives do we most-reward? And least-reward?

What kind of a nation do we want?

Is it about time for us to OVERTLY ask these questions ... and answer them, each for ourselves (and for our children), and collectively for our nation?

And if we want to CHANGE any of those alternatives that currently dominate our nation and our lives ... how do we go about such change?

First, let us see if we can agree on the principles -- the alternatives we desire and about which we can feel most proud -- then let us discuss how to pursue them. And then, take ACTION in their pursuit.

Isn't that what citizenship -- and honor -- require?

--jim Jim Warren; jwarren@well.com, public-policy advocate & technology writer 345 Swett, Woodside CA 94062; 650-851-7075; fax/off due to spam-glut

[self-inflating puffery: InfoWorld founder; Dr.Dobb's Journal first editor; Soc.of Prof.Journalists-Nor.Cal.James Madison Freedom-of-Information Award; Electronic Frontier Foundation Pioneer Award (1992, its first year); Playboy Foundation Hugh Hefner First-Amendment Award (1994); founded the Computers, Freedom & Privacy Conferences; blah blah blah]
1:15:40 PM    

From today's papers - stops to make you think, eh?

------------------------------------------------------

"What kind of peace could come from you or your agents when you feel pleasure at torturing prisoners? How are you going to control the world when you can't control a few soldiers here and there? If anyone did this to one of your people, would you accept it?" -- Muqtada al-Sadr

11:09:40 AM    

I always thought this was spam but I started reading it recently and its another vaguely rightwing financial guy. clearly he's a supporter of Bush's, but that makes the following even more fascinating. Read it and see why... -------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Stupidity Out Of Control

_____

_____

Journal of American Finance May 7, 2004 Volume 2 Number 18

By Andrew C. Carpenter Executive Editor

The High Cost of Low Living

Don't fall for the emotional plea that Walt Disney Co. is censoring filmmaker Michael Moore.

No one stopped Moore from making his film, "Fahrenheit 911." Or even tried to impede him from creating what is said to be a scathing critique of how the Bush administration responded to the hijacking attacks on Sept. 11 and on ties between the Bush family and prominent Saudis, including the family of Osama bin Laden.

Nope, it was a business decision that led Disney to shelve the film.

In fact, it could cost Disney millions every year, forever, had it not barred its Miramax film studio from distributing the film.

But Disney's selfish corporate decision was stupid.

It may ultimately do more harm to President Bush, who's reeling from the fact that U.S. troops and CIA contractors may have killed at least 10 Iraqi and Afghanistan prisoners of war during the past year.

Disney's decision will also bring Moore tons of publicity, more fame and, worse for the president, credibility.

And, I guarantee you, what was once a quiet little flick will open on thousands of screens this summer to a big buzz.

That's because other distributors are already drooling at the free publicity generated by multiple major news outlet stories and talk radio.

That means millions more Americans will flock to a film once destined to preach only to the ultra-liberal choir.

It also means that tons of swing voters will learn Moore's take, right or wrong, on the president's close ties to the Saudis, some of whom may have helped finance the terror attacks on the U.S. homeland.

It could also refocus attention on the deal the president cut with the Saudi royal family to increase oil production late this summer so gas prices will drop before the November presidential election.

Bad as this may be for the president, the mess isn't really Disney's fault. Because, even though Jimmy Stewart was a real war hero and Dalton Trumbo stood up to Sen. Joe McCarthy... everyone knows that's about as far as it goes when you're looking for spine in Hollywood.

The blame for this mess can be laid right at the feet of the president's brother, Florida Governor Jeb Bush... actually, probably some weasel on his staff.

After years of covering politics and a few years inside the ropes, I worry that the stench will never leave my nose.

But all that experience comes in handy occasionally.

I'll virtually guarantee you, here's how this mess happened.

_____

ADVERTISEMENT Good News from the Front Lines in Iraq and Afghanistan That Will Make You Some Serious Money!

This amazing bullet proof vests manufacturer is saving countless American lives in Iraq and Afghanistan everyday. Government contracts are pouring in faster than they can make them...and theirs is the ONLY vest approved by the US Military. This unknown company is ready to turn every $10,000 invested into $55,000...but you'd better act quickly because these shares are about to EXPLODE! Click here to get your FREE special report.

_____

In Politics, It's Your Friends Who'll Do You In

Someone in Governor Bush's Florida administration - probably not Bush - learned that Moore was getting ready to slam the president.

The same person probably knew that Disney, which bought Miramax more than a decade ago, has a contractual agreement with the Miramax principals, Bob and Harvey Weinstein, allowing it to prevent the company from distributing films under certain circumstances, like an excessive budget or content.

Now, it's critical here to remember the number one function of political insiders, hired sycophants and hangers on... is to score points for the big guy.

That's how they acquire the only thing that matters to them... access, and cocktail party chatter about how the big guy can't make a move without them.

So, in an effort to gain major brown-nose points, one of Jeb's old boys put in a call to Disney. Probably to its embattled CEO Michael Eisner.

Jeb's boy suggested to Mike that if Miramax released the Moore film, the company could lose some huge Florida tax breaks.

The New York Times even quoted an "unnamed Disney executive as saying that the company did not want to be involved in a politically controversial film."

Of course the real question is, what did Disney have that could be threatened?

The answer is a big fat tax break.

You see, in Osceola County, Fla., Disney World receives a farming tax break on 1,600 acres of pasture, timber and nurseries where it grows plants for its theme parks.

The land is worth $194 million. But county tax records show the land is only taxed as if it were worth $12.3 million.

Disney also plans to develop some of this land... but it still wants to keep the tax break.

Once you know the players it's easy to understand why Disney caved.

Losing the tax break could cost it anywhere from $9 million to $18 million a year, depending on who's doing the math... and assuming that its slice of Central Florida - where developable land is a dwindling commodity - never had its value reassessed.

For a company on shaky financial ground that's real money.

And, you can bet one of Jeb's gang knew it.

Who Made The Call?

Also, remember the guy that made the call had to have enough political juice not only to get a top Disney official's attention but to be taken seriously, as well.

So it's safe to assume it's one of Jeb's captains... a guy who wants a seat close to his man... who many Republicans believe, personal baggage and all, is next in line for the White House.

Of course politicians and their pals think their world is the center of the universe. So, it would never occur to the guy who threatened Disney that Michael Moore was such a big mouth, or such a media hound. Heck, he might not have counted on the fact that Disney would cave... and was just having fun flexing his muscle.

Of course now his efforts may have blown up and created the reverse of its intended effect. It's cast more bad light on the president.

Insiders love to claim politics is a hardball sport played by tough men.

Why is it then that time and time again we witness the pathetic reality that so few of politics' self-claimed macho men are actually equipped to throw strikes?

_____

ADVERTISEMENT 7 Best Stocks for the Next 30 Days

Picked from a system proven to consistently beat the market, these 7 hot stocks are sure to soar in the next 30 days. These timely buys have beaten the S&P 500 in the past by 714.5% since 1996. Beating Wall Street in good markets and bad. What are these hot picks? Click here now to learn more.

_____

Don't Believe The Bozos... China Is Still Very Hot

Unlike most Americans, former President George Herbert Walker Bush probably had no visa problems when he quietly visited China recently.

It looks like Bush 41 was in China doing some legwork for his pals at the enormously powerful, and very privately held Carlyle Group. It's a Washington, D.C., investment firm with huge clout and a huge international roster of advisors and managers.

Its Chairman is Louis V. Gerstner, Jr., its Chairman Emeritus is Frank C. Carlucci, Senior Counselor is James A. Baker, III (you remember him from the 2000 Bush Supreme Court presidential campaign) and its senior advisors are Richard G. Darman and Arthur Levitt.

Trust me, the Carlyle team is just as well stocked at the bottom as it is at the top.

Anyway, it looks as though Bush 41 was in China because the Carlyle Group is opening a Shanghai office. It plans to invest up to $1 billion in China over the next two years.

In an interview with the Dow Jones newswire, Yang Xiang-Dong, managing director and co-head of Carlyle Asia's buyout team explained the move.

"We see an increasing number of significant investment opportunities in China," he said. "This new office reflects our confidence in and commitment to investing substantial capital in China."

Mr. Yang said that Carlyle intends to use $700 million to $1 billion to buy companies in China over the next two years. And that Carlyle's venture capital operations will also look at smaller-sized investments that could total $100 million in that period.

He said Carlyle is particularly looking at opportunities in well- established financial services, manufacturing groups, consumer-goods companies and pharmaceutical makers with sales in the $200 million range.

He said it may make five to six investments in such firms. The venture operation plans to focus on smaller companies that feature a technology component.

Luo Yi, a director of the firm and former investment banker at Merrill Lynch, will head the Shanghai office.

Mr. Yang and Wayne Wen-Tsui Tsou, head of the firm's regional venture group, will have roles in running the Shanghai office but remain based in Hong Kong.

Carlyle is the latest private equity investor to set up operations in China, a market that has been growing in importance for deals.

China was one of the most active areas for mergers and acquisitions last year in Asia, with 343 deals valued at $2.18 billion, according to Thomson Financial.

As I mentioned Carlyle's team is stocked. It also includes former British Prime Minister John Major as Europe chairman. And yes, former president Bush, who retired as an adviser last October.

By the way, Carlyle also had already done a number of private equity deals in China, including investments in a wireless content provider, an online travel company and an integrated-circuit designer.

I believe this speaks for itself... I resist all urges to editorialize, with this one exception.

How come you don't see the China doom and gloom investment guru crowd writing about the world's most powerful people investing in China... I know the answer and, even if you have to think about it for a moment, so do you.

The answer: They're still in high school. Shut from membership in the ruling elite, they instead slam it with the most scurrilous of claims.

Of course as adults this makes these financial lightweights dangerous. Because, under the guise of legitimate commentary they are grinding their immature axes through investment advice to people who take them seriously... and who are unaware of how impotent these posers actually are.

Until next week, Andrew C. Carpenter

C2004, Journal of American Finance, All Rights Reserved

_____

The Journal of American Finance is a free weekly e-letter. JOAF comes to you from Integrity Publishing 221 S. Ellwood Ave. Baltimore, MD 21224
9:07:42 AM