Katrina Cash Crisis Continues

The need to continue giving aid to the victims of Hurricane Katrina must remain a priority ...

It's now months after the American Gulf Coast was devastated. Billions have been spent in relief, but billions more are needed. Such is the scope of a storm that ranks among the most severe in modern North American history.

To this day, residents' lives are still wrecked. Vital services are still wanting. Homes and businesses remain unrepaired. The effort to do so is not lacking; far from it. The hard fact is that the resources available are still spread too thin.

Recently, the Washington Post conducted a survey to determine an accounting of the charitable aid that has been provided to date. The results are impressive, showing this to be the largest donation drive in American history. Almost $3billion has been raised and approximately $2billion of that amount has already been disbursed.

It's a mind-jolt to grasp the concept that, even with a record level of heartfelt giving, only a dent has been made in improving lives there and that the remaining $1billion will be impossibly stretched in order to have any overall impact. Very little has apparently slipped into administrative hubris. Virtually all monies, says the Post, have gone toward cash, food and temporary shelter, medical care, tarps for damaged homes and school supplies for displaced children.

Here are other facts which were determined by the Post's survey:

The Red Cross , which was criticized for slow distribution of donations after the Sept.11, 2001, terrorist attacks, has given out 84 percent of its Katrina and Rita donations.

Fifty cents of each donated dollar went out in cash to victims.

Six percent of contributions came in the form of supplies — building materials, food, water, clothing, heavy equipment — contributed mostly by corporations.

Fifty-six percent of remaining donations are controlled by faith-based organizations. They include such well-known institutions as Catholic Charities USA and the Salvation Army but also lower-profile groups like the United Methodist Committee on Relief and United Jewish Communities.

It's estimated that the American government will need to spend a minimum of $200billion, simply to rebuild infrastructure and re-establish basic services in the region. There will be budgets for housing grants, low-income food support and medical care, but longstanding parameters on those programs will still leave many hurricane victims out in the cold. Literally.

Some of the Gulf states, such as Mississippi and Louisiana, were far from the richest in the USA before the disaster struck. Now, with much of their tax base blown away, their resources are hardly sufficient to cope with anything more than the most urgent requirements.

Americans should take great pride in going to amazing lengths to look after their own. That those being assisted are doing all they can to become self-sustaining again makes the act of donation feel even more rewarding.

It is still time to experience that feeling. There are many causes in life, but this one is about providing fundamental needs to people who are aching to provide for themselves. If you're visiting the Longer Life site, don't make those Red Cross boxes on each page fade into your background. Once a month, or more if you can, use them. When you're out on the town, instead of ordering an extra round of beer, wine or spirits, re-direct that amount to the Katrina relief fund. When you're in the store, instead of purchasing an extra snack item, re-direct that amount to the Katrina relief fund.

Those proceeds will be used for so much more by people who are grateful to receive because they have no other choice.

It's still difficult to comprehend that a few dollars can do so much good when billions are needed, but we can never 'massify' the human condition in the Gulf states or anywhere else. The few dollars you give will help one person, or one family, who will then be allowed a welcome moment of respite for at least another day.

To them, your donation would seem like a million dollars. Maybe even a billion.

Gnash of the Titans

The Winter Olympics and America seem only to be fair weather friends ...

Underwhelming television ratings for the recently completed games in Turin indicate that the USA is only inclined to watch when their athletes are winning. Specifically, they watch when they expect to see certain athletes winning. Those would be the athletes who have been heavily hyped in the run-up to the Games.

Two examples of this point are skater Nancy Kwan and skiier Bode Miller. Both are definitely capable of winning any competition they enter. Both were considered favorites to earn medals in Turin. As a result, both experienced extensive publicity campaigns that were not of their own making. Both, however, failed to meet expectations; Kwan had to withdraw from her competition due to injury and Miller's medal chase went 0-for-5 in his events.

NBC Sports, holder of the American broadcast rights, was left with a star-crossed presentation. The spectre of total failure is not 'must see' TV.

This is one of the primary differences between how the Olympics are perceived in the USA as opposed to the rest of the world. Perhaps it's a holdover from the Cold War, when the Soviets and Americans actually believed a superior medal count proved a superior socio-economic system. Even though the Soviet lie was ultimately proved via populism, it's possible the Americans never did change their mindset.

Winning has an important place in life, not just in the USA, but everywhere. So does coping with loss. That is not the key here. Neither is the fact that the American way is littered with overzealous win-at-all-cost Little League coaches, sports-meddling dads and stage moms.

The important delineation of note is that, in the USA, it's vital as to who wins. Star power is amplified by the American media. This factor, for example, is what took the National Basketball Association from a sporting afterthought whose championship series was broadcast on a late-night tape-delay basis as recently as the late 1970s to a media spectacle in the early 1980s. That's when the league decided to focus on two new talents, Larry Bird and Magic Johnson, promoting them instead of their teams.

It worked.

It worked even better when Michael Jordan followed them.

Still, these are exceptional athletes who don't come around that often. When their careers are over, it's rare when another exceptional athlete is there to replace them. There is usually a cotillion of pretenders, but they prove to be just that.

Ask the NBA.

They've attempted to promote others, but the general public is wise enough to discern the difference between 'exceptional' and 'talented enough to be a professional.' So, the focus on star power now has NBA ratings in decline. They've been hoisted on their own petard, so to speak.

In the duration, though, other sports in the USA noted the NBA's initial success and attempted to emulate it by promoting star power of their own. The practice of putting a name forward became a foundation of almost every national publicity campaign for sporting endeavors. Logically, it was something to which the American sporting public became accustomed.

In events such as the Olympics, where not every sport listed is a household thought in the USA, it's clear that NBC felt a strong need to insert star power. Their secondary tactic was similar and successful to an extent in previous years, namely, focus on a human interest story to emotionally attach the viewer to a participant. Ultimately, though, there will be more regular-life athletes getting medals than those who overcame obstacles in their lives.

Other countries --- even 'winter' nations such as Canada, Russia and the Scandinavians --- emphasize the competition over the competitors. They appreciate the skill of the sport. Television ratings throughout Europe were excellent, with only the Germans amassing a large medal haul (they were the overall winners in that category, incidentally). They took note of stars, of course, but it mattered little that those stars were from other countries. They took serious pride in their own stars, of course, but recognized them as a part of a bigger picture rather than that picture serving as a backdrop for them.

It's not only a refreshing difference, but a logical one. Especially when a network needs to cover the rights fees being charged by the Olympic movement.

NBC Sports has announced it will show a profit on its Turin package, most probably because much of the advertising was pre-sold with little provision for ratings-influenced price fluctuations. That tactic worked because of the American success in the previous Winter Games; coincidentally, they were held in Salt Lake City. It may not be so effective for their 2010 Winter Games package when the current ratings are pushed back in their face.

The NBC coverage in Turin was excellent from a presentation standpoint. They used the cable networks in their stable --- CNBC, MSNBC and USA --- to great extent, so if one wanted to watch a particular event, odds were that it was being shown somewhere. The only drawback was, these events were not promoted nearly as well as the perceived 'star power' attractions. Only a devotee would seek the coverage. That is not a strategy that optimizes strong viewership.

The American media has conditioned its public to expecting charasmatic competition. The Olympic movement expects spirited competition. The American networks groan when smaller-market teams advance to a championship series; they'd prefer a New York - Los Angeles meeting any day. The Olympic movement rejoices when smaller-country teams achieve such a standing; Sweden-vs-Finland in the men's hockey final sent ratings through the roof in those countries, but it did well in most other nations, too, as the game itself was nothing short of spectacular in both drama and skill.

It's already clear that this era will be known in history as the CyberCentury. The world is more accessible to everyone more than ever before. It only makes sense that viewer interest can expand beyond the parameters of star power to the entire experience of a competition. Other countries' media have always known this. Manchester United, for example, is still a major draw without David Beckham, and when he ultimately moves from Real Madrid, the same will be said again.

When the American media re-discovers that it's the competition --- not just the star competitors --- that make sports attractive to viewers, the Winter Olympics will once again enjoy a resurgence of ratings popularity in the USA. Such a realization would be a welcome breath of fresh air, even during those winter days when you can see it.

Strange Exchange

Just when you think the sports world has produced every possible bizarre trade imaginable, they still manage to top themselves ...

A broadcaster for a rabbit. And a cartoon rabbit, at that.

When baseball journeyman Harry Chiti got dealt to the New York Mets for a player to be named later, little did he know that player would be him. The Chicago Cubs could spare a backup catcher during the early season, and apparently, the Mets saw enough of Chiti afterward. So, when they later gave a list of players from which to choose in order to complete the deal, Chiti's name was there. Perhaps their choice said something about the other players, but there can be no doubt that the Cubs got equal value in return.

At least that transaction was a player-only deal, albeit only one player.

Transactions involving no players have had various impacts on the teams involved. An obvious example was a swap between the Detroit Tigers and Cleveland Indians. In mid-season, they managed to trade managers. Jimmy Dykes was shipped to the Tribe, with Joe Gordon moving to the Motor City, making it the only deal of its kind in North American sports history. Both were probably disoriented for the rest of the season, but they'd surely agree that it beat being fired, which is usually what happens when teams want to jettison their skipper.

However, there was a more salacious no-player deal. It might have happened more discreetly, except it affected New York Yankees. The year was 1972, and while half a decade had passed from The Summer of Love, pitchers Mike Kekich and Fritz Peterson kept its spirit alive. They and their wives were close friends. Really close. So close, in fact, that during spring training of the next season, they wound up making a trade of their own. When Marilyn Peterson changed houses with Susanne Kekich, it was news which made more than the agate type in America's newspapers.

Said Yankees general manager Lee MacPhail, "We may have to call off Family Day."

A bag of baseballs isn't nearly as hot for headline fodder. So, when minor-leaguer Tim Fortugno was unceremoniously moved to another team in return for one of those bags, we can only imagine that the amount of $2500 in cash got tossed into the deal to make him feel better.

Much more cash was put on the table in 1919 for an emerging star named Babe Ruth. The Boston Red Sox had just completed a lousy season and owner Harry Frazee wanted to unload salaries. He also had his eye on Broadway, so he sold Ruth to the Yankees for $125,000 and a $300,000 loan (with Fenway Park serving as the collateral). Frazee used the proceeds to stage 'No No Nanette,' the sprightly musical that gave the world tunes such as 'Tea for Two' and can still be found up in lights to this day. This is the deal that gave rise to the Curse of the Bambino, which may have affected the Red Sox for so many years, but Frazee did very well by it.

Ruth justified his title as the Sultan of Swat in 1927, becoming the first player in history to hit 60 home runs in a season, a revered record that would stand for 34 years. That wasn't the only notable achievement in 1927; Walt Disney also brought the first cartoon rabbit to the silver screen.

Oswald the Lucky Rabbit looked like a rip-off of Felix the Cat, and he probably was. However, cartoon characters were a novelty back then, so Oswald enjoyed a measure of commercial success. In fact, Disney was certain he could expand the rabbit's fame if he had a bigger budget, which is why he traveled to Universal Studio's head office and requested as much. The studio refused, even showing their power by cutting the budget by 20% and telling Disney to like it or lump it. Chagrined, Disney quit and decided to work independently. He was certain he could create another cartoon character to help him realize his visions of commercial success.

We now see that the empire built around the fame of Mickey Mouse never forgot its origins.

When the ABC network decided to move Monday Night Football to its subsidiary, ESPN, long-time broadcaster Al Michaels decided he didn't want to accompany it. He expressed a preference to remain paired with virtuoso analyst John Madden, who left to join NBC, which had acquired the NFL's Sunday Night Football broadcast rights.

Michaels' career was launched at the 1980 Winter Olympics in Lake Placid, New York. He exclaimed to the USA, "Do you believe in miracles? Yes!" when the American hockey team completed the biggest upset in team sports history by defeating the Soviet Union's juggernaut and paved the way to an improbable gold medal. One of the best in the business, Michaels ultimately moved to the prime time of Monday Night Football and stayed there for 20 years.

NBC saw his addition to their broadcast team as a natural move. ABC saw an opportunity, too, and the idea of a trade was broached.

ABC is owned by the Disney empire. They noted NBC's association with Universal and decided it was time to bring Oswald the Lucky Rabbit home. Dick Ebersol, president of NBC Sports, did a double-take. He accepted the trade package for Michaels containing cable rights to golf's Ryder Cup through 2014 and expanded access to Olympic highlights, but he had never even heard of the cartoon rabbit.

Michaels took being swapped for a cartoon pioneer in stride. "Oswald is definitely worth more than a fourth-round draft choice," Michaels said, referring to the compensation that New York's Jets got for releasing head coach Herman Edwards to the Kansas City Chiefs.

Walt Disney's daughter, Diane Miller, is thrilled, saying "Having Oswald around again is going to be a lot of fun."

And so it came to pass that the strangest sports trade to date was sealed. NBC got the polished veteran it wanted, while Disney could be hoping their re-acquisition can earn a Comeback of the Year award.

For Oswald, it's going to be a brand new ballgame.

Insurance for Identity Theft?

Here's an article from the Associated Press that is well worth reading ...

NEW YORK -- The advertisements are intentionally frightening: If someone steals your identity, you could lose your home, your job, even your life.

The ads are meant to scare you into buying identity-theft protection. And while the problem is real, insurance isn't always the answer.

In fact, most consumers could better protect their identities if they guard their Social Security numbers, read their bank and credit-card statements and request their free credit reports.

"If it hits, it could be quite destructive to your life for a long time," said Linda Foley, co-director of the Identity Theft Resource Center in San Diego. "Identity theft is not a picnic, but it is repairable."

Even though Foley's former employer used Foley's personal information to apply for credit cards and purchase a cellphone, Foley considers identity-theft insurance "a personal choice item."

Her advice: Buy it only if you have the money and you want the peace of mind.

In 2004, about half of the victims surveyed by the Identity Theft Resource Center spent under 100 hours repairing the damage. Sixty-six percent said the information was used to apply for new credit cards, and 28 percent said it was used to buy a new cellphone.

Identity-theft protection varies in cost and coverage, but it either reimburses you for expenses from the theft or monitors your credit or accounts for changes.

Some insurance companies provide it free or for about $25 a year with your home insurance policy. But, in recent years, financial institutions have rolled out an array of services for about $12 a month.

American Express, for example, is pitching free as well as paid services. Its no-cost Identity Theft Assistance is available to all cardholders.

The program provides round-the-clock counselors, who help customers navigate the identity-theft maze. The company also has the typical fee-based services that monitor a customer's accounts.

Daniel Solove, a privacy expert at George Washington University Law School, finds it inappropriate that people have to pay credit bureaus for services they're legally bound to provide.

"Why should you pay for them to do their job better?" he said.

Instead, do it yourself. Consumers nationwide are entitled to get a free annual credit report. Stagger your requests among the three big firms, and you'll see what's happening every four months.

The law in many states allows victims of identity theft to freeze their credit reports. Those eligible are victims who have submitted a police report to the credit bureaus, and consumers who have been notified their personal data have been stolen.

The best course of action, of course, is to be proactive. In cyberspace, for example, make sure your computer has sufficient protection against spyware and give serious thought to using e-currencies as forms of online payment, as the good ones come with security features that, to date, many credit cards rarely provide.

Modern Wonders

Apparently, it's time to turn the page on the original Seven Wonders of the World ...

Since only one of them is left standing, and since most people can't remember what the rest of them are, anyway, this is a good idea for someone who has too much time on their hands and the ability to raise money.

In this instance, that would narrow the candidates down to one Bernard Weber. He's a Swiss idealist who is behind the New 7 Wonders Foundation, which he founded in 2000.

Weber's motivation is simply to call attention to the marvels made possible when mankind applies positive energy. In fact, should his foundation actually generate profits, he intends to use at least a portion of them to rebuild lost marvels. Specifically, he cites the Bamiyan Buddha statue, a cultural masterpiece which dated to the Fifth Century AD and was senselessly destroyed as a blasphemous icon by the Taliban when their stilted act tyrannized Afghanistan.

The original Seven Wonders were so anointed by an ancient geek, Philon of Byzantium, and an ancient Greek, Antipater of Sidon. Those were the days before travel agents and tour guides, so perhaps each felt a need to fill the void. Whatever their inspiration, they were not the first to get the idea.

The concept of such a list was first mentioned by Herodotus in his seminal 'The History' in the Fifth Century BC. Later, around the Third Century BC, Callimachus of Cyrene, the top logster at the legendary Museum of Alexandria in ancient Egypt, wrote "A Collection of Wonders Around the World." These lists varied in content, but Philon's prevailed, due in part to its mention in engravings by the Dutch artist Maerten van Heemskerck (1498-1574) and Johann Fischer von Erlach's 'History of Architecture.'

Here are Philon's seven wonders:

1. The Hanging Gardens of Babylon, although some historians believe they were an ancient urban legend and never really existed;

2. The Statue of Zeus, which honored the first Olympic games, was later moved to Constantinople and ultimately destroyed by fire;

3. The Temple of Diana at Ephesus, the largest known building in ancient times which took a century to build and was subsequently senselessly destroyed as a blasphemous icon by Christians when their intolerance tyrannized southern Turkey;

4. The Mausoleum at Halicarnassus, which stood for 1500 years until the Maltese Knights of St John used its stones to build their own mega-castle nearby;

5. The Colossus of Rhodes, which towered 120 feet high at the city's harbor entrance until it was destroyed in an earthquake, and which later served as the inspiration for French sculptor Auguste Bartholdi when he created the Statue of Liberty as a gift to the USA;

6. The Lighthouse of Alexandria in Egypt, whose beacon had a range of 100 miles and which stood for 1500 years before falling victim to an earthquake in the 1300s; and

7. The Pyramids of Egypt, the lone wonder still standing.

Once Weber confirmed there was no official Seven Wonders of the World being sanctioned by any recognized bodies, he established a website, gathered an impressive list of professionals --- architects, engineers and the like --- and began the process of nominating structures worldwide as potential Wonders. During the subsequent years, visitors to his site answered his call to vote and the nominees were pared to 77.

Recently, these were winnowed to 21 --- another multiple of seven, if you hadn't noticed --- with the voting set to continue throughout 2006. The new Seven Wonders will then be announced on New Year's Day, 2007.

I've gone to Weber's site, perused the finalists and did my cyber-duty by voting. All are truly worthy choices, but I didn't find it difficult at all to quickly make my decisions:

- The Great Wall of China, where the term 'breathtaking' is an understatement;

- The Easter Island Statues, also known as Stone Clones Gone Wild;

- Petra in Jordan, for its mixture of intricacy and magnitude in its status as the world's most spectacular city carved out of sandstone;

- Stonehenge, a Druidic version of the ultimate perpetual calendar with a timeless design;

- Neuschwanstein Castle in Füssen, Germany, because that's the way castles are supposed to look;

- The Taj Mahal at Agra, India, because Richard Halliburton said so in one of my favorite childhood tomes, 'The Book of Marvels,' and his vivid description therein sold me on it forever; and

- The Hagia Sophia cathedral at Istanbul, because I think at least one Wonder should contain Viking graffiti, and Halfdan did the honors --- which are still prominently visible --- during his stint with Byzantium's Varangian Guard.

One interesting twist to Weber's foundation is that its home is cited as the Heidi Weber Museum in Zurich, which also happens to be a landmark structure designed by the Swiss architect and visual artist Charles Edouard Jeanneret, who became famous under his nom-d'art of Le Corbusier. This building was commissioned by Mrs Weber, to be named after its designer and to house various artworks created by him. It was completed and opened to the public in 1962. However, disputes arose between the two parties, and when Le Corbusier died, the entity which survived him took up the case against the Webers. Among other things, this resulted in a re-christening of the building to its current title and legal squabbling over everything from exclusivity for artwork sales rights to website domain names.

The Heidi Weber Museum is rarely open these days. The irony of its creative legacy and legal history compared to the mission statement of Bernard Weber's New 7 Foundation is rich. Clearly, universal harmony in the recognition and preservation of famous structures is easier said than done.

Silent but Violent

True danger is found where you least expect it ...

This thought came to my mind recently, after noting the near-simultaneous release of two separate but related news items. One was the obituary for Peter Benchley, best known as the author of 'Jaws,' his tall tale about a vengeful shark that surely had a steroid issue. The other was a report released by the University of Florida, noting that the number of human deaths from shark attacks decreased in 2005 from previous years.

I dismissed Benchley's benchmark opus as a low-calorie version of 'Moby Dick' --- which I consider to be the Great American Novel --- but I was amused at some of the real-life stories it generated. My favorite was the girl who, after seeing the movie version of 'Jaws,' became afflicted with perpetual nightmares of shark attacks, even though she lived in Kansas City.

There were, no doubt, four people last year who --- given their fate --- would have otherwise preferred to live in her neighborhood. They comprised the total number of fatalities out of 58 shark attacks recorded in 2005. I'm assuming these were the four who were unable to deploy the three suggested means of defense against aggressive sharks: punch their snout, poke their eyes and/or rake their gills. They no doubt encountered sharks who weren't easily discouraged.

However, isn't it ironic that this fascinating fear of sharks which exists in modern culture is so out of proportion to the acutal human mortality caused by them? In the meantime, the real killer in Mother Nature's universe stalks much more subtly and reaps a grimmer harvest.

We're talking about trees.

Yes, trees are much more hazardous than sharks. As proof of this, allow me to present one of my all-time favorite feature articles:

Attack of the Killer Trees
By Gene Weingarten,
Washington Post Staff Writer,
Wednesday, January 7, 1998; Page C01
© Copyright 1998 The Washington Post Co.

America was stunned this week by the tragic deaths of Michael Kennedy and Sonny Bono, who lost their lives to a silent killer.

Trees.

That the public was surprised is evidence only of our ignorance and gullibility. Americans are tree huggers. We love our trees. We loved asbestos, once.

Years ago, Ronald Reagan tried to warn us about trees, and he was ridiculed for his honesty.

Trees kill. Their bite is worse than their bark.

John Sevier of Atascadero, Calif., is an accident reconstruction expert. He investigates killer trees, or as he puts it, "deadly tree scenarios." It is his full-time business, and he makes a pretty penny at it.

"You think of the tree as your friend," he says, "not as something that will kill you or put you in a wheelchair for the rest of your life. But it can. And it does."

Ask the lumbering industry. A lumberjack is about as likely to get life insurance as a bomb squad demolition officer. The language of lumberjacks is peppered with peril.

A "butt jump" is the official term for what happens when the hinge of a partially severed tree snaps as the tree begins to fall. It is not uncommon. The trunk of the tree hops off the stump, like a pogo stick from Hell. It plops down on its severed end, which is angled back toward the man with the saw. The tree shudders, reverses its course. Have you ever tried to outrace an 80-foot screaming mahogany monolith with branches the wing span of a 747?

If you had, you wouldn't be reading this.

Do you know the official term, contained in Occupational Safety and Health Administration regulations, to describe a dead limb lodged, insidious, in the high branches of a tree, waiting to fall?

A "widowmaker."

Here is another tree term: "looping root." Looping root describes a condition in which a tree root snakes its way up to the surface, then goes back down into the ground, leaving a loop on the ground the size of a human foot. "It's a trap," Sevier says. He investigated one case in which a woman was tripped by a looping root and suffered extensive hip damage.

Sevier tells of the case of the San Diego Zoo's Killer Eucalyptus, which collapsed and killed a girl. Eucalyptuses are particularly dangerous because they outgrow their own strength and suddenly crack and fall. "They prune themselves, which is great in the Australian outback, but not in the entrance to a zoo," Sevier says.

He has investigated trees that grew too quickly and blocked a stop sign. "By spring it is no problem," he said. "By midsummer, the stop sign is obscured and all of a sudden you have dead people all over the highway."

Item: June 5, 1997: A cottonwood in Albuquerque, N.M., dies when hit by a Ford pickup. Its passing is not mourned. In the previous 40 years, the Killer Tree of North Fourth Street, which presided over a hairpin turn, was responsible for the deaths of 23 people.

Item: Oct. 24, 1989: A federal study of hunting accidents in Georgia found that 36 percent of the hunters injured over the past decade were not shot by other hunters. They fell out of trees.

Item: Jan. 4, 1996: An Arlington man was seriously injured in McLean when a large oak tree fell on his car, rebounded and apparently struck the vehicle two more times.

Item: July 21, 1993, Punxsutawney, Pa.: Lying pinned under a tree, a woodsman with a broken leg cried for help for an hour before giving up hope. Then he saved himself the only way he could: by cutting off his leg with a pocket knife.

Trees' crimes against humanity are as old as humanity. Older, in fact. Three hundred seventy-five million years ago they caused the extinction of half the life on Earth.

According to scientists at the University of Cincinnati, as trees began spreading over dry, upland areas, their root systems broke up the rocks. This caused an overdose of nutrients to be washed into rivers and oceans, fertilizing the waters, leading to an explosive growth of algae. At least 70 percent of all marine animal species on Earth were suffocated and eradicated.

And now, 375 million years later, Michael Kennedy and Sonny Bono.

Coincidence?

This just in: On Tuesday, in the Solomon Islands, near New Zealand, a woman was killed while collecting fronds and branches to help secure her home against Cylcone Susan.

Cyclone Susan was blamed.

But the fact is, the woman was not killed because her house collapsed on her. She did not drown. She was not electrocuted by a downed power line.

She was beaned by a flying coconut. No one ever blames the tree.

Spoonman

I've always taken pride in having an open mind ...

So, when the invitation came to visit Uri Geller at his estate in the English countryside back in the summer of 1987, I couldn't pass the opportunity to personally experience the phenomenon he represents and/or channels.

Uri Geller has made a career out of being controversial. His claims of possessing paranormal talents have not necessarily polarized opinions as much as the outrageous outlets by which he seemingly prefers to display them. For example, Geller has, at one time or another, alleged to have:

- bent spoons and keys merely by concentrating on them,
- made a soccer ball move just before a Scottish penalty kick was taken during an international match against England, causing the shot to be missed and victory assured for the English,
- stopped the hands of time on Big Ben,
- advised families that messages from the dead would appear to them in symbolic acts,
- sent disorienting mental signals to KGB agents at the request of the CIA, and
- healed people's afflictions merely by being close to them.

Uri Geller was an Israeli paratrooper who fought in the Six-Day War and dabbled in modeling and a small-time magician's career before bursting onto the global oddity scene by apparently having access to a part of his brain that others didn't. He seemingly had the powers to move objects and sense thoughts and do them well enough that major media and, yes, even major governments took notice. Results may have been mixed --- the CIA, interestingly, doesn't comment either way about their contact with Geller --- but they all served to perpetuate his fame (or notoriety, according to the skeptics).

When we approached his mansion, there was no doubting that his exhibitions, books, television appearances and hobnobbing with politicos and celebrities had allowed him to amass considerable wealth. Geller met us in the foyer, immediately conveying the impression that he may be a shameless self-promoter in public, but at home, he was a gracious host. This was a social call, so he was casually dressed, soft-spoken and totally unpretentious. I couldn't say that for the furniture in his drawing room, however, as the matching sofa, chairs and coffee table were composed of huge glass-shards held together by metal spines. They were more artwork than furniture, and I was quite glad we settled in the kitchen instead.

Inevitably, our conversation broached the topic of Geller's talents. He asked if I wanted to see them for myself and, after receiving the obvious response, he pulled a spoon from the utensil drawer and gave it to me to inspect. I can attest that it was a normal, everyday spoon; I tried to flex it and confirmed that its malleability was what one would expect from a common spoon.

Geller took it, kept it in clear view, and began to rub the stem in short, quick strokes from his index finger. Before my eyes, the spoon's business end began a perpendicular rise, as if awakening from a nap. When it had formed a 90-degree angle, Geller stopped rubbing and handed me the spoon again. I felt the bent segment of the stem for signs of heat, but there was none. I checked to see if the tensile strength had been diminished, but it had not.

He really did it.

Geller then asked me to pull any spoon from the drawer and he'd do it again. I noticed that they were made of sterling silver --- ie- a normal metal --- and wondered how many he'd buy during the course of a year. Meanwhile, he repeated the feat. The only factor I noticed that could have possibly come into play was that Geller made sure he was standing in the same place both times. There was a metal radiator very close to him, but I have no idea if that played any role in the result.

He then gave me a small notebook and pen and asked me to draw something simple. He stood away and there was no chance he could see what I did. As this was summer, I opted for something totally opposite from the season and sketched a Christmas tree with a star on top. I then closed the notebook and told him I was finished.

Geller reached for a totally separate piece of paper and pen. He sat at the table, thought for a moment and began to draw. He briefly stared at me and then returned to his task. It only took another minute for him to announce he was done. He put down his pen and held up his drawing.

It was a Christmas tree, with a star on top.

I was impressed. I almost wished I had something he could heal.

I could not resist asking one off-the-wall question. I knew a prominent shipbuilding family in Spain who had access to the records of many galleons which disappeared on return voyages from the New World. Many of them were laden with gold. Had Geller ever been asked to 'divine' for precious metals underwater?

He didn't bat an eye. "No," he replied, "But I don't know why I couldn't."

He pulled a book from a nearby shelf and opened it to a section of photographs in the middle. The topic was Uri Geller. The photos were allegedly taken with a sensitivity that exceeded the spectrum of light. There seemed to be a 'cloud' between Geller's head and a small object of his concentration, such as a ball. The inference was that his mental projection was being physically 'captured' on film, joining his mind with the matter on which he was focused.

I ultimately did report to the Spanish magnates what I had seen and what I suggested. They were more than interested. One of their scions promised to get back to me, and he did, but somewhere during the course of our days, the momentum to pursue such a project faded.

I did pay closer attention to Uri Geller in the next few years. The two displays I witnessed were clearly his top talents; I read accounts of similar feats from others who had met him. However, Geller wasn't as successful when he attempted to expand his range. For instance, he bought a soccer team, Exeter, and said he'd keep his mind off the pitch. I guess he did, as they were relegated to a lower division under his chairmanship.

Allegedly, Geller did later claim to avail his services to oil and gold companies. He said he got results, but that nobody wanted to disclose he was the secret to their success. He's since written a number of books --- some of the holistic tomes are actually quite logical and devoid of anything paranormal --- and continues to enjoy the company of celebrities.

I have no idea about his talents beyond what I saw. I am convinced that what I witnessed was authentic. My lingering thought is what Geller's displays to me could portend for the human condition. It's a fact that 90% of our cerebrum's utility is yet to be understood. Did all of us really have the powers of telekinesis and telepathy?

Those are deep thoughts, and I'm certainly open to further suggestions. In the meantime, if I ever come across shipping records which list a cargo of golden spoons lost at sea, I know who I'm going to call.

The Inertia of Power

I hate it when Saddam Hussein gets proved to be right ...

Buried in all his pre-invasion bluster was a promise that Iraqis would give the Americans 'another Viet Nam' if they tried to occupy the country. To many, this sounded like just another empty threat, but I took note when he said it.

The reason for my attention had nothing to do with Saddam or any tribal fealties in his favor. Instead, it gave me pause to recall a comment made to me by a veteran foot soldier who fought in World War II. We had a conversation in Geneva in the early 1980s, just before the Cold War began to thaw. I remarked about the superior weapons technology that I thought gave America a distinct advantage over the Soviets, and the vet responded by dismissing hi-tech armories.

"War is about killing your enemy one at a time and gaining territory a step at a time," he said. "And you can only do that with the grunts on the ground."

In what's become a prolonged battle between the forces of technology and terrorism in Iraq, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld is the latest to challenge the old vet's advice. It's also looking like he'll be the latest to rue that decision.

However, such repentance will probably not occur in the short term. Just as the Gulf of Tonkin fabrication --- where the Johnson presidency alleged a since-debunked North Vietnamese torpedo boat attack on an American destroyer --- and the Watergate burglary were subordinated to the public as mere historical footnotes by the administrations in power at those times, the present American presidency appears to believe its power of office can trample any truth that may give the lie to its Iraqi folly.

The trappings of the American presidency are such that the presidency's ability to do this is an established fact. Richard Nixon suppressed the truth long enough to win re-election. Lyndon Johnson ultimately saw a nation so divided by the Viet Nam issue that he chose not to seek a second term, but not before plunging the USA into a full-scale war. Now, it's George W Bush who has slithered into another four year term, based in part on his administration's spin machine successfully keeping the roots of his Iraqi misadventure obscure to the public.

The harsh reality is that the omnipotence of the world's most powerful government makes the task of calling it into immediate account virtually impossible. Before any resistance can be effectively raised, considerable damage --- in lives and resources --- has already been irretrievably done.

We already know that in Iraq, there were no weapons of mass destruction. This has been countered by the presidential argument that, well, Saddam was a bad man. We also know now that there was no relationship between al-Qaeda and Saddam. Yes, said the presidency, but there could have been in the near future; this soon became a self-fulfilling prophecy. Furthermore, even though the presidency claimed that American forces would be welcomed as liberators in Iraq, the locals there have so far shown a strange way of expressing their gratitude.

How can these retorts go so consistently uncontested, with the possible exception of The Daily Show, which is merely a cable comedy channel's satire of the news?

Now comes further evidence which damns the dubious premises of presidential Iraqi policy, which has recently appeared in the journal, Foreign Affairs. The author, Paul Pillar, is the recently resigned CIA head of intelligence for the Near East and South Asia, who held that office from 2000-2005. His job included managing the Bush administration's secret assessments regarding Iraq. In the article, he contends that invading Iraq was a pre-ordained goal and that, if the presidency had to resort to misleading information in order to gain support for doing so, then they would provide it.

The article, 'Intelligence, Policy and the War in Iraq' doesn't have any new revelations. Its significance is the fact that Mr Pillar, a 28-year CIA operative, was directly involved in the picking and choosing of data ordered by the presidency to make its case, rather than being allowed to take the more ethical and responsible path of reviewing all data and arriving at objective conclusions. (Lest someone attempts to accuse Mr Pillar of being a bureaucratic malcontent, he was installed on the faculty for Security Studies at the prestigious Georgetown University soon after his resignation from the CIA.)

The astounding carnage of Viet Nam --- 58,000 American dead, over 150,000 wounded; approximately 2-4million Vietnamese dead and wounded --- still dwarfs the totals for the Iraqi incursion, but tell that to each family who loses a loved one and see if it offers them any solace. These soldiers, fighters and innocents are not dying or being maimed for noble causes, but for cynical agenda: vague definitions of an enemy on one side and warped extreme fundamentalism on the other. The fact that the casualties in Iraq show no signs of subsiding make the assertions in Mr Pillar's article all the more exasperating.

A new documentary has also been recently released. 'Why We Fight' was produced and directed by Eugene Jarecki, who used a spectrum of interviews to delve into the effects of current American foreign policy. These range from former Bush administration officials to critics to American fighter pilots to a policeman who lost a son when the jets hit the towers in New York.

Jarecki's premise is based on a famous 'farewell' speech by Dwight David Eisenhower in 1961, who warned of a shadowy 'military-industrial complex' that had the potential to hijack American foreign policy without the public's ability to sufficiently contain it. Given Eisenhower's status as the Allied supreme commander in World War II as well as his presidency, his warning was not only jarring, but prophetic, especially coming as it did on the throes of the Viet Nam conflict. All appearances now are that it's even more pertinent today.

In retrospect, it is also ironic to think that it may have been the Americans who were being held in check by the balance of power posed by a totalitarian Soviet regime. There's no doubt the reverse was true, as well, but I had always thought the Americans realized their best global weapon was their culture; I continue to believe their culture, not their weaponry, caused the USSR to collapse. As such, I fail to understand why each successive American presidency hasn't realized that simple and obvious observation.

Putting that point to an unscientific test, I've asked various citizens of Iraq --- and Iran, for that matter --- what foreign country they most admire, and more often than not, they cite the USA. If I follow that with a question about which government they least admire, they cite the USA. Call me simplistic, but not only does it seem burgers and bluejeans do a better job of making friends, they cause significantly fewer deaths in the process.

However, as long as the American public allows its presidency the inherent power of overbearing rebuttal to any dissenting information without a constant call to justify itself, there will be no subsidence in damaged lives or diverted resources.

Until then, as Saddam, the old vet and history have combined to predict, Iraq is a grunt's war, fought one building at a time. And, like every other war, not every grunt will come home alive or well.

Cockney Rhyming Slang

Sir Winston Churchill once observed that Americans and the British are 'a common people divided by a common language' ...

Never was that as true as when describing the Cockneys.

You've certainly heard their accent, made famous in everything from movies based on Dickens and George Bernard Shaw novels to computer-generated gekkos telling real gekkos how to go forth and sell car insurance. The Australian accent has its roots in Cockney culture, as they comprised a large percentage of prisoners who were shipped there by the British when they viewed the Land Down Under as an ideal penal colony. Cockneys are the crafty characters from east London who admire those among their lot who can make a living simply by 'ducking and diving, mate,' which is their version of wheeling and dealing on a working-class level.

To be a 'true' Cockney, one must be born 'within the sounds of the Bow bells.' That's a reference to the St Mary-le-Bow Church in the Cheapside district of London 'proper.' Their sound carries to a distance of approximately three miles, which defines the Cockney digs better than any zoning ordinance could do.

The term 'Cockney' first appeared in the 1600s, but its actual origins are vague. Its first known reference was related to the Bow bells themselves in a period satire that gave no reason for the association.

Some believe that 'Cockney' came from the second wave of Vikings, known as the Normans. These were descendants of the Northmen ('Norman' was the French word for 'Viking') who settled in that part of northern France that came to be known as Normandy when King Charles the Simple ceded it to the Vikings in exchange for ceasing their annual summer sackings of Paris. William the Conqueror was a Norman, and when he took England in 1066, a considerable amount of French influence permeated the Anglican language.

Normans often referred to London as the Land of Sugar Cake, or 'Pais de Cocaigne,' which was an allusion to what they saw as 'the good life' that could be had by living there. Ultimately, this gave rise to a term for being spoiled, 'cockering,' and from there, Cockney was a short derivative away.

Cockneys are famous for dropping the 'H' from the start of words and infamous in the mind of every grammar teacher for their coining the word 'ain't' to replace the formal contraction for 'is not.' However, their most unique feature is their distinctive and catchy rhyming slang.

Legend has it that, during the course of their 'ducking and diving,' they would occasionally run afoul of the law. It was not uncommon for groups of Cockneys to be transported together to and from custody and courtroom, obviously in the company of policemen. So that they could speak openly to each other and deny the officers any ability to understand what they were saying, Cockneys devised a word/phrase association system that only the truly-indoctinated could follow. This became known as their rhyming slang.

It's simple, really. For example:

Dog-and-bone = telephone
Apples-and-pears = stairs
Troubles-and-strife = wife

So, if a Cockney wanted you to go upstairs to tell his wife that there's a phone call for her, he'd ask you to 'take the apples and tell the trouble she's wanted on the dog.'

As a general observation, their technique is that the second word of a rhyming phrase is the link between the 'translated' word and the first word in the rhyming phrase, which becomes the word used when speaking. Sometimes, though, to emphasize the word, the entire phrase might be used. Thus, if you are absolutely exhausted and want to make a point of it, you would exclaim, 'I'm cream crackered!' This is because 'knackered' is an English term for being tired; cream crackers, incidenally, go well with tea.

There are even dictionaries for Cockney rhyming slang, from pocket versions tailored for tourists to online listings. Two good sites for the latter are London Slang and Cockney Rhyming Slang. As with most slang, its vibrance is cause for constant expansion and/or modification of terms, so the Cockney rhymes are always a work in progress.

One note of caution: nothing sounds worse than a visitor attempting to over-Cockney their speech. If you're thinking of touring an East End market or pub and want to pay your respects by using the local vernacular, be prepared with a few simple terms and deploy them with a smile only when the occasion permits. Otherwise, not being sure if you're 'taking the Mickey' out of them or just ignorant, the Cockneys will most likely view you as a 'right Charley Ronce' and turn away.

Given that 'ponce' is common English slang for a fool --- which had its origins in describing a 'fancy man,' now known as a 'pimp' in modern times --- you may first need a 'British' translator to tell you what word the Cockney was using. By that time, you'll no doubt agree that Churchill wasn't 'alf Pete Tong (ie- wrong).

In fact, he didn't even need to refer to another country in order to be right.

Flock Upgrades Bookmarks and Browsing

Anick Jasdanun of the Associated Press has written a thorough introduction of the innovations Flock is bringing to the cyberspace experience ...

Here is his article:

Web browsing used to be mostly about just that: Surfing site after site for information and goods.

But lately, more people are using the Internet as much to produce and share things as to consume them.

A new browser called Flock seeks to address the new reality of enhanced online creativity and community.

It's a souped-up version of the Mozilla Foundation's Firefox browser, with features added to help users create Web journal entries and share favorite Web sites.

Although Flock is still in an early preview mode, meaning it is crash-prone among other problems, it offers a good sense of what to expect.

I find Flock does succeed in taking Web browsing to a whole new level.

With Flock, traditional "bookmarks," also known as "favorites," are out the window. Instead, you "star" a page, and by doing so, you can automatically send the link to an online account you create at shared-bookmarking service Del.icio.us.

That means, in theory, you can easily access your favorite sites from any computer, not just the one where all your bookmarks are stored. (In practice, because it's still in preview, the synchronization is far from perfect).
Plus, you can discover new sites and help others do so. Del.icio.us lets you see which other members have the same sites listed in their collections. From there, you can see what other sites they frequent.

The thinking is that if two people have the same bookmarks, they are likely to have similar interests and would want to discover similar sites.

Flock also gives you a way to easily tag the online bookmarks to help with sorting and discovery.

Instead of using an arbitrary folder to hold a link for a site on the TV show "Lost," you can tag it "television," "Lost" and even "ABC."

You can use Flock's "favorites" manager to see only links carrying a certain tag, or you can search through other people's Del.icio.us collections by tag.
Flock also has a number of features meant to help people post to their Web journals, or blogs.

A built-in word processor lets you submit entries directly to some of the leading blog services, including Six Apart's TypePad and Google's Blogger.

If you come across something you like on the Internet, you can highlight the text, right-click your mouse and select "Blog This."

The word processor launches, with the text and a link to the site already filled in. All you need to do is add some comment and a title, and click "publish."

One feature lets you easily drag photos from the Yahoo!-owned photo-sharing site Flickr for use in your blog.

About the only thing missing is a tool for publishing entire Web pages, not just blogs. There are no plans for one; such a tool was explicitly removed from the Mozilla browser suite by the people who created the Firefox offshoot.

Besides producing and sharing, Flock has a number of features to assist in discovering. Start typing a word into the search box and Flock will find bookmarks and recently visited pages containing that string in the address or title.

The free browser is available for Windows, Mac and Linux computers, and its underlying code is open for anyone to examine and improve upon.

Developers say many more features are to come, including ways to seamlessly upload photos to your Flickr account and better integrate with social-networking services. Other bookmarking, photo and blogging services will also be supported eventually.

A more stable test version of Flock should be available next month, with a final release early next year.

I wouldn't recommend you replace your existing browser with Flock yet. But if you do more than passively visit Web sites, I'd suggest keeping a close watch.

Virus Strains

What we need is the Dewey Decimal System to go digital ...

Specifically, someone needs to coax their keepers into putting some logical order into how computer viruses are sorted.

Recently, warnings abounded about the Kama Sutra virus quickly proliferating cyberspace, joining the Grew.A and Nyxem.E as serious threats to computer file security. However, only those who took a closer look at these strains were able to discover that they all had something in common.

They were virtually the same virus.

There is uniformity in the library world when it comes to catalogging the millions of books contained therein, thanks to Dewey. The weather service administrators do their bit for personnification by breathing a bit of nefarious charm into the tropical storms they track by assigning them names in alphabetical order each year. The key to both of these facts is that someone devised a universal means of identifying something that assists the general public in dealing with it.

The time is rapidly approaching when someone needs to step forward and put a bit of order into the villainous world of computer infections.

New viruses arise so suddenly and spread so quickly that those whose job it is to seek and destroy them have little time to muse over what to name them. With Kama Sutra, for instance, its file-destroying program appeared to be spread by junk e-mail enticements to visit porn sites. The news media ran with that theme and gave it a headline-grabbing handle; Kama Sutra, of course, is the legendary lovemaking guide compiled to classify the carnal creativity of ancient Hindu hedonism.

Geeks, however, have their own perspective when they put a spin on things. Just as banks need to have stately names, spyware apparently needs to carry Matrix-like titles to make them appear darker, more foreboding and a worthy challenge. After all, who amongst them would want to quash the Kama Sutra? Wouldn't that confirm the geek image as a cyber-eunuch?

Thus, titles like Grew.A and Nyxem.E are coined to look so much more imposing and in need of professional assistance to eradicate.

F-Secure is a Finnish virus fighter and widely acclaimed to be one of the best of its kind on the market. Their stature is such that when they identify an intrusive program, others notice and accept the name they give it. In this case, F-Secure noticed that the program shared code and techniques with cetain file-destroying predecessors, so they christened it 'Nyxem.E,' derived from the acronym for the New York Mercentile Exchange, whose web site was targeted by the initial culprit.

Other vendors took note that this program destroyed files instead of overloading websites with fake traffic. Using a logic known only to one of the backroom gnomes in their employ, this meant that 'Grew.A' was the most appropriate description. I can only think that asking for a clarification for that decision would cause most of us as much of a headache as trying to remove the program after it has hit our computers.

Anyway, in these trying times of terrorism alerts, if nobody else is willing to tackle the task of virus classification, those rock-lifters and cobweb-sweepers at the USA Department of Homeland Security are prepared to step into the fray. They have devised a system of virus naming through the Common Malware Enumeration, or CME. Outbreaks are assigned a random number, which in this case turned out to be '24.'

We'll see if such a system captures the public's imagination.

This is an important point, because if a unified virus identification system is to be effective, it has to immediately raise a general awareness so that the virus' contagion can be better contained.

If nothing else, 'Kama Sutra' generated enough clicks to quickly spread the word that a cyber-invader was on the prowl. Once named as such, this program which had been circulating for weeks but was set to destroy files only on the third day of each month, finally came to the public's attention. That gave vendors time to update their products and warn customers.

Incidentally, this strain is known to corrupt documents using the most common file types, including '.doc,' '.pdf' and '.zip.' It affects most versions of Microsoft's Windows operating system, which caused them to issue the most widely-heeded warning of the problem.

Given the recent animosity-filled anti-trust suit brought by the American government against the software colossus that is Microsoft, it does seem like their efforts to raise the awareness of this virus has necessitated that they become the proverbial strange bedfellows.

It's only appropriate that something named Kama Sutra would bring them together. It's inevitable that they would find themselves in this position. The task now is for them --- and everyone else --- to agree upon what to call it.

Hi-Yo, Silver Fund!

"Stay long precious metals" ...

I'm beginning to think that's Graeme Irvine's mantra.

He's the business columnist on Longer Life's Bourse page, and I'll leave it to you to discover his reasons for this four-word chant. Amidst Graeme's siren calls, I've taken notice of his recent daily listings of silver transfers. It seems that HSBC-Hong Kong is in the process of accumulating a substantially high percentage of the current market inventory. The range is something like 60%, an achievement I find as breathtaking as it is intriguing.

Why would that much of the world's investment-grade silver be moved to one depository? So far, I've not been able to find anyone willing to provide an answer. The accumulation is public knowledge, so I'm not suspecting a conspiracy.

I think most investors recall the Hunt brothers' clumsy attempt to corner the silver market three decades ago --- driving their Texan empire from billionaire to bankrupt within eight years --- and wouldn't think of trying to duplicate that stunt.

Super-investor Warren Buffett is, of course, much more sophisticated. His acquisition of 130million ounces of silver approximately nine years ago was made in tranches calculated to coincide with the market rather than drive it. All outward appearances indicate that he has no clandestine intentions; instead, he's simply substantiating his confidence in the metal and possible lack thereof in the long-term strength of the dollar.

Perhaps the HSBC-Hong Kong hoarding is a result of an announcement made in June 2005 by the United Kingdom's Barclay's Bank in which they filed their intent with the USA's Securities & Exchange Commission to establish an Exchange Trading Fund ('ETF') for silver. Specifically, the applicant is a Barclay's subsidiary, iShares Silver Trust, and the process gained momentum in January 2006 when the SEC approved their listing on the American Stock Exchange.

The Silver ETF is meeting with strong resistance, most notably by the Silver Users Association (SUA), who represent entities who make, sell and distribute products related to silver. Their complaint is that in order to support the ETF, so much silver would have to be taken out of the marketplace and held in reserve that its membership would be burdened by the metal's higher cost. As the SUA membership processes 80% of all silver produced in the USA, they represent a significant voice in this matter.

Ted Butler is one of the most respected silver analysts in the world. His opinion is that, no matter what the outcome of the Barclay's application, the entire episode is a positive development for silver investors.

First, let him explain how Exchange Trading Funds for commodities operate, and then describe how the Barclay's proposal is being positioned:

"In order to establish a commodity ETF, a financial institution buys and stores a quantity of the commodity in question and then issues shares of common stock at a fixed unit of conversion to represent fractional ownership of that commodity. In the case of silver, Barclays would buy the metal, in industry standard 1000oz bars, have them stored in London and elsewhere, and issue common stock shares in a ratio of one share of stock for every ten ounces of silver. The shares would then be traded on a recognized stock exchange, hence the name, exchange traded fund. In the case of the Barclay's Silver ETF ... they’ve even decided on the stock symbol, SLV. The amount of silver bought and stored would increase and decrease depending upon the investment demand for the shares, similar to how the gold ETFs currently function."

The practicalities of a silver ETF include:

- Stock certificates are certainly easier for the investor to store than the metal itself, and

- The 'common stock' format allows more categories of investors the eligibility to participate.

What is interesting about the Barclay's proposal is that its goal is to put 130million ounces of silver into reserve, the exact level of Warren Buffett's holdings. Could they be using that precedent as a model? Burton notes that even though Buffet was careful not to disrupt the market, the price of silver still doubled during that accumulation. Furthermore, Burton says, "I see nothing in the Barclays prospectus suggesting such buying restraint, either in time or price."

So, Butler reasons, this makes the situation most favorable for involved investors:

"This silver ETF announcement is a true win-win for silver investors. (If) their silver ETF becomes effective, the impact on the price of silver will be great. That’s win number one, obvious and straightforward.

"But if ... this ETF never sees the light of day, that will be a big win as well for silver investors. Why? Because it will prove for all to see just how critical the supply/demand and inventory situation is in silver. If the government says no way to this ETF, it will be for one reason only – there is not enough real silver in the world to fund it."

Either way, it's a development worth watching. Graeme lists the Comex figures daily at the end of his column and always mentions when another allotment of silver moves to HSBC-Hong Kong. The growth of those figures could well be the 'tracer' of things to come.

Stay long precious metals.