Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Stock Attack II - A Complete Analysis -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Stephen who wrote (18503)	9/12/2001 11:34:53 AM
From: stockman_scott	Respond to of 52237

Destroy The Network By Henry Kissinger The Washington Post Wednesday, September 12, 2001; Page A31 An attack such as yesterday's requires systematic planning, a good organization, a lot of money and a base. You cannot improvise something like this, and you cannot plan it when you're constantly on the move. Heretofore our response to attacks, and understandably so, has been to carry out some retaliatory act that was supposed to even the scales while hunting down the actual people who did it. This, however, is an attack on the territorial United States, which is a threat to our social way of life and to our existence as a free society. It therefore has to be dealt with in a different way -- with an attack on the system that produces it. The immediate response, of course, has to be taking care of casualties and restoring some sort of normal life. We must get back to work almost immediately, to show that our life cannot be disrupted. And we should henceforth show more sympathy for people who are daily exposed to this kind of attack, whom we keep telling to be very measured in their individual responses. But then the government should be charged with a systematic response that, one hopes, will end the way that the attack on Pearl Harbor ended -- with the destruction of the system that is responsible for it. That system is a network of terrorist organizations sheltered in capitals of certain countries. In many cases we do not penalize those countries for sheltering the organizations; in other cases, we maintain something close to normal relations with them. It is hard to say at this point what should be done in detail. If a week ago I had been asked whether such a coordinated attack as yesterday's was possible, I, no more than most people, would have thought so, so nothing I say is meant as a criticism. But until now we have been trying to do this as a police matter, and now it has to be done in a different way. Of course there should be some act of retaliation, and I would certainly support it, but it cannot be the end of the process and should not even be the principal part of it. The principal part has to be to get the terrorist system on the run, and by the terrorist system I mean those parts of it that are organized on a global basis and can operate by synchronized means. We do not yet know whether Osama bin Laden did this, although it appears to have the earmarks of a bin Laden-type operation. But any government that shelters groups capable of this kind of attack, whether or not they can be shown to have been involved in this attack, must pay an exorbitant price. The question is not so much what kind of blow we can deliver this week or next. And the response, since our own security was threatened, cannot be made dependent on consensus, though this is an issue on which we and our allies must find a cooperative means of resistance that is not simply the lowest common denominator. It is something we should do calmly, carefully and inexorably. The writer is a former secretary of state. © 2001 The Washington Post Company

To: Stephen who wrote (18503)	9/13/2001 11:57:01 AM
From: Stephen	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 52237

Some contrarian reasons for being long/buying the dip are actually quite logical imho. 1)There are a large number of short positions, and in Europe shorts have been covering ...there seems to be a growing movement that being short is now unpatriotic 2)Funds I follow have been raising cash this last 6 weeks looking to buy back in the Sept/Oct period. This maybe too early ... but time is passing. 3)The immediate danger of being long stocks at this time was the chance of getting caught with an earnings warning. Well all those companies now have an 'excuse note' for a qtr or two ... and only time will show how analysts respond to the reports coming out and whether they upgrade on the basis that results cannot get any worse. This qtr will be the lowest point for earnings for a while.... and no matter what the drop off in future business... yr on yr comparisons are likely to improve. In fact even next qtr may show considerable growth tech earning growth due to deferred business ... 4)Greenspan and the rest of the central banks are at the pumps. That money has to go somewhere ... and some will find its way into stocks ...besides .. history has shown that when the red light starts flashing Greenspan errs on the side of over-reaction ... 5)One of the dangers I was afraid of was that there would be massive hedging of long positions in the forign markets. I suspect that a lot of this has already been done in Asia/Europe. They have already stabalised ... and if the US shows any sort of strength, those hedges may well be unwound boosting those markets. I could go on ....but I don't see a crash at this time - in fact, perverse as it maybe, the chances of a crash may have diminished with the tragic events that just occurred. Good luck & God bless everyone Regards Stephen