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.

Politics : High Tolerance Plasticity -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Second_Titan who wrote (7847)	9/13/2001 9:27:58 PM
From: energyplay	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 23153

Report that National Security Council is evaluating explosive effect of loaded 757 /767 aircraft to see if they qualify as weapons of mass destruction. Appears that explosive power is equivalent to some small tactical nuclear devices, therefore, WMD have been used. Evidently, based on various treaties, this clears the way for U.S. to use dispproportionate nuclear response, and still be within conventions of war as understood by our allies. I am not predicting this, but it appears that this option may be on the table. Or this may be a disinformation ploy to scare certain nations into cooperating. Or both.

To: Second_Titan who wrote (7847)	9/13/2001 11:45:47 PM
From: Raymond Duray	Respond to of 23153

Hi Quehubo, Re: The Chamberlain Prime Ministry - History isn't clear as to how the world viewed Hitler in the 1930's, though it is quite true that his cause was championed by Henry Ford here in the U.S. and by a large percentage of British aristocracy, who found his brand of state-aided capitalism to be quite amenable to their own worldview. I, for one, would be in favor of moving Israel to Florida, and let the Israelis and Palestinians bicker via long distance phone. I'm also a huge fan of the rapid development of alternative fuels so we can end this obnoxious symbiosis with the Mid East. The sooner we get off that teat, the better, IMHO. As far as the enemy in our midst, the only problem with rounding up a few million illegal aliens is that we won't get our sheets changes or our restaurant dishes washed. Think about that inconvenience, and I'm sure you'll agree with me that the cost of incarcerating the cheapest labor in the land is simply too high. What's this "war" nonsense anyway? There never has been a war fought when there has been no enemy on the field of battle (except the Cold War, I reckon). That seemingly is what is being proposed here. It defies my rational mind to think we can pull this off without an enemy. Maybe I'm wrong, maybe the Pentagon can waste hundreds of billions of dollars without a credible enemy. Come to think of it, that's not that far fetched, now is it? It seems to be going on today. -Ray PS: For those who didn't see the humor in this post, some of it was tongue-in-cheek. And some of it was just plain cheeky. Hope no one takes too much offense, but I can only be somber and angry for just so long. Then I reflect upon things like one of my favorite lines from Dottie Parker, which seems so apt when thinking about the WTC: "What kind of fresh Hell is this?"