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.

Technology Stocks : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Amy J who wrote (143521)	9/17/2001 8:25:06 AM
From: Proud_Infidel	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Intel expands stock buyback plan by 300 mln shares SANTA CLARA, Calif., Sept 17 (Reuters) - Intel Corp. (NasdaqNM:INTC - news), the world's No. 1 computer chip maker, on Monday said it would increase its current stock buyback program by 300 million shares, joining dozens of U.S. companies to initiate or increase repurchase programs in the aftermath of last week's terror attacks. Under previous stock repurchase authorizations, about 63 million shares of common stock remained available for repurchase by the company as of the end of the second quarter of 2001, it said in a statement. During the second quarter, Intel repurchased about 34 million shares at a cost of about $1 billion. Dozens of companies have announced stock repurchase programs in an effort to buoy stock prices after the attacks on in New York and Washington, which destroyed the World Trade Center's twin towers and damaged the Pentagon, leaving thousands dead or missing. Trading in U.S. stock markets is set to reopen at 9:30 a.m. EDT on Monday after being closed since last Monday ahead of the attacks.

To: Amy J who wrote (143521)	9/17/2001 10:29:16 AM
From: Joe NYC	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

Amy J, What is wrong with our foreign policy that an entire group of people would feel so hopeless in life and commit suicide and kill others? Didn't the same thing happened with the Japanese, that they were indoctrinated to the same level of fanaticism that they did the same? Maybe the answer is something along the lines of educating people, giving them purpose, and giving them hope. bin Laden is educated, he is able to manage construction projects, build roads, houses, schools, libraries etc. Yet, he chooses to be a mass murderer. The people committed these acts did not look to be deprived. Education and jobs give people hope to create a better life, a future, a better lifestyle. You are assuming that they want better life, future, better lifestyle. Apparently, murdering Americans has much greater appeal to them. Why is it that you are trying to assume that people whose intention was to commit mass murder with almost no paralel in history operate under your assumptions? Maybe terrorists are like street thugs that come out if they don't have hope and aren't kept busy being productively employed. So you are willing to consider all reason and possibilities other than one, which is that these people have free will, take actions freely, and are responsible for their actions. Why is it that you are trying to go through all these twists to come up with excuses for something that is inexcusable? Why is the obvious reason that some people are just evil, fanatical, beyond reason, so difficult to accept? Joe

To: Amy J who wrote (143521)	9/17/2001 12:20:07 PM
From: greg s	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

OT ... Thoughts on the war on terrorism I recently was discussing the current situation with a friend on email. My friend had mentioned that in east Mesa a person of Arab or middle-eastern background was shot at while he worked at a gas station and one Indian Sikh shop owner was shot and killed. Such behavior makes us no better than the terrorist we deplore. I have been following the situation and Americans' reaction closely and have not commented until now. Following is an excerpt of my reply to my friend which summarizes some of my own thoughts: I have seen the same kind of hate on the various stock-related boards I check from time to time. I also see the frequent comments that tactical nuclear weapons are called for in this situation. Until now, I have not commented and have, instead, quietly listened and absorbed the attitude of our nation. As a Titan II ballistic missile launch officer, I became very knowledgeable of the deployment, usage, and consequences of nuclear weapons. Whether an air or ground blast is used, there is no such thing as a "clean" nuclear blast. Even "tactical" nuclear weapons ensure the collateral injury of noncombatants. If we were to utilize nuclear weapons, the rest of the world could retaliate "in kind". Pakistan certifiably has the weapon. Others could probably get their hands on them, especially with the demise of the former USSR and the attendant economic woes, which confront the former Soviet states. They will do almost anything to get a cash infusion. To even consider the use of nuclear weapons is absolute lunacy. Make no mistake, I am as angry as the next guy at this attack on our homeland. We must retaliate on many fronts (military, intelligence, financial, political, diplomacy). We must enter this effort with a very clear end game (unlike Vietnam, where the lack of crisp objectives led to our failure). The objective is not retribution or vengeance. The objective is to utterly destroy all groups and infrastructure that would implement acts of terrorism in the world. Further, the final objective is to remove terrorism as an option for any group or state that have differences to settle in the future. A very tall order, indeed. There is an aspect of the situation that concerns me greatly, as a dyed-in-the-wool libertarian. Emotions are running high in the United States and throughout the world. There are many who would desire to use this time and environment to further their own goals, perhaps at the expense of our hard won freedoms. Other states, such as Russia, Iran, Pakistan, China, have their own agendas to address. Some of these agendas run counter to the best interests of the United States. Our leaders must be very vigilant to avoid subrogating our nation's values in the long term to win the war on terrorism in the relative short term. Usama Bin-Laden could also use our own war efforts against us, much like the terrorists used our own flight instruction and jets against us on Sept. 11. His goal is to polarize the world into two camps: Islam and the West. He believes Islam would win. If we do anything to alienate the centrist and moderate Islam world in the prosecution of this war, we will have played directly into his hands (and the hands of states that surely are behind this). These people are very smart and are playing this game of chess far ahead of the current move. We must not be myopic. This is probably the greatest threat in the current environment. Lastly, but of vital importance, are the agendas of domestic groups who would abridge our civil liberties. I have heard so many citizens say that giving up some of our freedoms is a worthy price to pay to win this war on terrorism. This is the ultimate contradiction. We are fighting for our freedoms and way of life. To forfeit any of these freedoms is to do the work of the terrorists. We are entering a period where elements of martial law will become part of everyday life. 35,000 reservists have been called up for Operation "Noble Eagle". Many, many more will follow. These folks will be deployed for "domestic protection". Will we be subjected to roadway checkpoints? Will our ability to move freely within our country be curtailed? Will we be subjected to what heretofore would be considered illegal search and seizure? Will the tenant of "innocence until proven guilty" survive? Will the war on drugs be morphed into the war on arms trade (which is certain to happen). These are the thoughts going through the mind of this old cold war warrior. I grieve for those lost and pray for the injured, but we must not lose sight of the consequences of our actions in our haste to go to war. This is unlike anything our country has ever encountered. We must be very careful. Kind regards, greg