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 : Win Lose or Draw : Be A Steve, Make A Call -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: mishedlo who wrote (2521)	2/16/2003 3:53:05 AM
From: Lone Ranger	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 11447

mish, Unfortunately the worm has turned. Civil rights in this country will have to be reduced in order for this country to survive<ng>. You write well but in all sincerity naively<g>. The attack on our towers demonstrates the hatred that fanatical muslim governments have towards the United States, capitalism and freedom. Very analogous to Pearl Harbor but without an identifying country. This is a long term choice for survival of the U. S. as we know it. Iraq is an abettor and enabler of anti U. S. terrorism. One nation at a time we will need to rid the world of fanatical muslim nations which sponsor such terrorism. The choice is a very sad one for there really is no other choice. Ask yourself a couple of basic questions. Is there anything that the U. S. could do to appease these nations so that they would stop their terrorism against the U. S.? The answer is no. The second more important question is: If their system would prevail? Would you have more freedom than what our U. S. citizens have? Even with reduced civil liberties? The answers are unequivocal. No! For anyone who has traveled through countries outside the U. S., one sees that order is kept basically through the threat of force where military presence is pervasive. Freedom of thought , movement and action is diminished. So you pick it, live under a reduced freedom of the U. S. or under a total freedom the likes of Saddam. I know my choice! I don't really expect a response.

To: mishedlo who wrote (2521)	2/16/2003 8:03:08 AM
From: LTK007	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 11447

i believe Powell is not holding himself in high respect right now. I think his presentation of evidence was researched and scripted for him by in large by the CIA and specifically Tenet, who sat behind him during the presentation. I at the time was thinking could the CIA be so low as to sucker Powell, and said i hoped we had not returned to the CIA of "dirty tricks" unlimited an agency lacking totally in ethics and fair play. The Agency saw to asassinaton of Allende , the Agency that trained and funded the unmitigated evil of the Death Squads in El Salvador and Guatemala. And a government that used the word , we are fighting for democracy and freedom, while propping up every extreme rightwing and deeply corrupted goverment they could. I have stated i am not predictable, and did, and still do endorse 100% the Falklands matter and the Grenada matter--and advise people to steer clear of me on those two as i have tons of knowledge on those two events, and was far far ahead in the knowledge curve of the opponents of those interventions, who actually didn't have a clue about what it was about. I for instance now think the U.S. would do much actual good by heeding the call from the Coite d' Ivoire and come to their aid and with ground troops destroy the inspeakably evil rebels of the Ivory Coast. But know they will not, it is not on their agenda for global domination and to take full control of Middle Eastern Oil. But i drift from the subject, and that is Powell. The "scuttlebutt" was so consistent coming from journalist that Powell wanted out but realized such a move would rock the governmement to the extreme and he evidently gave his word to hang on until 2004; and i strongly feel the story was with substance, as the leak was too relentless. Those considering Woodward's book about post 9/11 on up to near the end of 2002 view it as valid , as with most of Woodwards reporting, you are not getting any denials or disputing of what was presented. And it presented that Powell with Armitage were the only ones saying a unilateral action against Iraq would be madness. My guess is that Powell is thinking if he resigned now the Rumsfeld, Wolfington, Cheney ,and yes Kissinger, ( the Machiavellian Kissinger moving behind the scene, coldblooded ruthless Kissinger) Power Group would then have taken complete control of the WhiteHouse. Maybe Powell knows what he has been saying will NOT fly and by just hanging in "playing the game" he can still see a diplomatic end to this, because if he didn't hang in there the Rumsfeld etc. crew have total control and all hell breaks loose immediately. In short i think Powell in is deeply conflicted within his own self.But that is just conjecturing on my part. Max But the bottomline to this whole mess is what we should accomplished, the destruction of Al Queda has been a a failure, Al Queda has rebuilt itself and could well be significantly greater threat than before 9/11. But i am sure if Al Queda pulls off another stunning attack, Bush speech writers will say, see i told you so, this is because we didn't destroy Iraq as they still believe they can propagate this big lie. Saddam, dead, so we all want that; but i ask has the U.S. the past 12 years been so without imagination to have found another way to kill Saddam; such as one Bunker Buster at the right time, or one cruise missile through the correct window at the right time? i think the U.S. could have eliminated Saddam but haven't because what they really want is Iraq itelf. Hope people caught news bit that U.S. plans to guard the oil fields in Iraq for at least two years after they 'win'. Why? In order to insure the safety of the oil why Iraq is stabilized. But , of course, as Blair and Bush pronounce this is ONLY about the high minded act of goodness to eliminate Saddam from oppressing Iraq, and to do so in a manner about as sublte as a 9.0 scale Richter earthquake. I state there are wayys to eliminate Saddam, and have all the way back to 1991 when he was about to flee Iraq, but Daddy Bush said no, let's stop. Why? Because that never was the prime directive, which was get that kuwaiti oil back. Public has again been hornswoggled and fogbound inside the fogmachine, the result of a media that has up given thought but just read press releases and people having learned well how not to think for themselves. PaxMax p.s. In the case of the Fox network news, it is not afailure to think, it is a premeditated propaganda machine.