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 : Stop the War! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Just_Observing who wrote (731)	3/20/2003 10:51:23 PM
From: Doug R	Respond to of 21614

A bit of backing up for an interesing perspective: Deep Cover Before the dust settled on the World Trade Center building collapse, President Bush nearly immediately announced an American military response that would be implemented over an extended time period, and would require great sacrifice from the Nation. This showed us that the government agenda was on autopilot, having been planned some time before. Otherwise, the President’s remarks in such regard could only be accepted as impulsive, reflecting the emotion of the day. That they proved accurate and true attests to the advance nature of his words. * Now, some weeks thereafter, we see the United States blasting Afghanistan to a degree where it will look as though it were hit with a series of atomic weapons. The amount of firepower far exceeds any identifiable political need or result. Thus in the search for meaning among the smoke, and the U.S. baiting the Islamic world with talk of seeking terrorists in other sovereign lands, we perceive an intent by the government to fuel a response in the Islamic world. Michael Boyce, chief of the British defense staff, told a news conference today, “We must expect at least to go through the winter into the next summer at the very least.” A U.S. defense official said, “We dropped a lot of bombs. We have said this will be relentless, and it will.” An Afghan witness to the bombings said, “It was like an inferno. The explosions were so huge and so massive, that it felt like an earthquake, as if an atomic bomb had been dropped on Kabul.” The reaction to such U.S. military action is predictable. The AP report states, “Muslims outraged at the raid on Afghanistan staged protests in countries including Bangladesh, Jordan, South Africa, India, Iran, Pakistan and Indonesia.” Thus couple the bait of entering more countries, with the intensity of the attack, and the commitment to an enduring presence and what does this all translate into? Here is what we wrote to the Senate and House members on the U.S. intelligence committees yesterday: "Has anyone outside the ambit of the administration assessed the consequences of a putative overthrow of the current regimes in Pakistan (Islamic nuclear) and Saudi Arabia (Islamic oil)? Would not these be likely and doable projects encouraged by the American presence and activity in the area and thus worsen rather than improve things for America long term, unless the U.S. intends to then invade and occupy these two countries to in fact remedy the situation it itself encouraged? Could such a plan be implemented without your review and vote?" Conclusion: This tactic is very high risk. It is exactly during this time that serious oversight must rest over secret government plans, especially when they do not seem to add up or otherwise make sense. However, instead of the people or the media encouraging oversight, they allow the President to tell the country that he is going to withhold intelligence from the Congress and just offer it to eight or so Congressional representatives. While he immediately thereafter said that he was just relaying a message to those with loose lips, the message from our perspective is other than what is initially apparent, to wit: that everything that will soon unravel will be by the will of the few over the wishes of the country, if they of course knew the truth, not to say had a choice or say in it. President Bush, his dad, and their cohorts are betting Texas style, that China will not intervene into these events. It is highly likely that China will ultimately intervene. In its attempt to wrestle the next step of world control and domination, again under the deep cover of world peace, the new world order group will take us beyond the precipice and into a Holocaust where the living will envy the dead. * Joseph Ehrlich Sender, Berl & Sons Inc. October 11, 2001 PS. One of the most often heard questions is why the U.S.did not oppose Syria's admission into the U.N. Security Council? We have routinely addressed China's behind the scenes presence in Syria. The U.S. thus provided ying to offset China's yang. The U.S. knows that Syria is a key player, particularly with China behind it. The U.S. is desperate to neutralize China. Thus, we can expect that after the Palestinian State and the return ofthe Holy City that Israel will say good-bye to the Golan, if not whatever more Syria asks, now that it is an esteemed member of the select U.N. SecurityCouncil community. senderberl.com

To: Just_Observing who wrote (731)	3/20/2003 10:55:50 PM
From: Doug R	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 21614

Quick Memo from Joseph B. Ehrlich 10/24/2001 11:02 AM It seems that the September 13, 2001 analysis in China, China, China was frightfully correct. *The following is excerpted from a press release issued yesterday by the publisher. In Seeds of Fire he has created a masterpiece that reveals and explains much that is still secret. Seeds of Fire explains the headlines of tomorrow - and sets the scene for events that will change our lives forever. Essential reading for all those who want to understand the mind-set of the Bush Administration as it goes to war, Thomas takes you inside the secret briefings that finally led to Bush launching the first war of the 21st century. It reveals the crucial background concerning President Bush and his father in relation to China and explains why China refuses to back the West in its declared war on terrorism. Thomas reveals the story behind the downing of the US spy plane incident earlier this year and exposes the secret dealings between Russia and China - which explain their own roles in their lip-service support for countering terrorism. *On September 11, 2001, the same day the World Trade Center and Pentagon were hit by terrorists, a Chinese Peoples Liberation Army transport aircraft from Beijing landed in Kabul with the most important delegation the ruling Taliban had ever received. They had come to sign the contract with Afghanistan that Osama bin-Laden had asked for, that would provide the Taliban with missile-tracking, state of the art communications, and air defense systems in exchange for the Taliban’s promise to end the attacks by Muslim extremists in China’s north-western regions. Hours later, CIA Director George Tenet received a coded “red alert” message from Mossad’s Tel Aviv headquarters that presented what he called a “worst case scenario” - that China would use a ruthless surrogate, bin-Laden, to attack the United States… senderberl.com

To: Just_Observing who wrote (731)	3/20/2003 11:26:29 PM
From: CapitalistHogg™	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 21614

This is the biggest bunch of hooey I have ever seen. You are looney tunes if you think that this article actually has any merit at all. I wish all you anti America types would seek psychopharmaceutical therapy. Who are you trying to convince with your conspiracy theory garbage? certainly not a rational thinking pragmatic moderate such as myself. With all of the mistakes this administration has made you should have plenty of ammunition to convince me otherwise, but posting 'Myths and Facts About the War' just makes me more convinced that I am right. (which I am) How can you sleep at night defending Saddum?