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 : Moderate Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tsigprofit who wrote (1038)	5/9/2003 10:50:43 AM
From: rrufff	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20773

I have to take issue with the "warning" of 9/11. There is a whole thread here on SI with paranoid posters claiming this. The problem with the "intelligence" received is so massive. There are warnings every day of stuff like 9/11. Imagine yourself in a job like that, particularly if you have the "government employee" mentality. No doubt there were warnings. I'm sure there were warnings today of someone hijacking a plane. Problem is how do you know which warning out of thousands is the one upon which to follow? Where do you put the resources? I agree with you if your point is that government needs to be streamlined and become efficient in all areas. I agree with you that the "intelligence" operations need to be better monitored and be made efficient. However, it defies common sense and moderation for anyone to think that the Bush administration did 9/11 or did not stop if if they had been able to do so. I'm not saying you posted that Bush was to blame, so forgive me if I am mischaracterizing some of your thoughts in posting what you did.

To: tsigprofit who wrote (1038)	5/9/2003 11:41:20 AM
From: The Philosopher	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 20773

And what about Bush riding on the Enron jet many times during the campaign? Again, to me, that's a 5-7 on the scale. Are we really going to hash over this stuff again? If we are, don't forget to bring up the wholesale sale of the Lincoln Bedroom, which compared to riding on an Enron Jet is, IMO, far worse. Bush used the donations of a corporation, which paid the bill for his trips. Clinton used the resources of the White House, which is owned by and paid for by the American people and which he was using as a public trust supposedly for the benefit of the people, not to line his and his party's pockets. And let's not forget the deal with financing his house in Westchester . . . well, do we really want to hash all that stuff out again? Neither side comes out smelling very good. But then, I don't think you can find a single national politician who comes out smelling very good out of any political campaign. A plague on both their houses.

To: tsigprofit who wrote (1038)	5/9/2003 12:42:32 PM
From: Bald Eagle	Respond to of 20773

Umm, I guess you forget about all the money that Enron gave to Democrats too and Clinton citing them as a "corporate model". Also, Clinton was offered Osama Bin Laden and TURNED DOWN the offer. As for warnings of 9/11, did someone call George Bush and tell him it was going to happen? I think you exaggerate the so-called "warning". I guess you didn't mind Clinton letting the Chinese have secrets that now compromise this country's security for a few campaign dollars. I feel much safer with this President than the previous one who "loathed" the military.