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 : Bush-The Mastermind behind 9/11? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Rock_nj who wrote (976)	7/13/2003 7:54:35 AM
From: Raymond Duray	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 20039

Rock, I'm wondering why you've taken the positions you have on the coup by George Bush's secret backers and on the results of the 2000 election. BTW, I agree that talk of a coup by Bush and company is over the top. There is no need for a coup, they have the people's minds controlled with their policies that have put us at a constant state of war (is there really any reason that we have to live our lives this way?). They know how to use propaganda to get Bush reelected, no need for a coup Looked at in a rational fashion, beyond the silly lens of the American media, what occurred in 2000 was completely beyond the solutions envisioned by the Founders in the U.S. Constitution. What occurred on December 12, 2000 was a judicial coup d'etat. Which makes Bush's efforts in 2004 his attempt to be elected for the first time. He's going to fail, unless they cheat again. In view of the lies that we've been told to get involved in the insane occupation of Iraq, and the intense effort to cover-up the events surrounding 9/11, I'm not sure why you don't view Bush & Cie. capable of perpetrating an Operation Northwoods type event in order to declare martial law. Bush has said that this nation would be easier to rule "if I were the dictator..." ******* Operation Northwoods, a Defense Department plan from the right wing of the JCS: Message 17525586 BTW, James Bamford, the author of "Body of Secrets" about the NSA and where I first learned about Operation Northwoods will be a guest on CNN's Late Edition today: washingtonpost.com

To: Rock_nj who wrote (976)	7/13/2003 1:27:36 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20039

Analogies are cheap. And quite often wrong. How about some of the terminology that the government is using these days, like "homeland" security, sounds like something straight out of NAZI Germany, Oh, cut the crap. I'd call that a poor descriptive phrase. If yours was their intent, I think they could have done much better. "USA Patriot Act" wasn't bad, I thought, for an act that appears to gut the bill of rights. How about Bush's blatent propaganda event on the aircraft carrier where he declared an end to the war? Gimme something to worry about, OK? If THAT'S the best he can manage, he's in serious trouble. They know how to use propaganda to get Bush reelected, no need for a coup. I'd say his reelection is by no means assured. The apparent economic recovery is apparently stalling. THAT will have more to do with the outcome than anything else. A good economy could even save him from a mess in Iraq. Maybe. But he will have to win straight up in 04, no tricks, no courts, no scandals. If he doesn't, there will be hell to pay. If Bush is in trouble this time next year, we'll be attacking some poor defensless country with some sort of concocted rationale like going after a drug dealer (Panama) or WMD (Iraq). You mean like your hero Slick, Monicagate, and Sudan? Why is it Slick's undeclared, non-UN approved wars are never mentioned? I have no idea why people vote for policies that spend $60 Billion to destroy and rebuild a country half way around the world, when they can look out their windows and see so many problems that need addressing right here at home. Because sometimes those problems out your window will mean nothing if DON'T solve a problem halfway around the world. The last war that was fought to really defend the U.S. from an outside threat was WW2. Was it? Or did an Anglophile finagle a way to come to the aid of Britain? Read a book titled "A Man Called Intrepid". After you find out what the Brits were up to in this country with FDRs knowledge and aid, you begin to think we declared war on the wrong country. You do know that the US had cut off shipments of oil and iron to Japan before Pearl Harbor, leaving them with 6 months supply of oil and that much time to act or submit to what they considered US domination of Asia, don't you? And that at the time of Pearl Harbor, US destroyers were escorting British vessels carrying war materials across the Atlantic and they had secret "shoot on sight" orders with respect to German submarines? Does that fit your definition of "neutrality"? Hitler's declaration of war on the US on December 8, 1941 has always been puzzling. The Tripartite Pact was a mutual-defense treaty; he had no requirement under it to aid Japan if it started a war with the US. I figure he did because he figured he might as well make an existing state of war legal and official. At least he could shoot back then. I see Mr. Duray is singing his swan song to you. I notice he failed to take up my offer of a bet that GWB WON'T try a coup in '04. I think we could agree on an amount (probably about $10- -a day's recycling income for him) and see if Admin Bob will hold the funds in escrow. The courage of his convictions should tell you something.