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 : Dutch Central Bank Sale Announcement Imminent? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: philv who wrote (19785)	12/14/2003 5:28:16 PM
From: sea_urchin	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 81079

Phil > Saddam wasn't hiding....he was being held for ransom?? With $750,000 in a box next to him?! Some holding for ransom. Anyway, I don't believe anything I read at Debka and, least of all, their opinions. Debka = Mossad What I'm wondering is whether this is the real Saddam or one of his look-alikes of which, I believe, there were three? If it is the real Saddam, then he can NEVER be brought to trial because he simply knows too much about all the US' nefarious activities and double-dealing in the region. He will have to be assassinated, Jack Ruby style. On the other hand, if it is a look-alike, then all the more reason to assassinate him because then everyone will believe he was the real McCoy. And, on the third hand, this Saddam-like person might just die in captivity of an "unknown" illness or even "commit suicide" Dr Kelly style. And that will be that. No-one will know, no-one will care and W will be Pressy again. What a pleasure. And couldn't have been easier. Stuffs all those Democrat aspirants and Hillary too. Yecch, what a woman, one can hardly blame Slick. By the way, looking at this photo, I note that although "Saddam" has an almost grey beard, the hair on his head is pure black. Not a whisp of grey anywhere. First time I have seen anything like that before. So, was his hair dyed for the occasion, or is it a wig, or is it a false beard? antiwar.com Meanwhile, here's someone who does not believe that the revelry from the goldbug feasting will go on for very long. forbes.com >>>The nation saw a productivity boom in the 1990s, chiefly powered by marvelous advances in information technology. Better labor training, more-efficient staffing structures (fewer managers) and smarter corporate strategy were helpful. Today's better productivity, though, is catalyzed by layoffs. Don't count on business anytime soon to step up capital spending, which could increase the need for more workers. Inventories are low in relation to sales, and companies now prefer backlogs to more inventory on the shelves. Why hold inventory in a world beset by deflationary pressures? Also, there's too much excess industrial capacity and vacant commercial space to spawn an economy-loading capital spending boom. The sober truth is that cutting costs is the only route to profits salvation these days. Most costs, directly or indirectly, are labor. And that means more layoffs. Sorry, the party can't continue. Cost-cutting layoffs will squeeze consumer incomes. Fiscal and monetary stimuli, which masked the devastating effects of layoffs on consumer incomes, are fading, too. The consumers who have kept the economy going are not going to be in the checkout lines. Their newfound zeal for saving will pinch spending further. The spillover to housing will break that bubble (see my Oct. 14, 2002 column) and seal the case for a 2004 recession. The result: I foresee a profits decline next year with S&P 500 operating earnings down 9% to $49 per share and reported earnings down 13% to $39. What a blow to investors who believe S&P's estimates of $62 per share for operating earnings next year and $56 for reported earnings. I hate to be the bearer of bad tidings. But if you expect the economy and the market to keep climbing next year, you will be sorely disappointed. <<< Seems it will take more than the execution of Saddam to resurrect the US economy. In the circumstances, I would think the execution of a few of the neocons, or even W himself, might do the trick.

To: philv who wrote (19785)	12/15/2003 1:37:03 PM
From: sea_urchin	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 81079

Phil, another work-of-art from the Holy Land. This time, how the US can make Saddam sing for his supper, or is it his life? haaretz.com >>>Deposed Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein could be offered a deal in which he would give his captors information on if and how he hid weapons of mass destruction and if he smuggled some of them into Syria. In exchange, he would face life imprisonment and not be executed for war crimes<<< Unfortunately, Saddam has already admitted that he didn't have any WMDs. news.independent.co.uk >>>Saddam Hussein told his American interrogators that Iraq never had weapons of mass destruction, claiming that they were an invention of the US government to justify an invasion, it was reported last night.<<< So, maybe they will offer him "life" if he declines to spill the beans about how the US gave him the poison gas etc. csf.colorado.edu But with Lieberman & Co bent on a blood-lust picnic that, too, seems out of the question. Thus, Saddam will have to be executed for "war crimes" so that Lieberman can go to Heaven.