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: sea_urchin who wrote (19990)	1/3/2004 12:20:25 PM
From: philv	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 81972

Orwell's "big brother" is a lot more active than a lot of people realize. Washington D.C. (PRWEB) December 23 2003--The International Bank Activities Reform Commission is revealing to the general public in the United States that Chat rooms, Bulletin Boards and Message Boards run by Lycos, Microsoft, and Yahoo such as Raging Bull and others are being used by government agencies such as the Securities and Exchange Commission, Comptroller of the Currency, the Federal Reserve Bank, the FBI, the CIA, Secret Service and the Department of Homeland Security to spy on Americans without their knowledge. Luckly for us, S.I. is not on the list. Phew. <g> prweb.com This revelation should cause serious concerns about the freedom of expression. Anything is possible when government agencies spy on people. What's next? A knock on the door?

To: sea_urchin who wrote (19990)	1/4/2004 6:38:48 AM
From: mcg404	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 81972

Searle, <the US government used land…as collateral for debts which it created…The whole scheme was clearly a scam for passing assets to pals at the expense of the "slaves".> I guess I’m not understanding or recognizing where this ever took place. Is there an example of this transfer of land used as collateral for a debt? Or did this guy dream up this scenario? <Thanks for showing me that debate. However, I don't agree with either of them. In my opinion, the Iraq war had nothing to do with Saddam… > And I agree with you. I just enjoyed reading a discussion that was elevated above a level of ‘evil’ this and ‘evil’ that, my god’s bigger than your god, they hate us because we love freedom, we need to make the world safe from terrorism, blah, blah, blah… And, I thought this issue was valid (if not truly the basis for the iraqi invasion): “The protection of sovereignty involved in those laws has kept humanity safe from some things but not others. It has protected people from conflict between states by establishing clear boundaries and non-interference pacts ñ no mean feat. Yet it has too often left people to horrific ravages within states…Don’t Iraqis have a better chance (although, I agree, no certainty) at human rights and democracy under a time-delimited US occupation than under Saddam? I wish there had been a wholly benign force ñ what the journalist David Aaronovitch called ìthe Nelson Mandela Peace Corpsî ñavailable to overthrow dictatorships. Alas, there wasnít.” John