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.

Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Hawkmoon who wrote (70862)	2/6/2011 6:12:21 AM
From: Maurice Winn	4 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 217711

Hawk, I'm getting pretty long in the tooth and my "hunches" are not just pulled out of the air. I spend a lot of time reading and thinking and watching. Plus, I don't have the mob mentality group-think which all my life I have watched take the unthinking, ignorant and wishful thinking true believers over the cliff together. <What you were operating on was a hunch.. It was our guys who actually turned your hunch into truth. > "Oh gosh, I guess you were lucky again". After a while, it starts to seem not at all like a hunch. A bit like people who are good at things say when told how lucky they are. "Yes, and more I work at it, the luckier I get." So what was that information that the so-called "great minds" had <I worked for a year with some of the best minds in the business on WMDs and they weren't as certain as you were that they didn't exist. >? Hawk, you have no doubt heard of bias. Judges and doctors recuse themselves from decision-making in which they are emotionally and personally invested because it is commonly accepted that their decision-making will be skewed to Hell, whether they know it or not. It's a bit of a Catch22 - to be involved in official Military Intelligence, they have to be sworn, patriotic, team thinkers, team players and all that "good" stuff. Being like that means they ipso facto, caveat emptor, infra vide, inter alia, ultra vires, habeas corpus, can't think. Your great minds sent hordes to their maimings and deaths. My so-called "hunch" was right. Like my "hunch" on the last three winters. Like my "hunch" on so many things. Did you see my 31 Dec gold price predictions for the last two years in a row? Lucky huh? The hardest thing is to predict what people will do in response to things. I still have trouble realizing just how slowly people will react and how counter-productively too. Hence I lost money on Globalstar and could not believe how long it took Greenspan to cut interest rates in Y2K and how long to raise them in 2002, 2003. I decided he must have been trying to give an electoral boost to his favoured presidential politicians [Bush, not Gore or Kerry]. Hawk, perception is NOT reality. There were no WMDs, irrespective of whatever your guys did in the way of blowing up a lot of things and people in Iraq. <What you were operating on was a hunch.. It was our guys who actually turned your hunch into truth > What your guys did was figure out in a more cumbersome, expensive and fatal way what seemed obvious to me. What else would you expect from a government department? They should call it "Military Perception" instead of the old oxymoron "Military Intelligence". Why would you think he would do that? <Saddam was supposed to be transparent with regard to disclosing the extent of his WMD program, not cloud it in ambiguity and uncertainty. > After his lifetime, I'd be surprised if he was capable of being like that. I had a manager once who seemed incapable of simply being straight and honest. He saw words as a way of manipulating other people's minds to benefit himself, rather than a way of accurately communicating reality. So words came out of him in a strange filtered way. It was interesting to see. Iraq might have agreed to transparency in some sort of surrender document to the UN after the first attack to evict him from Kuwait. But of course such an agreement is not a willing agreement. Just as the USA "unsigns" treaties they decide they dislike, he would of course feel no obligation to an agreement signed at the point of a gun. Irrespective of WMDs, it seemed reasonable to conquer Saddam and if the only thing achieved was cutting of Uday's succession, it could be considered a good thing. But also, Saddam no longer funds Palestinian suicide bomber families. And he did say it was a good thing that the Twin Towers were destroyed though he pointed out it was nothing to do with him - good enough cause. Plus rumour has it there was an assassination attempt on King George I and his wife et al [I might have that wrong - my intelligence systems are not too worried about such historical details]. hnn.us It was all very Shakespearian, Oedipal and crazy, on both sides. Saddam killed 2 x sons in law. I could not believe that they thought they could go back into Iraq, but they did and were killed shortly afterwards, of course - zero surprise. Mqurice