Rick -:- OT More Bin Laden garbage -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 18:14:32 (EDT)

SC (posted on LG) -:- What does Maharaji say about Masters? -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 17:09:02 (EDT)

__ Selene -:- And the devotees/students?? -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 18:06:34 (EDT)

__ __ silvia -:- You, genious...;()) -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 19:13:57 (EDT)

Dermot -:- I've mentioned it a few times -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 16:52:46 (EDT)

__ Robyn -:- Re: I've mentioned it a few times -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 19:37:15 (EDT)

__ Katie -:- Amazing lyrics - thanks -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 19:24:16 (EDT)

__ __ Dermot -:- With God on our side. -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 19:36:18 (EDT)

silvia -:- A FBI AGENT just KILjED IN DETROIT -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 15:08:30 (EDT)

__ Deborah -:- Silvia, you must be upset :( -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 16:02:18 (EDT)

__ __ Selene -:- same here Silvia -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 16:18:38 (EDT)

__ Rick -:- here's the story -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 15:57:41 (EDT)

__ Francesca :C) -:- I AM SO SAD! -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 15:23:29 (EDT)

Pat:C) -:- Holy Cow! It's WW111 on F7 -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 13:55:29 (EDT)

__ such -:- sharing bananas vs. kilotons -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 14:34:56 (EDT)

__ __ JohnT -:- I come here to help stop m -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 15:15:09 (EDT)

__ __ __ Pat:C) -:- Re: I come here to help stop m -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 15:16:33 (EDT)

Richard -:- Afghan War journalist's perspective -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 13:10:34 (EDT)

__ btdt -:- Re: Afghan War journalist's perspective -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 15:10:05 (EDT)

__ Scott T. -:- Re: Afghan War journalist's perspective -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 14:04:24 (EDT)

gerry -:- Voting with my feet -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 12:56:04 (EDT)

__ a0aji -:- :: pond scum are people too :: -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 19:55:21 (EDT)

__ cq -:- Re: Voting with my feet -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 16:33:05 (EDT)

__ Sir Dave -:- Eh? -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 16:24:30 (EDT)

__ Scott T. -:- Not to say... -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 13:30:03 (EDT)

__ SC -:- So you're the piece of SHIT -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 13:10:28 (EDT)

__ __ gerry -:- What are you on about, Roupell? -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 15:51:32 (EDT)

__ __ JohnT -:- David Roupel has no right here -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 15:12:36 (EDT)

__ Scott T. -:- Just keep your socks on. -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 13:07:25 (EDT)

Sir Dave -:- The Afghan's on America's side -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 12:51:34 (EDT)

Timmi -:- I came here to say...... -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 11:35:38 (EDT)

__ btdt -:- Re: I came here to say...... -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 15:05:44 (EDT)

__ Scott T. -:- Re: I came here to say...... -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 14:40:19 (EDT)

__ __ Pat:C) -:- Hi Timmi -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 15:15:02 (EDT)

__ __ __ Scott T. -:- Re: Hi Timmi -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 16:06:27 (EDT)

__ __ __ btdt -:- Re: Hi Timmi -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 15:47:35 (EDT)

Rick -:- selling stock (OT) -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 08:44:20 (EDT)

__ Ben Lurking -:- Re: selling stock (OT) -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 14:46:15 (EDT)

__ __ Joe -:- Free Stock Advice ? -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 17:05:29 (EDT)

__ __ __ Ben Lurking -:- Re: Free Stock Advice ? -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 18:00:17 (EDT)

__ __ __ __ Joe -:- Thanks, that's helpful -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 18:22:18 (EDT)

__ __ Rick -:- I hope you're right (NT) -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 15:35:49 (EDT)

__ gerry -:- Re: selling stock (OT) -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 10:06:58 (EDT)

__ __ Rick -:- thanks, Gerry -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 10:48:06 (EDT)

__ __ __ Gerry -:- Re: thanks, Gerry -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 10:59:09 (EDT)

Pat:C) -:- From Lifes (sic) Great -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 04:57:22 (EDT)

__ David Roupell's response from LG -:- You can't do it Pat, I've already tried -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 15:30:00 (EDT)

__ SC -:- You're becoming embarrassing Conlon -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 11:26:52 (EDT)

__ __ SC -:- DID NOT WRITE THE ABOVE POST -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 13:00:53 (EDT)

__ __ __ MK -:- But you could have, SC / David -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 15:04:51 (EDT)

__ __ __ Pat:C) channeling SC's therapist -:- Now take your thorazine like a good boy -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 14:09:57 (EDT)

__ __ __ __ Gofer Boy -:- SC/Roupell's latest psot on LG -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 15:25:30 (EDT)

__ __ __ __ __ A S Fisher -:- SC/Roupell admits to CAC -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 16:26:01 (EDT)

aussie -:- the coming crusades -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 04:52:18 (EDT)

__ Uncle Sam -:- You will if we tell you to-deal with it [nt] -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 09:28:05 (EDT)

__ Yankee -:- Re: the coming crusades -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 07:30:22 (EDT)

__ __ aussie -:- Re: the coming crusades -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 09:33:31 (EDT)

__ __ __ Scott T. -:- the coming crusades -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 14:22:39 (EDT)

__ Robyn -:- Re: the coming crusades -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 06:57:44 (EDT)

__ __ Scott T. -:- TLC -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 18:17:02 (EDT)

__ __ __ Robyn -:- Re: TLC -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 19:13:08 (EDT)

__ Pat:C) -:- Another Aussie weasel -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 05:01:23 (EDT)

__ __ aussie -:- Re: Another Aussie weasel -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 05:26:39 (EDT)

__ __ __ Joe -:- Aussie reaction....American reaction -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 14:43:52 (EDT)

__ __ __ __ Dermot -:- Excellent Joe -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 15:30:45 (EDT)

__ __ __ __ __ Joe -:- Thanks, Dermot -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 15:59:20 (EDT)

__ __ __ __ Jim -:- Arab American civil rights? -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 15:19:43 (EDT)

__ __ __ __ __ Joe -:- Re: Arab American civil rights??????? -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 16:17:09 (EDT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ Scott T. -:- Re: Arab American civil rights? -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 18:40:49 (EDT)

__ __ __ __ __ JohnT -:- Tough one -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 16:01:50 (EDT)

__ __ __ __ __ Scott T. -:- Profiling - the bigot's view. -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 15:50:32 (EDT)

__ __ __ Pat:C) -:- Apologies, aussie, but... -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 14:02:32 (EDT)

Salam -:- Latest News -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 04:46:02 (EDT)

__ Robyn -:- Re: Latest News -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 07:01:48 (EDT)

__ Pat:C) -:- G'day, Salam -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 05:13:29 (EDT)

__ __ salam -:- Re: G'day, Salam -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 05:59:04 (EDT)

suchabanana -:- Taliban says NO to handing over bin Laden -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 04:17:11 (EDT)

__ suchabanana -:- a flight attendant's nightmare -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 15:28:20 (EDT)

Janice Silver -:- THANKS FOR THIS SITE -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 02:49:36 (EDT)

__ Brian Smith -:- Dear Janice -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 14:48:24 (EDT)

__ Cynthia -:- Welcome, Janice -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 14:22:46 (EDT)

__ Jim -:- It's magic is what it is -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 11:51:42 (EDT)

__ __ Scott T. -:- Rope trick next. -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 16:14:48 (EDT)

__ Pat:C) -:- Hi Janice -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 03:59:43 (EDT)

__ __ salam -:- Re: Hi Janice -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 06:27:51 (EDT)

__ bhdt -:- Re: THANKS FOR THIS SITE -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 03:48:59 (EDT)

__ __ Pat:C) -:- You're up late, btdt -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 04:07:03 (EDT)

__ __ __ btdt -:- Re: You're up late, btdt -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 04:50:02 (EDT)

__ __ __ __ Cynthia -:- To: btdt Re: Worry -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 14:30:23 (EDT)

__ __ __ __ __ btdt -:- Re: To: btdt Worry -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 15:43:09 (EDT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ Katie -:- Re: To: btdt Worry -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 19:08:25 (EDT)

__ __ __ __ Pat:C) -:- It doesn't help to worry -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 05:07:53 (EDT)

__ __ __ __ __ wolfie -:- just to say hello -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 07:38:05 (EDT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ Pat:C) -:- Re: just to say hello. Wolfie -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 13:24:23 (EDT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Disculta -:- Focusing on love -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 15:15:36 (EDT)

Jorge -:- Who said no Israelis were killed at the WTC? -:- Thurs, Sep 20, 2001 at 22:27:37 (EDT)

__ Scott T. -:- Re: Who said no Israelis were killed at the WTC? -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 00:49:49 (EDT)

__ __ Mel Bourne -:- Re: Who said no Israelis were killed at the WTC? -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 05:57:08 (EDT)

__ __ __ Scott T. -:- Thanks, Mel -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 13:12:02 (EDT)

__ __ __ Jorge -:- Re: Who said no Israelis were killed at the WTC? -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 07:20:23 (EDT)

__ __ __ __ Mel Bourne -:- Re: Who said no Israelis were killed at the WTC? -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 10:52:42 (EDT)

__ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Don't change the subject, Mel -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 11:45:47 (EDT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ Mel Bourne -:- Re: Don't change the subject, Mel -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 13:15:29 (EDT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Naw, you don't get it -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 14:54:13 (EDT)

__ __ __ __ __ Katie -:- I hope you're wrong too, Mel -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 11:11:13 (EDT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ Mel Bourne -:- Re: I hope you're wrong too, Mel -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 12:25:07 (EDT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Katie -:- Thanks, Mel -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 12:46:06 (EDT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Dermot -:- Guiliani -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 15:09:04 (EDT)

__ __ __ __ __ gerry -:- Re: Who said no Israelis were killed at the WTC? -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 11:07:14 (EDT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ Mel Bourne -:- What's worng Gerry? -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 11:23:12 (EDT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ gerry -:- Mel, I've Evolved -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 11:28:25 (EDT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Mel Bourne -:- Re: Mel, I've Evolved -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 12:38:26 (EDT)

__ __ Pat:C) -:- And 2 Muslims died too -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 04:10:30 (EDT)

__ __ __ Katie -:- likely far more than 2, Pat [nt] -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 10:45:22 (EDT)

bill -:- Some decent financial analysis -:- Thurs, Sep 20, 2001 at 16:55:10 (EDT)

__ Scott T. -:- Re: Some decent financial analysis -:- Thurs, Sep 20, 2001 at 19:48:07 (EDT)

__ Joe -:- We are definitely in recession.... -:- Thurs, Sep 20, 2001 at 19:15:28 (EDT)

__ bill -:- An interview with bin laden -:- Thurs, Sep 20, 2001 at 17:00:14 (EDT)

__ __ bill -:- Latest report on bad binnie -:- Thurs, Sep 20, 2001 at 17:01:47 (EDT)

__ __ __ bill -:- above post is not above but here -:- Thurs, Sep 20, 2001 at 17:02:59 (EDT)

__ __ __ __ JohnT -:- Oh! No it's not! [nt] -:- Thurs, Sep 20, 2001 at 17:25:51 (EDT)

__ __ __ __ __ David -:- Another chilling interview -:- Thurs, Sep 20, 2001 at 19:40:49 (EDT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ David -:- Part2 and Link URL -:- Thurs, Sep 20, 2001 at 19:47:53 (EDT)

Sir Dave -:- The courage of an airline stewardess -:- Thurs, Sep 20, 2001 at 16:42:01 (EDT)

__ Francesca :C) -:- Thanks, Sir Dave -:- Thurs, Sep 20, 2001 at 23:51:43 (EDT)

__ __ silvia -:- devouring -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 00:43:32 (EDT)

__ Scott T. -:- Re: The courage of an airline stewardess -:- Thurs, Sep 20, 2001 at 20:29:09 (EDT)

__ __ silvia -:- fight or flight -:- Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 00:44:10 (EDT)

PatD -:- from the London Times -:- Thurs, Sep 20, 2001 at 16:22:25 (EDT)

__ Pat:C) -:- I'm seeing double -:- Thurs, Sep 20, 2001 at 17:00:55 (EDT)

__ PatD -:- Re: from the London Times -:- Thurs, Sep 20, 2001 at 16:27:32 (EDT)

__ __ Dermot -:- Good article Pat -:- Thurs, Sep 20, 2001 at 16:54:14 (EDT)

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 18:14:32 (EDT) From: Rick Email: None To: All Subject: OT More Bin Laden garbage Message:

The Taliban says they won't turn over Bin Laden without evidence. The U.S. says they won't show evidence. The media doesn't ask why and barely speculates that the Taliban will just reject it. Is it really the medias job to second-guess the Taliban? What can it hurt to show evidence? Or at least get the government to explain why they won't. Wouldn't the U.S. gain more sympathy if they provided the evidence? After following this story for more than a week, I still don't know any specifics that point to Bin Laden, or any reasons why the public shouldn't know them.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 17:09:02 (EDT) From: SC (posted on LG) Email: None To: All Subject: What does Maharaji say about Masters? Message:

MASTERS AREN'T ROBOTS' 'There are people who have information about all the masters that have been. Academic, encyclopedic knowledge. How does that help you with the one you need now? It doesn't. There are people who say, 'This is what a master should be.' Even if they looked at their information, they would realize every master was different. Why shouldn't they be different? Why should they be all like robots? There were masters who had a beard, there were masters who didn't have a beard. There were masters who wore saffron, there were masters who didn't wear saffron. There were masters who wrote poems and songs. And there were masters who said, 'I'm not even going to speak. I'm going to be quiet.' There were masters who said, 'Come here.' And there were masters who said, 'Try to find me.' If you have a family of eight kids, you know that no two are alike. All eight will be completely different. They were raised the same way, in the same house. Fed the same food. Everybody yelled the same way. And they all turn out differently. But when it comes to a master, people say, 'No. This is how a master should be.' It doesn't work like that.' Edited excerpt, Maharaji in Johor Bahru, 7th April 1999

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 18:06:34 (EDT) From: Selene Email: None To: SC (posted on LG) Subject: And the devotees/students?? Message:

A quote from Rick Ross site - in regards to a man's story of his experience with Landmark Forum and his helping his daughter get rid of her 'training': And no I don't think I'm ending the thread just because the guy mentioned Nazi Germany. ======================begin======================================== 'They want to replace your individual values, experiences, morals with their values, experiences and morals. Your way of looking at the world with their way of looking at the world. Your mind with their mind.' 'Sure, it all seems benign. But look at what's happening just in this country. The malicious militias. Farrakhan and all his hatred. All these little cults who 'know the way' the rest of us should follow. Hitler just wanted to unify Germany and protect German people from the Jews.' 'True believers are true believers, and they can all be dangerous when push comes to shove.' --- Walter Plywaski quoted from Westword / April 18-24, 1996 By Steve Jackson

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 19:13:57 (EDT) From: silvia Email: None To: Selene Subject: You, genious...;()) Message:

I wonder if the devoted premies as SC can even begin to question their real motives posting stuff like that? Do they need reassurance that they are right needing a master? Oh DOGS! Do they allow themselves to reason or they just think enough, little, to maintain the dream alive at all cost, even if they have to sacrifice their liberty? Do they consider that maybe, MAYBE they are wrong? Why do they need to maintain such a blatant lie? When I was a premie I had no belief system of my own but as what you posted explains, maharaji had created in my head such a 'perfect' story that to even doubt, after 26 years of believing it seemed too complicated to consider. I found myself saying one day that I didn't care who maharaji was at all. Is that insanity or not? How can a human being fall so deep, down, to the extent of losing touch of their mental health, welcoming lack of common sense? To be healthy is to have the capacity to question. To have surrendered to a belief system without questioning it is not. Perhaps they could get a life? Putting the master in a pedestal they have lowered themselves....in adoration... Their radical ideas are so separatist. So unloving. Special my ass! I thank evreyone again here who helped me open my eyes. Is good to be free. Hi darling Selene! :(()

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 16:52:46 (EDT) From: Dermot Email: None To: All Subject: I've mentioned it a few times Message:

in passing, so here are the lyrics to Cohens song. Better with music mind you. I love the 'cradle of the best and the worst' verse. DEMOCRACY t's coming through a hole in the air, from those nights in Tiananmen Square. It's coming from the feel that this ain't exactly real, or it's real, but it ain't exactly there. From the wars against disorder, from the sirens night and day, from the fires of the homeless, from the ashes of the gay: Democracy is coming to the U.S.A. It's coming through a crack in the wall; on a visionary flood of alcohol; from the staggering account of the Sermon on the Mount which I don't pretend to understand at all. It's coming from the silence on the dock of the bay, from the brave, the bold, the battered heart of Chevrolet: Democracy is coming to the U.S.A. It's coming from the sorrow in the street, the holy places where the races meet; from the homicidal bitchin' that goes down in every kitchen to determine who will serve and who will eat. From the wells of disappointment where the women kneel to pray for the grace of God in the desert here and the desert far away: Democracy is coming to the U.S.A. Sail on, sail on O mighty Ship of State! To the Shores of Need Past the Reefs of Greed Through the Squalls of Hate Sail on, sail on, sail on, sail on. It's coming to America first, the cradle of the best and of the worst. It's here they got the range and the machinery for change and it's here they got the spiritual thirst. It's here the family's broken and it's here the lonely say that the heart has got to open in a fundamental way: Democracy is coming to the U.S.A. It's coming from the women and the men. O baby, we'll be making love again. We'll be going down so deep the river's going to weep, and the mountain's going to shout Amen! It's coming like the tidal flood beneath the lunar sway, imperial, mysterious, in amorous array: Democracy is coming to the U.S.A. Sail on, sail on O mighty ship of state ! To the shores of Need Past the reeds of greed Through the squalls of Hate Sail on, sail on, sail on, sail on. I'm sentimental, if you know what I mean I love the country but I can't stand the scene. And I'm neither left or right I'm just staying home tonight, getting lost in that hopeless little screen. But I'm stubborn as those garbage bags that Time cannot decay, I'm junk but I'm still holding up this little wild bouquet: Democracy is coming to the U.S.A.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 19:37:15 (EDT) From: Robyn Email: None To: Dermot Subject: Re: I've mentioned it a few times Message:

Dear Dermont, Thanks. 'I love the country but I can't stand the scene.' That's it! Love, Robyn

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 19:24:16 (EDT) From: Katie Email: None To: Dermot Subject: Amazing lyrics - thanks Message:

The songs I keep thinking of are 'With God on Our Side' and 'Brother's Keeper' - both in versions sung by the Neville Brothers. Thanks again.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 19:36:18 (EDT) From: Dermot Email: None To: Katie Subject: With God on our side. Message:

Oh my name it is nothin' My age it means less The country I come from Is called the Midwest I's taught and brought up there The laws to abide And that land that I live in Has God on its side. Oh the history books tell it They tell it so well The cavalries charged The Indians fell The cavalries charged The Indians died Oh the country was young With God on its side. Oh the Spanish-American War had its day And the Civil War too Was soon laid away And the names of the heroes I's made to memorize With guns in their hands And God on their side. Oh the First World War, boys It closed out its fate The reason for fighting I never got straight But I learned to accept it Accept it with pride For you don't count the dead When God's on your side. When the Second World War Came to an end We forgave the Germans And we were friends Though they murdered six million In the ovens they fried The Germans now too Have God on their side. I've learned to hate Russians All through my whole life If another war starts It's them we must fight To hate them and fear them To run and to hide And accept it all bravely With God on my side. But now we got weapons Of the chemical dust If fire them we're forced to Then fire them we must One push of the button And a shot the world wide And you never ask questions When God's on your side. In a many dark hour I've been thinkin' about this That Jesus Christ Was betrayed by a kiss But I can't think for you You'll have to decide Whether Judas Iscariot Had God on his side. So now as I'm leavin' I'm weary as Hell The confusion I'm feelin' Ain't no tongue can tell The words fill my head And fall to the floor If God's on our side He'll stop the next war.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 15:08:30 (EDT) From: silvia Email: None To: All Subject: A FBI AGENT just KILjED IN DETROIT Message:

few minutes a go, in the Mc Namara building in downtown. I was on the phone with an investigator of the housing commission who work on the same building and he said he had to go, that they were evacuating the building. I thought he was BSing me, because he didn't want to talk with me, but it was true. Detroit is an area with a large number of Arabs. So, is touching home...I live 25 minutes from there.... :(

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 16:02:18 (EDT) From: Deborah Email: None To: silvia Subject: Silvia, you must be upset :( Message:

I am really depressed today myself, but email me if you like.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 16:18:38 (EDT) From: Selene Email: None To: Deborah Subject: same here Silvia Message:

If I can get away this evening I'll call.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 15:57:41 (EDT) From: Rick Email: None To: silvia Subject: here's the story Message:

http://wire.ap.org/?FRONTID=HOME&SITE=MIDTN&enter=Go [ guard killed ]

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 15:23:29 (EDT) From: Francesca :C) Email: None To: silvia Subject: I AM SO SAD! Message:

But thanks for keeping us up with the news Sylvia. Love to you, Francesca

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 13:55:29 (EDT) From: Pat:C) Email: None To: All Subject: Holy Cow! It's WW111 on F7 Message:

I wake up from a lovely snooze and pop over here and what's happening? WW111! Hardly anyone responded to our new arrival, Janice, because they're arguing politics. Perhaps it's time to take the political discussion to Anything Goes and let this forum go back to fullfilling one of it's main purposes which is to provide a place for old exes to help new exes to exit the cult. Sure the whole Rawat business seems so petty and sordid compared with what we have all just been through but we will never all agree on politics and the arguments are threatening to chase away some of our best contributors. I enjoy arguing politics too but can we take it to AG? Now about Bush's speech last night.... Just kidding. I'll meet you on AG for political debates from now on. Gerry is kindly paying for a lot of extra bandwidth for stuff which has no bearing on the forum's stated purpose. My email is full of letters saying that they won't read or post while the politics goes on.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 14:34:56 (EDT) From: such Email: None To: Pat:C) Subject: sharing bananas vs. kilotons Message:

naturally healthy, lotsa vitamins, filling, tastes great vs. '767 plane represents a kiloton Physicist Herb Lin calculates the energy on board (fuel + kinetic energy) a fully loaded 767 moving at 400 mph is on the order of a 1,000 tons of TNT, which is the yield of a typical tactical nuke. That is the scale of attack that NYC suffered.' If terrorism does not stop, I have learned that da ulema and militants among da faithful exes shall declare jihad against duh infidels. infidels' dark crusade is like rancid camel butter - it makes one sick to stomach and causes constipation, then runs. Peace and lentils,

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 15:15:09 (EDT) From: JohnT Email: None To: such Subject: I come here to help stop m Message:

I agree we should move the war / law and order / peace and justice discussion to Anything Goes.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 15:16:33 (EDT) From: Pat:C) Email: None To: JohnT Subject: Re: I come here to help stop m Message:

Precisly John. The terrorist attack made M and K seem so petty and irrelevant but that's what this forum is for.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 13:10:34 (EDT) From: Richard Email: None To: All Subject: Afghan War journalist's perspective Message:

The following commentary from David Kline I find to be very insightful. Hi Everyone, I covered the Afgan War as journalist 1979-87. I'm sure it'll take us all a very long time to come to grips with the full meaning of last week's disaster. But as someone who covered the war in Afghanistan extensively from 1979-87, and has reported from the Islamic world since 1978, I do have some thoughts that might possibly be helpful in our efforts to understand the nature of the struggle before us. First, there is the extremely complex and protracted nature of the struggle, one not amenable to easy or simplistic solutions. It is possible, for example, to take out Bin Laden and Company, although it will not be as easy as Washington might think. But more on that in a minute. The point is, even if we do eliminate this terrorist, we're still left with several million embittered anti-American Muslims worldwide who comprise the future suicide bomber recruits for the next Bin Laden that comes along. What do we do about them? In other words, the struggle is both acute (the shorter term direct military action needed to eradicate Bin Laden) as well as protracted. For in truth we will need to wage a long term political, moral and philosophical war against Islamic fundamentalism -- indeed, against the scourge of fundamentalism and absolutism of every stripe everywhere in the world. It is fundamentalism (and its philosophical core, absolutism) that enables otherwise intelligent beings to objectify and slaughter faceless 'others' in the service of some 'greater cause.' It is fundamentalist religion (whether Christian or Muslim) that is the wellspring of future World Trade Center bombings. It is absolutism -- the sort expressed in a popular Christian bumper sticker seen recently entitled 'Truth ... Not Tolerance' -- that today represents the greatest threat to humanity everywhere in the world. We saw the results of Marxist absolutism -- the notion that millions must, if necessary, be slaughtered to advance the cause of the world proletariat. Likewise we saw the results of fascist absolutism -- the Holocaust and 50 million dead in WW2. Now we see the fruits of religious fundamentalism both at home and abroad. Thankfully, America's truly deep-rooted democratic and secular traditions -- our 200-year-long separation of church and state -- have prevented religious fundamentalists from doing much damage here in the U.S. Fallwell and company, though they might wish to outlaw 'secular humanism,' will never find more than a very temporary and ephemeral following among Americans. Would that this were so in the rest of the world, however, where most nations do not have what we might call the 'habits' of democracy, of tolerance, of the ability to let voices that are even considered despicable still have their say in open debate. So that's the longer term and much more difficult struggle we face. In fact, I think we need nothing short of a modern day 'enlightenment,' a 21st century 'reformation' against the forces of absolutism and fundamentalism. We need to wage political and educational campaigns around the world akin to those we waged in post WW2 Europe against the then-ascendant communist parties. We eventually won the moral and philosophical war against communism, mainly because of its own intrinsic 'wrongness,' but also because we fought resolutely on the educational, political and philosophical front against it. Please note that I am NOT talking about McCarthyism or some modern version of anti-Islamic 'red-baiting.' I am talking about serious educational work to expose the most serious danger facing humanity today. In fact, the most difficult part of this effort for America's leaders may be this: We also need to honestly and frankly admit some errors in our own foreign policy that have neglected the legitimate aspirations of Islamic peoples for freedom and democracy. We must support, not oppose, democratic reform movements in authoritarian Arab nations. We need to diffuse the virulent anti-Americanism that exists in much of the Middle East. In short, we need to isolate the extremist fundamentalists and win over (or at least neutralize the anti-American sentiments of) the broader Islamic masses worldwide. I don't say it will be easy. But it cannot be avoided -- not if we want to root out the soil from which future suicide bombers and Bin Ladens will rise. It may take a generation or more to achieve success. But there it is. We have no other choice. We must confront fundamentalism and absolutism with all the wisdom and forcefulness in our hearts and minds -- and we must do so in every sphere of public and private life. A few words now about the necessary short term struggle to kill Bin Laden and crew. And I do mean kill. In the same spirit with which decent men and women fought to the death against Hitler, we can offer no quarter to Bin Laden. He and his direct supporters must be killed -- executed. With or without trial is (to my mind) of little consequence. But you can't just drop some paratroopers disguised in Turbans over the Afghan border. I spent many many months in Afghan war zones being hunted by Russian special forces units, and they never came close to capturing (let alone locating) the leading Afghan resistance fighters I traveled with. Hence they had to content themselves with the mass slaughter of Afghan villagers. Bin Laden is likely moving about the Afghan countryside today in a group of no more than 15-20 armed men -- but also never more than half-a-day's fast march from larger platoons of supporters. So how can he be spotted? Where is the real human intelligence that can locate him and help us hunt him down? It lies in the surviving leaders of the true Afghan resistance, with whom we must strike an alliance to go after not only Bin Laden but also the illegitimate Taliban rulers of Afghanistan. For make no mistake, the Taliban do not represent the Afghans, who have no previous history of fanaticism or rule by clergy. In fact, it was only because of the wholesale destruction by the Soviets of nearly all social institutions in Afghanistan -- including the systematic KGB assassination of so many members of the Afghan intelligentia that it produced a statistical decline in the Afghan literacy rate -- that the Taliban came to power in 1977. Financed by Saudi and Pakistani extremists, the Taliban came from outside the country and simply filled the vacumn of leadership created by 20 years of anti-Soviet warfare. Did you know that in the 2nd great British-Afghan War in the late 19th century, a woman by the name of Malalai led an army of Afghan tribesmen to decisive victory against the British Imperial Army after her husband fell in battle? This is a fact once celebrated in Afghan culture (at least in some circles), although no Taliban would ever admit to it (or probably even know about it) today. I mention this only to emphasize that the Taliban have nothing to do with true Afghan culture and attitudes. Anyway, if we ally with true Afghans -- the surviving leaders of Massoud Ahmed Shah's Northern Alliance (sadly, Massoud died Saturday from wounds received in a not-coincidental Taliban assassination attempt the day before the WTC bombings), then we will eventually eliminate Bin Laden and his Taliban protectors. And then, my friends, in every school and church and political institution across the globe, I hope we will all get down to the longer-term business of waging protracted moral, philosophical and political war against absolutism and religious fundamentalism in all its virulent and ugly forms. God help us if we don't. David Kline

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 15:10:05 (EDT) From: btdt Email: None To: Richard Subject: Re: Afghan War journalist's perspective Message:

But why can't we just round 'em up, load 'em in a space shuttle and send them to the moon with limited oxygen supply? They can just sit there, watching this little marbled ball spin round and round, and get some cosmic consciousness. If they can't, then they can terrorize each other all they want with moon rocks.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 14:04:24 (EDT) From: Scott T. Email: None To: Richard Subject: Re: Afghan War journalist's perspective Message:

Richard: Thanks. As I've said, it's a war of liberalism vs. 'The Right' (or what Kline calls Absolutism). I'm only concerned that we obtain an adequate appreciation for liberalism, it's history and essential tenets. Sadly, I think many of us are wandering in the wilderness about that. --Scott

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 12:56:04 (EDT) From: gerry Email: None To: All Subject: Voting with my feet Message:

I've emailed Hotboards asking how I can down grade the Forum to the free version. I'm not going to pay for this anymore with maniacs like Scott Talkington, SC and all the rest of the pond scum. Ex-Premies excluded of course. If I can't do that, I'll close up shop. Then anyone can create a new board and if you use the name 'gl' as the board name, no one will have to change their bookmarks to find it. Alternately, I could close it myself and start up a free board under the same name and email the password to whomever wants it (with reservations, of course.)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 19:55:21 (EDT) From: a0aji Email: None To: gerry Subject: :: pond scum are people too :: Message:

I've emailed Hotboards asking how I can down grade the Forum to the free version. I'm not going to pay for this anymore with maniacs like Scott Talkington, SC and all the rest of the pond scum. Ex-Premies excluded of course. If I can't do that, I'll close up shop. Then anyone can create a new board and if you use the name 'gl' as the board name, no one will have to change their bookmarks to find it. Alternately, I could close it myself and start up a free board under the same name and email the password to whomever wants it (with reservations, of course.) --- Any forum that excludes the likes of Scott T has such serious flaws in its ideology that I think them unrecoverable. If he goes, I go.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 16:33:05 (EDT) From: cq Email: quartus@postmaster.co.uk To: gerry Subject: Re: Voting with my feet Message:

OK, how much would make a difference? email me, OK?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 16:24:30 (EDT) From: Sir Dave Email: None To: gerry Subject: Eh? Message:

Scott T a maniac??? If he's a maniac then I'm bin Laden.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 13:30:03 (EDT) From: Scott T. Email: None To: gerry Subject: Not to say... Message:

I am still of the opinion that a great deal of the emotional response that's going on is a direct result of the fact that there are about 6300 bodies under the rubble that have yet to be recovered. What we are seeing is misdirected rage, but rage under the circumstances is precisely what we ought to expect. I'm not ever going to take it personally that you called me 'pond scum.' Instead, I'll thank you for helping us get this out in the open. --Scott

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 13:10:28 (EDT) From: SC Email: None To: gerry Subject: So you're the piece of SHIT Message:

who re-wrote my post? Well, to quote you.. 'you fucking cunt' You better run with your flat little feet you twisted low life coward. That is the dirtiest most scurillous trick anyone as acting FA can pull. You behaved normally for a few weeks. So it got to be too much work keeping that rabid sicko in your head under leash did it? Yup, and out pops rabidgerry we all know so well. Writing new text in someone else's message? GOLD MEDAL SCUMBAG. I'm glad to be an excuse to rid any forum of the likes of you. Yea, well you better run and you better run fast...

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 15:51:32 (EDT) From: gerry Email: None To: SC Subject: What are you on about, Roupell? Message:

What's your problem? I can't help it if you have a split personality. Maybe you slipped into one of your alter egos. One no one ever met before. That's my best guess as to what happened to your post.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 15:12:36 (EDT) From: JohnT Email: None To: SC Subject: David Roupel has no right here Message:

David Roupel, it is you who are in deep water and do not know it. Your cyber-stalking of Abie will haunt you even more than your absurd CAC-antics.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 13:07:25 (EDT) From: Scott T. Email: None To: gerry Subject: Just keep your socks on. Message:

I've emailed Hotboards asking how I can down grade the Forum to the free version. I'm not going to pay for this anymore with maniacs like Scott Talkington, SC and all the rest of the pond scum. Ex-Premies excluded of course. If I can't do that, I'll close up shop. Then anyone can create a new board and if you use the name 'gl' as the board name, no one will have to change their bookmarks to find it. Alternately, I could close it myself and start up a free board under the same name and email the password to whomever wants it (with reservations, of course.) --- Maniac? Pond scum? I'll just let Jim respond to this. Over and out.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 12:51:34 (EDT) From: Sir Dave Email: None To: All Subject: The Afghan's on America's side Message:

An invasion of Afghanistan by USA and UK forces will be very popular with one group of Afghans. See above link. [ Hoping to avenge their leader's murder ]

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 11:35:38 (EDT) From: Timmi Email: None To: All Subject: I came here to say...... Message:

that maharaji must have his head stuck so far up his rear that he needs a proctologist to fill his cavities. Then I thought, (Heaven forbid! A thought! Oh, how horrible, how awful!) that rawat knows exactly what he is doing. It is the rabid premies who have their anatomy so positioned. He is like every other religion that doesn't want you to think for yourself. 'You must have faith.' Anybody ever heard that one from one of the established, 'regular' religions? I certainly have. It is exactly the same thing rawat says, often in the same speech where he insists that 'this is not a religion.' ''You need a master.'' ''You must be grateful.'' Why? I'd like to look him right in the eye and ask him just how stupid he thinks most people are. The answer is, 'Very stupid', obviously.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 15:05:44 (EDT) From: btdt Email: None To: Timmi Subject: Re: I came here to say...... Message:

I came to the same conclusion. M knows exactly what he's doing/done. Nothing is left to chance and if something doesn't go right, he instantly changes things. I've never thought, and still do not consider him low I.Q. To use it the way he does is inhumane.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 14:40:19 (EDT) From: Scott T. Email: None To: Timmi Subject: Re: I came here to say...... Message:

Timmi: Just want to take a moment and thank you for your post. It looks so lonesome sitting out there. Cult thinking causes brain damage. Not proven yet, but a viable hypothesis. --Scott

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 15:15:02 (EDT) From: Pat:C) Email: None To: Scott T. Subject: Hi Timmi Message:

Yes, he knows what he's doing. He may not have known consciously from the beginning but of course he knew he was onto a good scam. btdt, as for his IQ. He's shrewdy and calculating but over-estimates himself and is arrogant and he thinks he's smarter than everyone else. In my book that equals STUPID.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 16:06:27 (EDT) From: Scott T. Email: None To: Pat:C) Subject: Re: Hi Timmi Message:

Yes, he knows what he's doing. He may not have known consciously from the beginning but of course he knew he was onto a good scam. btdt, as for his IQ. He's shrewdy and calculating but over-estimates himself and is arrogant and he thinks he's smarter than everyone else. In my book that equals STUPID. --- Pat: You can say exactly the same thing about Bin Laden and his group. And unlike our flaws (which are many) theirs *is* fatal. Being in a cult, whether you're the leader or the follower, turns you into a dope. --Scott

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 15:47:35 (EDT) From: btdt Email: None To: Pat:C) Subject: Re: Hi Timmi Message:

I work with gifted kids and a research study showed the number of incarcerated kids, as well as, adults, with high I.Q.'s is staggering. M, is everything you say and behaves stupidly, but to me, he got an extra does of brain cells and what he's done with them is inhumane. 'Stupid is as stupid does'

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 08:44:20 (EDT) From: Rick Email: None To: All Subject: selling stock (OT) Message:

I have about two grand in Oracle that I'm going to sell this morning. It's not much, but to me it's alot and I can't afford to lose anymore of it. The reason I'm selling is that I don't have 'confidence' that terrorism can be controlled. That's what it really comes down to... if it's reasonable to think that our streets can be safe. America is too big to control in the way it would be necessary to rule out the possibility of terrorism, and technology is too advanced to restrict the means to cause it. The gaps in communication and transportation that used to exist kept our immediate world from being threatened. That's been gone for years even though we weren't accutely aware of it till now. I saw Bush on TV last night, blustering about 'America is strong', but I think he's bluffing. I saw Netanyahu being interviewed earlier, and he said that when Libya was attacked by America, people predicted an Islamic backlash that would rock the world. It never happened, he said, and Libya just shut it's mouth and kept quiet ever since. Netanyahu said the same thing would happen in the current situation; America would kick some ass and the Islamic extremists would crawl right back into their hole. I found it unconvincing. The stock market is all about confidence. The notion of terrorism, which wasn't even thought to me two weeks ago, is now big enough for me to think their isn't any reason for confidence in the American economy. I've always thought it was pretty much a house of cards, but used to think it could be sustained nonetheless. Now, with what few dollars I have left invested in it, I'm pulling out because I honestly think it may be my last chance. This is one of those few times it would be great to turn out to be wrong.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 14:46:15 (EDT) From: Ben Lurking Email: None To: Rick Subject: Re: selling stock (OT) Message:

That is a historically inacurrate additude, every calamity going back to pre wwII cuases drops in the market and excpet for pearl harbor the market was above where it was within 6 months, Pearl Harbor took longer, about 18 months, I have a paper chart on it on my desk. I am about to jump into the market and buy for long term growth. There are some seriously undervalued stocks out there that will be up in the next year. I have had money sitting on the sidelines waiting since march of 2000.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 17:05:29 (EDT) From: Joe Email: None To: Ben Lurking Subject: Free Stock Advice ? Message:

Hey Ben, I also have a bunch of money sitting in money markets. Everytime I decide to put it in stocks, the go down more, so I thought I'd wait to try to get some bargains. Do you think this is a good time? I was thinking of waiting a couple more weeks. What do you think? Joe

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 18:00:17 (EDT) From: Ben Lurking Email: None To: Joe Subject: Re: Free Stock Advice ? Message:

We pay some one to manage this for us and he took our personal and business funds out of the marker last year - our 401 k had about8% growth last year and we are at about 6% this year. We were going to wait until after the first of the year as we felt that it would take that long for the market to correct - I think we are near bottom on some stocks - I will specualte with half of what I have allocated and rest will go into what I feel are strong companies that are undervalued. I know I will put some in some kind of energy basket, focusing on fule cell and hi -? capacitors (the have the ability of when you brake your vehicle soting the energy used in breaking and then using it to get going again - this is tech thats 4-5 years away - then there are things like computer storage and remote backup - I think you will start to see some demand build up as companies reevalute their stategies. I guess the answer is do you feel brave now - its definetley a time of higher risk - which should return a higher reward. I have faith in this countries economy - we were near the bottom of a downward cycle and now a lot of value has been pushed out - look for prices to start rising after the first few attacks. That will settle down the country somewhat. Also we are in a typical 'triple witching' weekend and if you look back over the years the fall is not typically strong anyway. Good Luck A-

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 18:22:18 (EDT) From: Joe Email: None To: Ben Lurking Subject: Thanks, that's helpful Message:

So, are you saying you aren't waiting until the first of the year? You changed your strategy to jump in now? I guess I'm like a lot of others that I got spoiled by all those big returns over the past 6 years. You could kind of just throw money anywhere into the market and make money. That was bound to come to an end. My more conservative funds continued to do well until this past week, and I agree it's temporary, but how temporary is hard to know. I just think the bubble was so big, that the downturn won't be small. I'm not exactly sure why I think this, but I have heard a few economists say it and it makes sense to me. I think alternative energy stocks are very smart. California just passed legislation to get to 20% production through renewables in the next 5 years from the current 10%. Solar and wind, I say. I just hope that solar gets cheaper for individual homeowners. I looked into it for my house and it would cost about $40,000. It will take a lot of PG&E bills to cover that. a guy in my neighborhood actually produces more power than he needs for his house, and gets money back from PG&E because he actually returns power to the grid. I guess the answer is a combination of tax incentives, and cheaper technology. Thanks.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 15:35:49 (EDT) From: Rick Email: None To: Ben Lurking Subject: I hope you're right (NT) Message:

nt

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 10:06:58 (EDT) From: gerry Email: None To: Rick Subject: Re: selling stock (OT) Message:

Rick, given what you have said, you might consider taking that money and buying one ounce gold coins. The price would be the gold price on the commodities market plus 5%.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 10:48:06 (EDT) From: Rick Email: None To: gerry Subject: thanks, Gerry Message:

I take it that's the most secure form of currency. God, if things get that bad, what're we going to buy with the gold?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 10:59:09 (EDT) From: Gerry Email: None To: Rick Subject: Re: thanks, Gerry Message:

what're we going to buy with the gold? Good question, but it will always be worth something. I can't say the same for paper currency. I hope this doesn't start a pissing match, but the billions of and billions of dollars created out of thin air and pumped into the money supply to prop up the stock market is going to contribute greatly to inflation. It has to, there's no way around it. Now the oil rich countries are not stupid. They see this devaluation for what it is and will want more of these now devalued greenbacks for their oil. Yes it is a house of cards and the bubble is bursting. Or maybe it's more like a leaky balloon. Just my unprofessional take on it all and I'm sure others will disagree and I'm not going to argue the point with anyone, so take it with a grain of salt, consider the source, buyer beware, caveat emptor, etc.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 04:57:22 (EDT) From: Pat:C) Email: None To: All Subject: From Lifes (sic) Great Message:

A few days ago I called David Roupell (aka cerise/Marolyn/SC and any number of other silly childish aliases) a liar on Lifes Great. He tried to weasel out of it by posting this (as Anais Nin - he loves his aliases:) ''Thanks SC, for exposing Pat the Cyber harrasser. Now we have seen what lies just under his ever present shallow facade of convivial joviality. You have done us all a service by ripping of the mask of this resentful bitter and horribly judgemental man.'' I responded: The funny thing is that I have only ever lashed out at two people on the ex forum - you and Catweasel because you are both liars. The CACroach replied: ''Errr...the public record proves otherwise sir. Forgotten your CAC profile already? Perhaps you'd like it posted here to remind everyone. No, we wouldn't be THAT cruel! ...and I bought a new guitar yesterday so I'm in a conciliatory mood. :) P.S. Catweasel never lied. That is my speciality. He's the good, upfront, straight honest cop. I'm the low down sneaky, slippery, bent, covert, lying jackass cop. It gets results.'' I answered: I wish you would post my CAC profile here especially since you have already said that you did it. That way my friends here who have not seen it will be able to see just what a weasel you are. I said: ''The funny thing is that I have only ever lashed out at two people on the ex forum - you and Catweasel because you are both liars.'' I should have been more specific. I meant: '' The funny thing is that I have only ever lashed out at two people WHO POST on the ex forum - you and Catweasel because you are both liars.'' In my CAC profile I am quoted as lashing out at people who DO NOT POST on the ex forum except for one quote which was to Catweasel. And I apologised to them twice. I know when I have made a mistake. PS There is nothing else happening on LG except for JHB trying to get a link to EPO and CT and Elaine agreeing that the WTC victims are better off dead because ''they are in heaven.''

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 15:30:00 (EDT) From: David Roupell's response from LG Email: None To: Pat:C) Subject: You can't do it Pat, I've already tried Message:

Though I know, you'd love to have a foot in both camps. Wouldn't we all? I suspect we all agree (cross forums) with each other a lot more than most admit. One of the reasons that you love me is because I've been very candid about admitting the shortcomnings of EV, ME, M, and everything that surrounds those things. You might as well admit it, you are, like many, deeply fond of me, regardless of my lies, deceit, treachery, false bravado, multiple handles and damright cruelty. I am pleased that you have (as you said) seen beyond those sketchy appearances and realised that there is a deeper cause to my presence here. Of course there is. A cause that is driven by love. So please stop trying to have a foot in both camps.... It just ain't possible dude. You remember what the boss said, foot in both camps means... one goes one way, one goes another way. And you go THISAWAY!!! . . . . . . . And people like me are here to break your fall. When you say things like...'I know when I have made a mistake.' I worry deeply. (knowing that you are indeed a beautiful hanuman being who has temporarily lost respect for you master.) But I will be here to gently guide you home. And please stop thinking that I'm taking the piss all the time, I'm totally serious and find a very real pleasure in being so. NO, I didn't think so.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 11:26:52 (EDT) From: SC Email: None To: Pat:C) Subject: You're becoming embarrassing Conlon Message:

I can't wait to suck gooroo's toes. Pleeaase Oh great master come (all over me) to Amaroorooroo

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 13:00:53 (EDT) From: SC Email: None To: SC Subject: DID NOT WRITE THE ABOVE POST Message:

And some very silly person just stepped into a very smelly pile of shit. Because he's acting as the forum administrator here. I'm gonna deal with this breach of FA protocal, that's the dirtiest trick yet. A LIE doesn't get more evil that that pal. Have you any idea what you've just done? You want a reaction? Rest assured smartboy, rest assured. PC just lost the war.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 15:04:51 (EDT) From: MK Email: None To: SC Subject: But you could have, SC / David Message:

Someone who invented Cerise would not have too much difficulty inventing the above SC as well.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 14:09:57 (EDT) From: Pat:C) channeling SC's therapist Email: None To: SC Subject: Now take your thorazine like a good boy Message:

Oops, sorry, I should say ''good girl.'' Or should I? Which one of your multiple personalities are you channeling today and what gender is? Is it Cerise or Marolyn or Selena Crumpet or Anais Nin? Come to think of it those are all girls names. Perhaps you could solve your personality disorder by pooping over to Thailand for one of those cheapy sex-reassignment surgeries. I wonder if they'll find any balls to remove and as for that.......oh, it looks like they won't have to make a clitoris for you. Oh, sorry - that's your cock?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 15:25:30 (EDT) From: Gofer Boy Email: None To: Pat:C) channeling SC's therapist Subject: SC/Roupell's latest psot on LG Message:

WARNING ABOUT F7 FORUM ADMIN I know this is a petty, indulgent, subjective post, not to do with LifesGreat (my earlier post below more than makes up for it!) but this may serve as a warning to others who may consider posting on F7. Most of you know this already. I just found out in a rather interesting way. That... FORUM 7 HAS NO CONSCIOUSNESS AT THE WHEEL ANYMORE Having posted a bit of stuff over the years on the ex forum, I've been treated all ways, from warmth and respect to utter contempt. That's fine and what one would expect. Under Brian and Katie's stewardship the rules were tough but fair. There was integrity. When the rules changed, they left. Well, there is not even an attempt to feign integrity or fairness. Why? Well, I just replied to another desperate, convoluted message from Pat Conlon, made up, as usual by snippets of my posts here, a dirty trick but one employed occasionally. I was attempting to clarify his ever confusing position re me and my so called harem of aliases, basically saying, 'Pat, no-one gives a fuck about me or your messy spaghetti of names'. Why should they? The world is in a frenzy, there are much much more important, serious things to consider. I don't know if it was gerry or not, (he's implied it) but some real champion slimeball changed the text of my reply so it reads like a dirty scummy little devotee sprouting obscenities about his Master. THIS IS DONE BY SOMEONE WORKING AS A FORUM ADMIN WITH AN EDITING PASSWORD yea gezza They accuse many of us pwk of games, tricks and much worse - ok. They can get ugly too, so many pwk's run away, some don't. Some are not afraid of these people and it really bugs them. Jabs occur. Ok. Fair enough. Word skill and smart thinking wins the day. The forum rules still have boundaries though, right? NOT ANYMORE! They'll justify this outrage in their graceless brains (or change the text back to what I actually said to hide their illegal activity) but what this smarmy little shit has done now is about as deceitful and dishonest as it can possibly get on a public forum - trying to make someone appear to say something they haven't said by ACTUALLY REWRITING THEIR POST Any trick will do eh guys? Including complete and total abuse of FA privileges. You rescued Pat from another humiliation? How touching. Must be be ecstatic. But I'm on to Pat. First he tries to 'expose' me by trotting out all these names, 'my' names. So called exposure happens. But nothing happens. It didn't work. No fear. No panic. So what to do? Your FA steps in... Let's make up a truly sick post so that the viewers with THINK it's from SC and all go..'Yea, look at him now, what a dirty scummy cult apologist shit'. Even premies will go, 'oh my God, we knew he was eccentric, but this is really sick stuff...SC must be totally off the wall, after all. The exes were right!' Well SC isn't off the wall and knows he's played by the rules, albeit considerably more skillfully than his opponent. I will take this as a compliment, someone (you) has to be mighty beaten to pull this little trick. A desperate crushed soul who cannot use words but a webpage facility that no-one else can use but you. Wow, what a brave boy. There were guys at bording school like this and boy, did you get your deserts in the end. I hope the all powerful Forum Admin of Sep 21, 2001 at 04:57:22 (EDT) knows this, and knows it well...You can't do this kind of shit, funny boy - without an equal and opposite reaction. For those of you who've been patient enough to read this far...here is what smarmy FA put instead of my message on F7.. Subject: I'm really just a Liar like my gooroo Message: I can't wait to suck gooroo's toes. Pleeaase Oh great master come (all over me) to Amaroorooroo Pretty classy work eh? This isn't Silvia or Deborah losing the plot THIS IS THE FA but I think gerry's running, using the excuse that he doesn't want to 'pay' for the forum anymore because SC posts there twice a month and Scott T is way too intelligent for him to deal with. I believe, if we haven't already, we need to have a very real think about who is running the Forum for the ex-premies now. I know Pat is desperate for FA access, maybe he has it. So what kind of mentality administers the messages of the folks, some of whom are good, polite and very interesting people? If they condone this kind of stewardship then they truly are in danger of losing any credibility they claim to have. Their very administration plays the cyberstalking card to the max, twisting and distorting a perfectly legitimate message to their forum. These people are NOT worth engaging in any sense of the word. And as they repeatedly show, it is they who are desperate for our company, our time and our answers to their never ending questions. The sensible, intelligent ex-premies already have ok, busy, interesting lives, one can see that from their posts. Good luck to them. The others, well, time to let the sleeping rabid dogs lie in their own shit? I reckon. Sorry, I try to employ brevity at most times, but not at times like this.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 16:26:01 (EDT) From: A S Fisher Email: None To: Gofer Boy Subject: SC/Roupell admits to CAC Message:

David Roupell said: ''Oh and please don't rib us endlessly about the CAC thing. Have you any idea how much work Cat and I put into that? Unpaid work it was too! Mind you, we almost developed hernias from the laughing.'' I will be forwarding this to my client. Thank you, Mr Roupell.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 04:52:18 (EDT) From: aussie Email: None To: All Subject: the coming crusades Message:

'Ifyour not with us your against us'.Sorry guys my kids and friends are not going to die for your president or 'way of life' or 'values'.Ive watched your'values'destroy our social democracy goodbye free education health services public ownership unions.I'm sorry about wtc truly but youon your own guys.We paid our WW2 debt with korea vietnam gulf war and our constant crawling.We are no longer your deputy sherriff.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 09:28:05 (EDT) From: Uncle Sam Email: None To: aussie Subject: You will if we tell you to-deal with it [nt] Message:

[nt]

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 07:30:22 (EDT) From: Yankee Email: None To: aussie Subject: Re: the coming crusades Message:

I wonder how you would feel if it was the Sydney Opera House that was the target last week?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 09:33:31 (EDT) From: aussie Email: None To: Yankee Subject: Re: the coming crusades Message:

Let me see bin laden delcared war on america didn't mention australia.I feel your pain,but I also feel the pain of my chilean and salvadoran friends,and the iraqi, kurdish and lebenese people i've worked with.Your not loved guys,we don't want your 'values'.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 14:22:39 (EDT) From: Scott T. Email: None To: aussie Subject: the coming crusades Message:

Aussie: I wonder if you've adequately considered the consequences of telling the US to 'go it alone?' Pull out a world map and take a careful look at where Australia sits. [Hint 1: Islam (including it's radical fringe) is a lot closer to your back door than ours. Hint 2: Denying targets of opportunity in the US will encourage the search for targets of opportunity elsewhere.] I note your objection to the erosion of social democracy, and suggest that such erosion is likely to slow or even reverse in wartime, when people are much more tolerant of 'government intervention.' --Scott

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 06:57:44 (EDT) From: Robyn Email: None To: aussie Subject: Re: the coming crusades Message:

Dear Aussie, I know the US has done a lot of dispicable things. I don't know if you heard or saw the president's speech but for me, someone who has NOT been a fan, it was an excellent speech delivered without flaw. If only it were the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help us god! If it were true I would agree but did he mention that we, the US created bin Laden and others like him, that we use people when it suits us and now we've seen the error in our ways, the fact that we created a monster that now threatens our very existance and much of the world's. Not only suicide hijackers and Americans were killed on September 11th. I don't pretend to know any answers I just wanted to say something since I'd seen that speech last night. Personally, I am sorry for all the wrong done by my or any government that is not backed by its people. I certainly haven't backed any aggression or worse that my country has backed. I am very sad for many reasons. Love, Robyn

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 18:17:02 (EDT) From: Scott T. Email: None To: Robyn Subject: TLC Message:

Robyn: If it were true I would agree but did he mention that we, the US created bin Laden and others like him, that we use people when it suits us and now we've seen the error in our ways, the fact that we created a monster that now threatens our very existance and much of the world's. Not only suicide hijackers and Americans were killed on September 11th. I don't pretend to know any answers I just wanted to say something since I'd seen that speech last night. There was an absolutely superb documentary on the WTC attack that includes the *entire* story about Bin Laden, etc. on the TLC channel. It included actual video inside the WTC during the attack that I have never seen anywhere else, as well as interviews with some of UBL's contacts in the Sudan, with people in the CIA counter-terrorism taskforce (not all of whom were complimentary about the US). I thought at the time, if the US has the capacity to produce something this compelling and informative within one week of the event then we ought to be able to combat terrorism on every level, including the propaganda war within Pakistan and other Moslem states. I'll see if I can find the reference, but am sure it'll be shown again on TLC and must make it into broader circulation. Just superb! --Scott

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 19:13:08 (EDT) From: Robyn Email: None To: Scott T. Subject: Re: TLC Message:

Thanks Scott. I'll have to get to someone's house with cable or satilite but if you find anything out, let me know. sundogs@hotmail.com just in case I'm not here. Love, Robyn

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 05:01:23 (EDT) From: Pat:C) Email: None To: aussie Subject: Another Aussie weasel Message:

......or the one and only Catweasel or SC/David Roupell. It's hard to tell them apart. They all the sound the same like the Borg. He should have joined the circus or been a quick change artist or a drag queen.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 05:26:39 (EDT) From: aussie Email: None To: Pat:C) Subject: Re: Another Aussie weasel Message:

wrong pat i'm an ex haven't posted much but an avid follower of the debate this should have happened twenty years ago but alas no internet.M with his wealth and lifestyle is part of the problem this wold faces.the piece racist scum we call our prime minister isgoing tomake us follow you tohell.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 14:43:52 (EDT) From: Joe Email: None To: aussie Subject: Aussie reaction....American reaction Message:

Hi Aussie, Just wondered. How do you think the population and media in Australia have or will respond to all this? To Bush's speech and the rest I mean? I didn't hear all of the speech because I was commuting at the time, but I heard parts later and I could understand Bush saying that if coutries 'habor' terrorists they will be considered 'hostile' (really, that already is American policy under the Anti-terrorism statutes), but I don't understand the 'you-are-with-us-or-you-are-against-us' statement. I just really don't like, and don't think it's helpful, for that kind of stark, manachean statement, partly because I can see how people in other countries might not like to feel that they are being forced to get into the battle, and don't consider it their fight. And I just wanted to say, that despite some of the allegations directed at me by our more 'patriotic' forum participants, I actually care a very great deal about my country I care what it does, domestically and internationally, because I'd like it, and the world, to be better places. Maybe it's just the 60's idealism of my youth, but I don't think it is. Patriotism is a whole lot more that just respecting and accepting what the government does, or how it acts, or always seeing it in the most favorable light. It's exercising the rights that this country actually stands for, and that includes openness, public participation, questioning and debate, with a good dose of questioning and skepticism. I do not believe that criticism of the government or politicians is anti-patriotic and I'm quite nervous that in this time of distress any dissenting views in this country will be seen as such, and that people who are somehow seen as 'different' will bear the brunt of it. I feel very strongly that we have to do what we can to keep that from happening. I think this view comes from my family. My father and all my uncles fought in WWII, (my father called it the war against fascism),and one of the things my father always said he was fighting for was the right to be skeptical, to dissent, to debate, to question and that our government is accountable to the people. Unaccountability, and blind patriotism, he always said, were very dangerous things, and it was very important that the public never give up their rights to freely dissent and question, even if they feel frightened or insecure. In fact, it's at those times that our rights and freedoms become most important, the obvious example being what we did to the Japanese in California and the West Coast in 1942 after Pearl Harbor. That policy to intern them was very popular among the American people at the time, and only a few people challenged it. One guy who did was from Oakland, a welder named Kormatsu, who, backed by the ACLU of Northern California (the national ACLU directed the CA chapter NOT to take the case), challenged the detention of Americans of Japanese descent. He lost that case, but in the 80s, his case was brought up again, and it turns out that the intelligence agencies and the Justice Department, concealed considerable evidence at the time that there was NO evidence that the Japanese were a threat, NO incidences of sabotage, etc., but based on the decision of the military commander on the West Coast, the decision was carried out and Kormatsu was convicted and jailed, on the basis of the supressed evidence. Anyhow, based on the new (previously supressed) evidence, now made available under FOIA, the Federal Court in San Francisco overturned his conviction, and of course the Feds did not petition the Supreme Court to take the case. I think this was about 1986, 35 years after Kormatsu was convicted, still alive, the conviction was removed from his record. Now, he's a hero and there is a park and monument in Oakland and one in San Francisco honoring him. But at the time he did what he did, he was considered a threat and the people who supported him pursuing his rights were considered traitors and unpatriotic. After all, America had just been attacked! Anyway, my dad also lived through the McCarthy era, during the dark, communist witch hunts in this country in the 40s and 50s, and my father's brother Jack was actually blacklisted from his job because he was a union organizer in the railroads in the 30s, before the war and, it was claimed, he associated with 'communists.' He had been a railroad engineer, and despite being a war veteran, could no longer get into the union, and ended up having to work in a factory. He developed a bad drinking problem and died in his early 50s. And I grew up during the Vietnam War and during Watergate, when the government lied to us about what was happening, and I witnessed the deaths of 60,000 Americans and millions of Vietnamese in a war that the US knew it couldn't possibly win back in the mid-60s, propping up an illegitimate regime. McNamara and others have 'apologized' in their memoirs in the past few years, although we haven't heard anything like that from Henry Kissinger. In any event, people took to the streets, and they were successful in changing things, eventually. So, I think it's very important for people all over the world, and particularly in the United States, to unite behind a cogent strategy to prevent what happened last week from ever happening again, but it is crucial that we question the means, both domestically and abroad. Otherwise, we are in danger of losing the very rights that we are trying to protect. So, I think Bush's speech last night was a 'call to war' but there are no specifics about how that will be carried out. I hope Bush is up to this task, and I hope Congress doesn't usurpt its responsbility to debate all this and let the people be involved in the decisions of what is done on their behalf, and I hope that people are not afraid to speak out about what they think should or shouldn't happen.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 15:30:45 (EDT) From: Dermot Email: None To: Joe Subject: Excellent Joe Message:

It baffles me how anyone could find your brand of patriotism wrong, but obviously some do. Funny , you mention 'dissenters' ....there was a whole section on tonights C4 news.Also tonight there was a big meeting at the Quakers Friends meeting house, In London.No one there defended the terroist actions but many did point out , as you have done in the past, how we in the west created these monsters in the first place!! All of these ogres ..Saddam, Bin Laden etc WOULD NOT HAVE SO MUCH HORRIFIC POWER were it not for our governments backing them to the hilt in previous times. Someone quoted a famous saying (which I can't remeber verbatim) to the effect that dissenters are either 'Idiots, helping the enemy or traitors'. Rubbish, I think. You mention the the Jap/American internments (not German/American, mind you) , McCarthyism, Vietnam and Watergate. These are all events Americans should never forget and truly learn from. A final point on C4 was that there are more anti-war demos in the USA than in the UK just at the moment. Cheers Dermot

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 15:59:20 (EDT) From: Joe Email: None To: Dermot Subject: Thanks, Dermot Message:

I also have to realize that SF and Berkeley, were I spend most of my time, aren't necessarily like the rest of the country. You don't see many American flags flying here, and there are lots of peace demonstrations happening. Me, I'm going to distract myself and go to the San Francisco Blues Festival this weekend. I hope we get some warmer weather! I think Colin Powell is actually the sane and moderating force in the Bush administration. I think Rumsfeld is a war-monger with his roots and brain still in the cold war, but Powell has built a career saying that the military shouldn't get involved in anything without a very clear exist strategy and goal, and I'm always reassured seeing he is involved. I just hope he's listened to. Thanks again Dermot. I always enjoy your posts. Joe

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 15:19:43 (EDT) From: Jim Email: None To: Joe Subject: Arab American civil rights? Message:

Joe, Pearl Harbour rightfully so scared the shit out of the U.S. which may be forgiven, to some extent at least, for reacting with at least some suspicion to Japanese nationals and even Japanese Americans living in the states. If you say that not only was there no evidence that these people in any way supported the Japanese and, worse, the evidence exonerating them of such suspicion was suppressed, that's terrible. Mind you, Pearl Harbour was even more terrible. Some measure of over-reaction as seen in hindsight is understandable. Still, of course, we should learn from our mistakes and become better always at seeking the optimal precision in defending ourselves. Here's what I wonder, though. So far it seems that only arab muslims are part of whatever terrorist networks threaten us. They seem to be the only ones smitten with the particularly nast virus bin Laden's spreading, the only ones prepared to die so readily in war against the great Satan. Is there any reasonable argument now for heightened scrutiny of arabs, then, at our borders, airports, etc.? I'm not talking about internment camps, deportations, anything of the sort. But, still, this very notion is a complete affront to the argument against 'racial profiling' in police matters. Still, we all know that it must be happening informally, at least. And don't we all want it? Let's be honest, don't we all want to know that the next time some arab or even arabic-looking fellow boards a plane we're on he's going to get a very thorough look over? Yes, just because of his appearance. Can anyone deny it? Say they were only doing random deep checks of passengers, how would we feel knowing that the arab guy over there wasn't selected but that middle-aged nordic looking woman from Wisconsin was? It would surely be an affront to the pride and dignity of most any arab American. I understand that. But is it reasonable, fair and even prudent in the circumstances to scrutinize the arab community more closely right now?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 16:17:09 (EDT) From: Joe Email: None To: Jim Subject: Re: Arab American civil rights??????? Message:

Pearl Harbour rightfully so scared the shit out of the U.S. which may be forgiven, to some extent at least, for reacting with at least some suspicion to Japanese nationals and even Japanese Americans living in the states. Sure, like I said, skepticism is a good thing, but sending American citizens to camps is pretty drastic. And it was so sporatic. It wasn't done in Hawaii, and it wasn't done East of the Rockies. And, of course, German Americans were not locked up, either, even though there were German subs off North Carolina at the time. I think it was pretty clear it was racist. But fear certainly is understandable, and it's understandable now. But we have to get beyond that when it comes to civil rights. I have a friend who grew up in SF and her father lived on 25th st in the Sunset section of SF and there was terrible fear of an invasion. You can still see the artillary installations on the cliffs all along the coast around SF, the GGB and the entrance to the Bay. Where PatC and I both take our dogs you walk right under these massive concrete structures. Right Pat, at Ft. Funston (aka 'dog heaven?') [One is called 'Battery Davis' which I call 'Betty Davis,' but that is another story.] . If you say that not only was there no evidence that these people in any way supported the Japanese and, worse, the evidence exonerating them of such suspicion was suppressed, that's terrible. Yeah it was terrible. The documents are amazing. Long, researched Justice Department and Military documents saying unoquivocally that there was no evidence of sabotage or dangerous activities by the Japanese on the West Coast. Marilyn Hall Patel, the judge who overturned the case in, I think it was 1982, gave a powerful statement from the stand. Kormatsu and his wife, then in their 70s, were in the courtroom, with lots of other Japanese Americans who had been interned. Lots of tears. Very powerful. Actually, I saw a documentary on PBS about it all just a few months ago. A few years later, partly as the result of the overturn of that decision and ther release of the documents, and under the campaign of Norm Minetta, then in the Congress and now Secretary of Transportation, Congress passed a law apologizing to, and compensating those who were still alive for what happened. Regarding Arab-Americans, this is the big concern at the moment. I was glad to see Bush go to the Mosque in DC the other day, and I have even been patronizing the Palestinian-run deli in my neighborhood when I didn't before, just to be supportive. They seem to be fine, though, (they have a picture of Ramalla on the wall, but I think they are Christian, because they also have a really tacky picture of the Last Supper, one of those 3-D things.) Congress just gave the governement the power to arrest and hold LEGAL aliens for unlimited time. Before, I think it was 24 hours, and then they have to be released or charged. These are LEGAL aliens. That bothers me, but if it's only temporary, it might be acceptable, but I'm just not sure. They can't do that to US citizens, and I agree, there is no way that Arabs, or people who look Arab, are not going to get special scrutiny. I guess there is no way to avoid that, as long as the legal extent to which people's lives can be invaded is limited. Like can you hold people for no reason and for how long, can you tap their telephones, read their mail, intercept email, etc. Those are some of the big questions. Plus, I am hearing with all the anti-arab violence that has been going on that people who aren't arab are being attacked. Apparently Sekes, who wear turbins (different kind of turbin from the one bin Laden wears, but still a turbin and Americans are pretty ignorant of Georgraphy, let's face it) are victims, and two have been killed, and a number of hispanics have said they were harrassed because people thought they looked arabic. This is where the rubber meets the road. This is where the constitution gets tested when it rubs up against the desire for security. It isn't easy, and we've got to talk about it. I'm as affected as anyone else. When I got stuck in Chicago for days and then finally got a plane home, you better believe I checked out my fellow passengers. I plan to do the same when I go back there next Sunday, if my plane takes off.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 18:40:49 (EDT) From: Scott T. Email: None To: Joe Subject: Re: Arab American civil rights? Message:

Joe: (I know you're not reading this, of course.) Just a point or two. Civil Rights is a component of Civil Peace, which exists within the confines of a Civil Society, or in our case a Nation State. (Since there is only one Supra-National State so far.) When the nation state is at war then certain elements of civil society may be compromised in proportion to the extent that the nation's homeland may come under direct attack. That said, we have a diverse society composed partly of people who may be sympathetic to the ethnic heritage of the enemy, so it is imperative to win them over by our strengths and principle values, which are non-ethnic or 'universal.' Abrogation of their civil rights doesn't help, but the 'civil' in 'civil rights' is a concept internal to the nation by long tradition, and therefore subject to our determination, with recognition that if the civil rights of people of one ethnic heritage are abrogated then those of everyone are, or ought to be. There's also a specific legal matter that's in a grey area. By virtue of the fact that we have never limited constitutional rights to citizens of the US they also extend to non-citizens. We could change that, by statute. --Scott

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 16:01:50 (EDT) From: JohnT Email: None To: Jim Subject: Tough one Message:

The internment of Japanese Americans during WW2 was particularly resented because Italiam-Americans and German-Americans were not viewed with suspicion - they were not required to exonerate themselves. Racial profiling is so riddled with logical and practical difficulties that it seems in practice to lead to more problems than it solves. I mean, it's just the black youth do most of the muggings in Brixton -- so let's concentrate stop-and-search on black youths issue writ large, surely. What that means is that respectable middle class chaps like me could safely carry weed to a party, but not some black kid. Oh, and that the police have a ready excuse to hassle black kids (as if they needed an excuse!)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 15:50:32 (EDT) From: Scott T. Email: None To: Jim Subject: Profiling - the bigot's view. Message:

Well not, actually. A few reasons why profiling on the basis of Arab characteristics might be a bad idea. 1. I alienates the only community that could provide us with accurate intelligence as to the workings of the Islamic suicide cults. 2. It oversimplifies the security protocols for what must ultimately be a boring and poorly compensated job. But I dunno. I'm open to arguments on either side. Jim is right that virtually the only individuals who might be involved now are those of Arab or Middle Eastern decent (although Afghanistan is actually part of Asia and not the Middle East). Could disguises foil a too-simplistic protocol though? '1' seems pretty critical too.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 14:02:32 (EDT) From: Pat:C) Email: None To: aussie Subject: Apologies, aussie, but... Message:

your anti-Americanism smacked so much of sour pessimistic cult-think (the world is evil and everybody in it is nuts and cannot be trusted) that I think I may be forgiven for making the assumption that you were not an ex.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 04:46:02 (EDT) From: Salam Email: None To: All Subject: Latest News Message:

A California Based News Agency announced that an American guru living in a delapitated house has asked his Indian followers to support the American troop in Afghanistan. NEWS BREAK

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 07:01:48 (EDT) From: Robyn Email: None To: Salam Subject: Re: Latest News Message:

Hi Salam, how ya doin' sweetie. I guess this news broadcast couldn't have been talking about m since his house isn't delapitated as far as I know. I guess even in California, guru's are a dime a dozen. Love, Robyn

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 05:13:29 (EDT) From: Pat:C) Email: None To: Salam Subject: G'day, Salam Message:

So yahoo has finally started to use pop-ups. I'm off to bed. Watch out for the CACroaches and Cultweasels.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 05:59:04 (EDT) From: salam Email: None To: Pat:C) Subject: Re: G'day, Salam Message:

they figured it out. A, Looking for another place to hot, I may finally register a domian. good night.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 04:17:11 (EDT) From: suchabanana Email: banana@bunkersRus.com To: All Subject: Taliban says NO to handing over bin Laden Message:

but their Islamic clerics decided by unanimous consensus that bid Laden should leave Afghanistan. jihad? bin Laden ready for a trial? September 21, 2001: THE TALIBAN Afghan Mullahs Suggest bin Laden Leave Country By JOHN F. BURNS Al-Jazeera via Associated Press At the end of a two-day meeting in Kabul, Afghan Islamic clerics offered a compromise on U.S. demands the country hand over Osama bin Laden. SLAMABAD, Pakistan, Sept. 20 — Afghanistan's senior Muslim clerics adjusted their course today, issuing an edict that said Osama bin Laden should be persuaded to leave the country. The White House quickly rejected the move, saying it did not 'meet American requirements' that Afghanistan immediately hand over the prime suspect in the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. 'This is about much more than one man being allowed to leave voluntarily, presumably from one safe haven to another,' said Ari Fleischer, the White House spokesman. The decision by a grand council of nearly 1,000 clerics in Kabul, the Afghan capital, came after days of refusals by the Taliban's supreme leader, Mullah Mohammed Omar, to surrender Mr. bin Laden or end the sanctuary the Taliban have given him and his armed force, Al Qaeda (pronounced al-KYE-dah). But it was not clear where Mullah Omar stood on the decree — whether he had inspired it, whether he would accept it — or whether Mr. bin Laden would comply. The decree served only to intensify speculation as to what the Taliban are up to, or even whether they have any plan to extricate themselves from the crisis. In any case, the decree appeared to do nothing to deter the Bush administration from its readiness to use military force if necessary to capture or kill Mr. bin Laden. The situation was further complicated tonight when Taliban officials at the Afghanistan Embassy here issued a statement quashing suggestions that the clerics' decree might open the way to the handover of Mr. bin Laden. 'We have no intention of surrendering Osama bin Laden to the United States,' the statement said. 'He is a free man and he can move to any place that he wishes, but we are not going to expel him.' In the religious decree, or fatwa, issued earlier in the day, the Afghan Islamic clerics left little doubt that they were acting under the pressure of American military threats, and made their own threat, of a worldwide holy war, or jihad, against the United States in response to any American thrust into Afghanistan. The clerics said: 'To avoid the current tumult, and also to allay future suspicions, the Supreme Council of the Islamic clergy recommends to the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan to persuade Osama bin Laden to leave Afghanistan whenever possible.' To this, they added a conciliatory statement of condolence for the victims of the attacks in the United States. 'The ulema,' they said, using an Arabic term for Islamic clergy, 'voice their sadness over American deaths and hope America does not attack Afghanistan.' This, too, was immediately followed by a harsh warning of retaliation. 'If infidels invade an Islamic country and that country does not have the ability to defend itself, it becomes the binding obligation of all the world's Muslims to declare a holy war,' the decree said. It also warned that any Muslim cooperation with the 'infidels' — an apparent reference to neighboring Pakistan, among other countries — was punishable by death. Protests in major cities in Pakistan continued today against the decision by Gen. Pervez Musharraf, Pakistan's military ruler, to agree to United States demands for cooperation in the hunt for Mr. bin Laden. Islamic militant groups linked to Mr. bin Laden and some political parties have promised to do everything possible to disrupt any American military venture involving Pakistan. A general strike is planned for Friday. All week, reports from Kabul and Kandahar have indicated that the Taliban leaders were engaging in a cat-and-mouse game with the United States, with Mullah Omar saying Mr. bin Laden would never be handed over, then suggesting that he might be under certain conditions. The conditions changed from day to day. It appears clear that there are significant splits within the Taliban movement, although their exact nature is not easy to determine. One new condition that appeared in the decree today was that President Bush apologize to the world's estimated one billion Muslims for using the word 'crusade,' derived from the Christian military campaigns that overran Muslims 1,000 years ago, to describe his plans to fight international terrorism. The United States has repeatedly refused to negotiate with the Taliban over Mr. bin Laden. Secretary of State Colin L. Powell, speaking in Washington, said that 'voluntarily, or involuntarily,' Mr. bin Laden had to be brought to justice. 'The sooner he is brought to justice, the better off the world will be, and the better off the Afghan people will be,' he said. The clerics' decree came less than 12 hours after President Bush ordered heavy bombers and other forces deployed to bases within striking range of Afghanistan. Islamic specialists and experts on Afghanistan had various interpretations of the latest developments. One was that Mullah Omar, and the wider clergy, wanted to try to rid themselves of responsibility for Mr. bin Laden without explicitly breaking previous assertions that Islamic injunctions would not permit them to endanger their 'guest.' Perhaps, too, these experts suggested, the Taliban thought that by allowing Mr. bin Laden to slip out of their control, they could escape the full weight of American wrath. Other views were less complex: that the Taliban leaders were confused, considering that their own harsh form of Islamic rule has eliminated television in the parts of Afghanistan they control, and restricted the state-controlled radio and newspapers to 'Islamic' news. Most simply, some experts felt that Mullah Omar and the clerics were simply playing for time, hoping that a growing tide of reluctance to join in or endorse American military action across the Muslim world might yet get them out of a corner. Officials in Pakistan, which sent a high-ranking military delegation to Kandahar and Kabul earlier in the week to tell Mullah Omar to surrender Mr. bin Laden or face being toppled from power, said they had left officers behind in case the Taliban had a change of heart. The Pakistan generals who led the delegation said they hoped realists in the Taliban government in Kabul might prevail over unworldly clerics in Kandahar, where Mullah Omar and other members of the Taliban's supreme council spent much of their time reading the Koran. One senior government official in Kabul, Education Minister Amir Khan Muttaqi, said after the clerics' meeting that Mullah Omar would follow the 'guidance' of the clerics and encourage Mr. bin Laden to leave, but implied that this would not be soon. 'It will take time,' he said. 'You know that Osama bin Laden has a lot of opponents. It can't be that he goes out on the street and catches a taxi to go to another roundabout.' In Islamabad, a Taliban official at the Afghan Embassy said Mr. bin Laden was ready to give himself up, if the United States provided evidence of his involvement in the attacks in the United States. Suhail Shaheen, the deputy ambassador, said of Mr. bin Laden: 'He said, `I am not involved in this terrorist action. I am a guest in Afghanistan. But if they have evidence, I am ready for a trial.' ' The diplomat added, 'We are telling the Americans, if he has violated his commitment, please prove it.'

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 15:28:20 (EDT) From: suchabanana Email: None To: suchabanana Subject: a flight attendant's nightmare Message:

FBI Praises Brave Flight Attendant An air hostess on one of the planes which crashed into the World Trade Centre may have provided vital clues about the hijackers during a final, brave call to her boss. Even though one of the hijackers had already killed a passenger and stabbed her colleagues, Madeline Amy Sweeney phoned her manager and spoke until the final seconds. Ms Sweeney, a mother of two children, explained that all the men were sitting in business class, and were Middle Eastern.  She was even able to say what seat numbers they were in. As the plane took a sudden detour over the Hudson River towards the Twin Towers Ms Sweeney, who had worked for American Airlines for 12 years, said: 'I see water and buildings. Oh my God! Oh my God!' Moments later Flight 11 from Boston hit the north tower of the World Trade Centre. FBI investigators said the 35-year-old stewardess showed remarkable calm when she called her manager Michael Woodward. She said: 'This plane has been hijacked,' then described how two other flight attendants had been stabbed. Speaking through her shock, she said, 'A hijacker also cut the throat of a business-class passenger, and he appears to be dead.' Investigators have identified five hijackers who were on the flight and are believed to be among 19 on the four planes who used box cutters and small knives to take control of the four planes. They think the men hijacked the plane after about 15 minutes. As she spoke the hijackers were taking control of the plane and 'had just gained access to the cockpit'. The plane then changed direction suddenly. Ms Sweeney was unable to contact the pilots and when asked to try to give the plane's location looked out of the window to see the approaching WTC towers. [from a UK news source]

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 02:49:36 (EDT) From: Janice Silver Email: janice4335@yahoo.com To: All Subject: THANKS FOR THIS SITE Message:

Just discovered this site. Wow! I received knowledge in 1971 in L.A. Anyone remember Alta Loma Terrace. I've been kind of in and out since then. I can't just write Maharaji off because the energy seems so right when I go back. But then...he says something that I just can't go along with. The last phrase that sent me packing: We are the only ones speaking from the heart. What an insult to so many people doing real work in the world...you know minor figures like the Dali Lama. But I've lived with this terrible ambiguity for so many years. Always asking premies and ex-premies what they think the real deal is. But I find it too simplistic to just thing he's a con. I have tended to feel (and felt guilty about so feeling) that he had conned himself more than anything else. That he was a victim of his own narrow belief system. And yet there was something so wonderful. I certainly saw him in the early days pick up on what was going on with me. He raised a puppy for my little boy and did some other great things...all the while saying this narrow minded stuff and then as someone thankfully pointed out insulted our intelligence by saying he never said he was God or the Messiah. I guess that makes me a hallucinator. Anyway, I really thank you for the opportunity to participate here. It's great therapy. Janice

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 14:48:24 (EDT) From: Brian Smith Email: None To: Janice Silver Subject: Dear Janice Message:

I strongly identify with your feelings of guilt and ambiguity, this is typical residual cult baggage that I am just beginning to discard myself. I got out a 9 months ago after being in the cult since 72. The eurporic recall of those early days, experiences, people and places is a strong tonic to seeking the truth about the underlying deciet that has been perpetrated for years by m and his cult. At one point it can be said that m was young, he himself was a victim caught up in the family business. There came a time however when m knew full well what the deal was and then he took the dirty little business even further. Backtracking, rewriting DLM history, went from lord to master (whats the difference) from bringing world peace to feathering his own nest etc. Check out the EPO site there is a wealth of information there. I had to draw the line as you did and be true to my own instincts and come to the conclusion that this whole thing was flimsy and false. Be assurred that you can ask the questions about the cult & m that you have always wanted to here on this forum, You can speak your mind freely. Freely speaking my mind about the cult is a luxuory that I denied myself for years, I just mouthed cultspeak, I tried hard to be a good premie and for years I just went along. I found this site and I knew that there was more to this mystery than I had ever imagined. I am unwinding years of imbedded myths, superstitions, beliefs and emotions, sometimes it is a painful process, mostly it is not. Regaining ones freedom of choice and free will is an event to be celebrated. Stick around and celebrate with us

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 14:22:46 (EDT) From: Cynthia Email: None To: Janice Silver Subject: Welcome, Janice Message:

I've been on a bit of a hiatus from posting here. The world's events got to me and I needed a short break. I received knowlege in 1976, when I lived in Hartford, CT. Have you read the Ex-Premie.org site? There is much information there that helps explains things. After a couple of years posting here, I've have made many new friends here. The ex-premies are experiencing the shock and grief of what happened on Sept. 11th. That's why so many threads are off-topic. I now live in the Green Mountains of Vermont with my husband and 3 cats. I am expecting him home tonight after a 3+ week trip he was on, so I can't promise that I will be here too often over the weekend. But, I'm sure many others will respond. If you have any questions (whether you think they are silly/stupid or not) please ask. We have developed a bit of slang here when referring to Maharaji. Don't be shy. I'm glad you came here. Best, Cynthia

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 11:51:42 (EDT) From: Jim Email: None To: Janice Silver Subject: It's magic is what it is Message:

Janice, The meditation techniques are magic. But not magic in the Harry Potter sense, I'm thinking more like Magic Castle or Penn and Teller, David Copperfield. Folksy, hindu recipes for sleight-of-hand. Scientists have already blown the cover off the basic 'transcendent' experience and this is all part of that. Did it feel good? Great. Was it 'god'? No.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 16:14:48 (EDT) From: Scott T. Email: None To: Jim Subject: Rope trick next. Message:

I'm just curious to see how the heck they do that. Most of the attempts at duplication of the trick have been pretty abysmal. And no one has ever duplicated the end of the trick, however poorly, where the boy disappears at the top. That's one amazing slight of hand.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 03:59:43 (EDT) From: Pat:C) Email: pdconlon@hotmail.com To: Janice Silver Subject: Hi Janice Message:

I really could relate to your post as someone who's ''been kind of in and out since'' (since 73 in my case.) I finally decided 9 months ago that I really did not need to be associated with Rev Rawat anymore. Perhaps he did have some juice in the beginning and for a few years afterwards (though much of that juice was supplied by our ideals, faith and enthusiasm) but it really sarted getting boring and sterile quite some time ago. Maybe you still get a kick out the videos. The last one I watched was the Atlanta propagation training seminar thingy and it gave me the creeps with him blaming the mahatmas for calling him god and prancing around like a wannabe Bill Gates. Okay so maybe he isn't a conman and is just incompetent and a bit dumb. Well actually most conmen fit that description. They overestimate themselves. You said; ''I have tended to feel (and felt guilty about so feeling) that he had conned himself more than anything else. That he was a victim of his own narrow belief system.'' Most conmen believe their own scam. Maybe he was ''a victim of his own narrow belief system'' at one time but the secrecy and paranoia now surrounding him (secret meetings, first class email etc) and his relentless push for propagation all tell me that he is thinking of it more in terms of a failing business. Premies are leaving, donations are down. As for your feeling guilty - that should tell you something right their. The truth can't make you feel guilty. It makes you feel clean and honest. Like all the guys in the god-business, he instills guilt (''Never doubt the purity of the Master,'' he said in Miami this year.) It's just another religion of guilt and fear (''You can't come home without the Master,'' he also recently said.) Perhaps he still thinks that he is sincere and believes in his product but he has been such an incompetent and irresponsible teacher and so damn greedy and selfish with donated money that he really has lost all credibilty especially once you realise that you don't need him to be happy unless you count spending thousands to go and see him and then feeling nice for a day or two afterwards. No thanks, I prefer going it alone and making my own effort to be happy. As soon as began to feel ashamed of him and embarassed to introduce my friends to it I knew it was a weird personality cult. Those who ''never doubt the purity of the Master'' get the juice. Anyone who does not sees him for what he is and it ain't a pretty picture. Anyway welcome and I am looking forward to hearing more from you and getting to know you. My name is Patrick Conlon and I live in San Francisco.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 06:27:51 (EDT) From: salam Email: None To: Pat:C) Subject: Re: Hi Janice Message:

welcome to the best place to reveal the only truth about maharaji, Elan Vital and their lies. Most posters on this forum have had enough and have decided to make themselves heared. Maharaji offers stuff all. He preys on our human nature. Don't allow him to do it. gurus suck.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 03:48:59 (EDT) From: bhdt Email: None To: Janice Silver Subject: Re: THANKS FOR THIS SITE Message:

Hi Janice, This site is a godsend. I discovered it just a couple months ago myself and it has been such an education. There's a lot to learn and sort through. It provided an anchor when my little world of knowledge started tumbling down. I received k in '74. Sad to say, I didn't see through the ambiguities that most here have. I just did that ole 'surrender' dance and figured the Lord of the Universe could update however he wanted as he took us through these changing times. Being told to continually surrender and surrender some more justified his actions, so it seemed at the time. I went to a video event this past weekend. Frankly, I wanted a big dose of Ipicac. I also wanted to see the pwk's who I've been friends with the majority of my life one last time. What I expected to happen didn't and what did surprised me. The pwk's who had always seemed so filled with a kind of radiance looked sadly empty and lost behind a fake veil. Their enthusiasm for the most mundane of things was truly pitiful. Two months ago I was exactly the same. These are good, decent, kind people, except for the 'Church Ladies' who seem to delight in their supposed superiority. What did surprise me was M on the video, the same video when watched at home makes no sense whatsoever. In that room, in that setting, he seemed larger than life, smooth, powerful, etc etc, etc. And I had to marvel and wonder, how does he do that? And that is what is hard to fight, that thing that 'seems right.' But I was armed with all the facts provided by the diligent people here. And I came to the conclusion, M is good at what he does. Real good. It's just too bad he isn't good at being honest or compassionate or walking the talk he has talked for so long. And I had to wonder, what was it in me that drew me to him?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 04:07:03 (EDT) From: Pat:C) Email: None To: bhdt Subject: You're up late, btdt Message:

Another terrific post from you again. You mean you don't miss straightening out the white table-cloths and waiting to greet the aspirants who sadly never show up? Yes, I feel very sorry for my premie friends right now. They also know that Rev Rawat has lost his juice. I mean, if he really is offering the greatest gift, why aren't the aspirants flocking to him? Could it be that the premies can't tell anyone about it because they are confused and embarassed by him?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 04:50:02 (EDT) From: btdt Email: None To: Pat:C) Subject: Re: You're up late, btdt Message:

God I wish, but there's a new bookmark out to hand people with a quote on the front and all the wwww sites and phone numbers on the back. They went ga ga. People still want the Atlanta type trainings. It's mostly because that's all he talks about....propogation. And mostly they all feel it's their fault, they are letting him down, that something is wrong with them that they can't bring people in, that they aren't trying hard enough. The ones that have 'spread the word' are overflowing with ego like I've never seen before. Any person, anywhere that expresses the slightest interest is cause for celebration and commendation for the pwk'er. I'm still having trouble sleeping with all this going on. Bush's speech, what I could stomach, was appalling to me. One of my client's nanny is expecting her first child. Her husband is in the Army infantry and they have their company out training, waiting to be shipped off. She said 'We just don't talk about it. He's not going. And if he goes, he'll be alright. But we just don't talk about it.' They are 19 years old. Shades of Viet Nam.... I really appreciate your upbeat, positive outlook. You have a knack for seeing the bigger picture. I'm jaded. After Watergate, I don't believe much. I wanted to believe in the inherent (sp) good of human beings, hoping Bush could see reason instead of waving a red flag. Obviously I live in la la land. I just look at these yahoo's and honestly, it's like seeing a kid at Christmas. Bush looks radiant, happy, a man with purpose. It's a bad dream and I want to wake up.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 14:30:23 (EDT) From: Cynthia Email: None To: btdt Subject: To: btdt Re: Worry Message:

Hi Btdt, If I could, I would hook you up with my Mom. She is the all time anti-worrying woman. Even with her Alzheimers, she gives me strong talk about the uselessness of worry: 1. What the hell is worrying going to get you? If you worry, you can't sleep, if you can't sleep, you can't take care of your responsibilities. 2. My husband used to berate me for being able to sleep because he would walk the floors at night and I slept. How can you let me do all the worrying, he'd ask. I'd say, I have five kids, I need my sleep. 3. What has worry brought to anyone but more stress and worry? 4. Stop worrying--it's useless. And on and on... It's difficult, btdt, but I've learned that I am not in control of much of what happens regarding the events of the day. I am concerned, very much so, but worry? It never helps. Taking even a small break from the forum has helped. I wish, as Pat posted in a thread about, that we get back on topic soon. So much political talk is interesting and educational, but is does induce fear, IMHO. Be well, Love, Cynthia

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 15:43:09 (EDT) From: btdt Email: None To: Cynthia Subject: Re: To: btdt Worry Message:

Your mom sounds incredible! I definitely wish I could be like her. Does she do workshops?!!! Unfortunately, I have a reeeeeally weird intuitive sense. I feel things before they happen and I hate it a lot, at times. At other times it's been lifesaving. One of the worst was when I was telling a nurse why I hated to fly, saying because airplanes have a nasty habit of falling out of the sky, when United Airlines 232 fell out of the sky nearly on top of my head, at that very dam* moment. Impending earthquakes make me want to jump out of my skin, and my grandaughter nearly killed herself two days ago because I didn't heed the weird feeling I was getting. Before that, my husband took the kids to dinner, I started praying like crazy cuz I knew something weird was happening and they narrowly escaped a gasoline tanker truck pushing them into the center divide on the freeway. Luckily, my husband has a better sense than I and felt the hair on the back of his neck stand on end, and did a bit of tricky driving. This has happened to him his whole life. Me, I just 'worry' because physically, I can feel this weird crap like a conductor or something. Can I choose six winning lottery numbers?NOooooo......maybe that's why k was attractive for so long. It really did numb me. I must need drugs or something.... those prescription type. Or some nice wine.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 19:08:25 (EDT) From: Katie Email: None To: btdt Subject: Re: To: btdt Worry Message:

Hey btdt - I can't empathize, because I don't have the same intuitive sense, but I can sympathize, because I have another friend who does. Unfortunately, hers has gotten 'clogged' and she now cannot tell whether it's a real premonition or just anxiety from some other source. It's been very difficult for her - she gets scared of too many things now because many of her premonitions have come true. And she still has premonitions, but she can't tell the real ones from the generalized anxiety ones - so she has a lot of unnecessary anxiety. No words of wisdom here - just wanted to say I know what you mean. BTW, don't know if you saw it, but I very much appreciated your post about your experiences during the Vietnam war - thanks for that. My husband would have been drafted if he hadn't had a good lottery number, so we've been talking a LOT about that - and the rest of what is going on, lately. No easy answers to the present situation either. Love, Katie

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 05:07:53 (EDT) From: Pat:C) Email: None To: btdt Subject: It doesn't help to worry Message:

But it does help to be positive and optimistic. Not pie in the sky rose-colored glasses stuff but just knowing that this has to be done otherwise we will all wake up dead one day from anthrax or some other horrible germ warfare terrorism. We have to do it so we may as well do it with hope for a good outcome. That really is sad about the propagation guilt. How long will it take for premies to realize that life is meant to be fun not filled with guilt and fear?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 07:38:05 (EDT) From: wolfie Email: None To: Pat:C) Subject: just to say hello Message:

Hi Pat, since one week I'm back from my holidays and now I have too much work to do and not very much time and when, I use it more on the recentexforum. Here on F7 it is more like writing on the frontline and I can imagine why you like it and I just want to say thanks for still being present here. The recentexforum is more like a chillout room or like living in a little village. When I will have more time, I will write more on F7 too. So dear Pat, maybe this or that will happen and there is too much pain in a wonderful world, but right now we are alive and this is enough to cheer up and I don't want to fill my mind with pictures of destruction, I have seen it and these pictures will stick to our collectiveconsciousness like so many other pictures of destruction. When I check my inner pictures there are allready too much destructive pictures: Nuclear Bomb on Hiroshima, Concentration Camps of the Nazis, the one picture where a guy is shooting the one Vietcong and so on, I don't want to reproduce more. What we need is a inner vision of peace a phantasy of a peacfull world and then maybe one day our phantasies will get real like the otherones have got desperatly real now. I know, that I don't know........love ........wolfie

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 13:24:23 (EDT) From: Pat:C) Email: None To: wolfie Subject: Re: just to say hello. Wolfie Message:

I wondered where you were. I hope you are well and happy.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 15:15:36 (EDT) From: Disculta Email: None To: Pat:C) Subject: Focusing on love Message:

Wonderful thread. I truly agree with you, Wolfie, about not wanting to fill my inner gallery with more pictures of horror. I don't think it helps me to tune into a helpful frequency of imagining a new level of loving resolution in the world. I haven't watched a second of the TV coverage because I just know I am too sensitive and it makes me ill. I have counselled several people who have been directly affected by the tragedy (losing loved ones). Feeling the world's pain is not a problem for me. The challenge is to expand beyond the trance of continually repeating and rerunning the pain and creating and recreating the intense reactions of terror and vengeance that it seems to invoke, in an attempt to resolve it. I can't be sick enough to heal anyone (I've tried for 20 years) nor miserable enough to cheer anyone up, nor traumatized enough to prevent trauma. In fact I feel that once we lock our systems and limbic attractors (the pathways of our nervous systems) into certain shock and reaction patterns, we become part of the problem and it becomes very difficult to free ourselves from these new codings. I feel as though I have been working at least since leaving MJ 17 years ago to release various levels of trauma from my body. THese didn't come from MJ but from my upbringing as daughter of nuclear physicists who worked on the bomb to stop Hitler, and then became terrified of what had been created. I was born and raised in rooms with pics of mushroom clouds and people burned from radiation. My cult tour of duty added some ptsd to my layers of fear. Over the years I have been gently releasing these patterns and installing new ones. The interesting thing is that as I get my system going in a new direction, all kinds of evidence shows up that that direction, which I thought I was imagining, actually exists as a reality. Whatever I vibrationally resonate I seem to attract more of, to an incredible degree. When I get pissy with a waiter, or someone on the phone at the bank, then I encounter more and more incompetent-seeming people. It's as though I am trying to mirror my own vibration to myself, but it's easy to project that the problem is out there. I'm applying this same principle to the desirable stuff in my life, and finding it expanding. It is quite amazing how quickly this works, but I find that it doesn't work just by THINKING about the aspects I want more of, but by actually inviting my body and nervous system to FEEL what these things feel like (without prior evidence). It takes a bit of stretching but I've found that I can actually consciously focus my personal energies in ways that lead me into a more and more loving world. As I said, despite not doing the media 'America Under Attack' thing, I have been in the middle of the trenches in terms of friends in shock around me. I find that when I consciously tune in to love as a vibration that includes my whole body, as well as my way of thinking inclusively, I am able to be there with the person right where they are most effectively. I don't usually post this kind of stuff on this forum but this thread just turned me on and drew it out. love Katie Darling

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Sep 20, 2001 at 22:27:37 (EDT) From: Jorge Email: None To: All Subject: Who said no Israelis were killed at the WTC? Message:

130 Israeli citizens died in the attack. I hope whoever posted that nonsense is satisfied.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 00:49:49 (EDT) From: Scott T. Email: None To: Jorge Subject: Re: Who said no Israelis were killed at the WTC? Message:

I hope whoever posted that nonsense is satisfied. That would be Mel Bourne. Who else? Thanks.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 05:57:08 (EDT) From: Mel Bourne Email: None To: Scott T. Subject: Re: Who said no Israelis were killed at the WTC? Message:

According to the Australian ABC 60 Israelis are missing, 2 killed on the planes and two killed in the WTC. The above link is to the ABC site that lists casualties by nation so far and published 21/9/2001. This should set straight the 'nonsense' that I apparently published in the Pakistani press a few days ago and then linked to this site! Mel [ International toll so far.... ]

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 13:12:02 (EDT) From: Scott T. Email: None To: Mel Bourne Subject: Thanks, Mel Message:

I trust the Australian more the the Pakistani press. Giulianni indicated that the update of the number of missing by about 900 reflects the fact that many countries were simply slower in identifying their missing than we were. The number of missing Israelias is probably at least twice that of the Australian press's estimate, unfortunately. --Scott

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 07:20:23 (EDT) From: Jorge Email: None To: Mel Bourne Subject: Re: Who said no Israelis were killed at the WTC? Message:

130 Israelis killed. Quote from Pres. Bush's speech last night.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 10:52:42 (EDT) From: Mel Bourne Email: None To: Jorge Subject: Re: Who said no Israelis were killed at the WTC? Message:

Well, I suppose if Pres. Bush said it in his speech last night, it must be true, mustn't it? The thing that really worries me about Bush is that he appears to have simplified the stakes in a truly frightening way. The war of 'Good vs Evil' and 'either your with us or your with the terrorists'... what about the nations or people who are niether 'with' the terrorists or 'with' America? What an affront to their intelligence and independence. Who is this President that he should hijack world history with such simplistic rhetoric and military threats that will undoubtedly multiply the suffering experienced in New York a thousandfold if and when carried out. This is clearly an excercise of the deliberate intimidation all nations of the world by the US based on a cynical manipulation of American grief and anger. The initimations of the speech go far beyond an understandable and legitimate need for justice and hint at an agenda to consolidate US world power and protect it's own interests by bullying other nations to fall into line, or be arbitrarily branded as 'with' the terrorists if they disagree with US policy (ie not 'with' them)....and suffer the consequences! As for the Office of Homeland Security....what an ominous sounding name for a Government institution, it sounds like something from George Orwell. If I lived in the US I'd be worried about my civil liberties, too much potential for an officially sanctioned 'born again' McCarthyism with all the attendant community fear, hysteria and hatred. Despite whatever 'ëvils' I felt that America may have perpertrated in the world, I always thought that there was some sort of redeeming justice would prevail and saw the unravelling of the Watergate affair as witness to that. However, after watching Bush's dubious accession to power and in light of this latest speech and his general 'bully boy' demeanour in relation to the New York disaster, I'm not so sure anymore. Apart from the obvious horror of the New York disaster, I think that whoever was responsible for that may also be responsible for unleashing a truly ugly and dangerous element of the American psyche that neither augurs well for it's citizens ot he rest of the world. I hope wrong, but I guess time will tell. Mel

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 11:45:47 (EDT) From: Jim Email: None To: Mel Bourne Subject: Don't change the subject, Mel Message:

This isn't about your opinion of the U.S. or Bush, although I really want to know it, don't get me wrong. This is about the bullshit you posted the other day and the fact that you were wrong. Get it? You wre wrong, Mel. Admit it.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 13:15:29 (EDT) From: Mel Bourne Email: None To: Jim Subject: Re: Don't change the subject, Mel Message:

Jim Now let's see where was I wrong in what I posted? 1. The story about the 4000 Israelis not turning up to work at the WTC was written in the Pakistani press as the result of a report on Beirut TV. I didn't write the report, I merely posted a link. Contrary to Scott's rather alarmist and paranoid post to AJW likening the post to some sort of pro Nazi act of sedition during WW2, I don't see that I did anything wrong there. 2. Certainly, I could be wrong about Shabak knowing about the attack prior to it happening, I never insisted that it did.(but I could be right about it though!) If you read my posts on the matter carefully, you'll notice that I was dealing with possiblities only. 3. As I mentioned in my post in that thread, my only mistake was probably underestimating the vehemence of the reaction that I got. I was obviously wrong about that! But I don't think that this is the kind of admission of being wrong that you want to hear, though, is it Jim? What about your expressed wish that I should have died at the WTC, don't you think that was wrong? I was frankly shocked by that remark and I've written you off as a loud mouthed emotive bigot whose opinion is basically worthless. Mel

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 14:54:13 (EDT) From: Jim Email: None To: Mel Bourne Subject: Naw, you don't get it Message:

Forget it, Mel. Everything about your post reeked. The subject line ('Israeli workers take day off on Tuesday 11th ...'), the 'humourous' link title ('A new passover?'), and most particularly your suggestion that the article was 'interesting' and your question as to whether or not it was true or false, all as if to suggest that this kind of blatant insult was reasonable. Worse, when you tried to defend your post later, you did so on the basis that the Israeil secret service might indeed have known of the attack beforehand, giving this heinous suggestion serious consideration as if it made perfect sense, even without a scintilla of evidence to support it. The only people who would buy that speculation as even worth repeating let alone really contemplating are people who already think that Israel is such an evil country to begin with that it's certainly plausible that they might have known this was coming but done nothing to stop it. The world today is full of such people, Mel. They include, but are not limited to, Muslim extremists who believe all jews are evil and ready for slaughter. They're leaders preach this doctrine overtly over the mosque loudspeakers throught Islam. That you would even think of carrying this virus here under the guise of fair discussion disgusts me. You want me to apologize for saying it should have been you forever lost in the WTC attack? Fine, I'm so very, very sorry I hurt your feelings. What could have possibly gotten to me like that? I have no idea.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 11:11:13 (EDT) From: Katie Email: None To: Mel Bourne Subject: I hope you're wrong too, Mel Message:

I actually thought that Bush's speech was OK, especially when he spoke about Islam and the Afghanistan people (not shown in the sound bites I've seen, unfortunately). Also, I saw Colin Powell speak earlier (if a conservative has to be president, I wish it was him!), and he did make the point that the ONLY issue in which countries have to 'stand with America' is in willingly harboring terrorists. In other words, countries don't have to be 'with America' as long as they are against terrorists. (Also note that Bush left out the word 'communist' in talking about unacceptable regimes - that, to me, is a big deal after all the abuses of the cold war.) The thing I did NOT like most in his speech was his implication that 'God is on our side'. I wish that line had been omitted - to me, that was the scariest thing. I don't like the name 'Office of Homeland Security' either, but I think the point is that agencies like the FBI, CIA, etc. have had squabbles and refused to share information in the past, which has made them far more incompetent. Also, re the media and the 'average American' - everyone, including the media, is all fired up right now - and even supposedly liberal commentators are talking the party line, which to me is a bit scary. I doubt that this will last all that long. It hasn't even been two weeks since the plane attacks, and people (including me) are still in shock. I believe that most people are quite scared right now, and when that fear diminishes, they will start asking more questions about their own civil liberties, etc. BTW, I have noticed a huge negative reaction to the US from many Australians on these and other forums and via e-mail - even directly after the attack. I was kind of surprised, but figure something has to be causing it - is it the Australian government's reaction? Take care, Katie

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 12:25:07 (EDT) From: Mel Bourne Email: None To: Katie Subject: Re: I hope you're wrong too, Mel Message:

Hi Katie BTW, I have noticed a huge negative reaction to the US from many Australians on these and other forums and via e-mail - even directly after the attack. I was kind of surprised, but figure something has to be causing it - is it the Australian government's reaction? There is a genuine feeling of sympathy in Australia to the New York victims. In Melbourne yesterday 11,000 people turned up to a memorial program to express their sorrow and support. I think many people, not just Australians, probably feel that as horrifying as the attack was, they are staggered by the the political (as opposed to personal) responses. The New Yorkers are the true heros at the moment, not the Bushs and the Rumsfelds. Their rhetoric obscenely undermines the example of the genuine spirit and expression of the finer aspects of humanity that have been demonstrated over the last week. Have we heard Guliani talking death, destruction and revenge? I think that the negative reaction that you've come across is a probably of fear of war with an enraged and heavily armed US that is prepared to use whatever weaponary 'ït takes' and has a demonstrated historical track record of extreme violence and 'terrorism' in it's foreign policy. As you are probably aware, the US is notorious outside USA for its methods of implementing it's policies and the rest of the world hasn't forgotten this. The Australian Government has a great deal of support for it's pro US (or should I say 'änti-terrorist') stand. John Howard the Aust PM was in Washington at the time of the attack and appeared genuinely distressed by it (his hotel wasn't far from the Pentagon)'. I suspect that there's probably an element of guilt about expressing any annoyance at the US govt that may conflict with an equally genuine feeling of sadness for the New Yorker victims. This may also translate into the negativity you've detected. Mel

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 12:46:06 (EDT) From: Katie Email: None To: Mel Bourne Subject: Thanks, Mel Message:

Appreciate your thoughts about the Australian reaction - it's been puzzling me. BTW, Guiliani has been kind of a jerk (and very conservative) in the past but this is truly his finest hour, and I now admire him. The first time I saw him on TV after the bombings, I thought "Oh No" because he can be a real loose cannon. But he has come through with grace and courage. I think this has changed him - let us hope that it will change other people in power as well (in the direction of humaneness and responsibility).

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 15:09:04 (EDT) From: Dermot Email: None To: Katie Subject: Guiliani Message:

I agree Katie....his finest hour. He just came across as someone who really cared about the people of his city and the city itself. Perhaps his fairly recent illness diagnosis (and a sense of his own mortality?) combined with the nightmarish horror of the attack just enabled him to sincerely and deeply represent NYC at its finest. I don't know, I'm just musing. Cheers Dermot

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 11:07:14 (EDT) From: gerry Email: None To: Mel Bourne Subject: Re: Who said no Israelis were killed at the WTC? Message:

Well said Mel. I have to agree with you in principle about this. Hey, you're not so bad after all!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 11:23:12 (EDT) From: Mel Bourne Email: None To: gerry Subject: What's worng Gerry? Message:

I thought you'd obviously tell me to ''fuck off' or have Jim and Scott taken that service over these days? Anyway, it pays to curry favour with the FA ;) Mel

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 11:28:25 (EDT) From: gerry Email: None To: Mel Bourne Subject: Mel, I've Evolved Message:

And so have you, IMO. Could you possibly sponsor my emigration? :)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 12:38:26 (EDT) From: Mel Bourne Email: None To: gerry Subject: Re: Mel, I've Evolved Message:

Gerry Sure, but you'll have to pay my agent in Jakarta $30,000 first, then catch a flight to Kuala Lumpur, then a boat to Java, and then a rusty rowing boat to the Ashmore reef with 600 other Afghani and Iraqi 'sponsored immigrants' and end up in a concentration camp on Nauru for the rest of your life (after annoying the captain of a Norwegian freighter who rescued you from the row boat that had sprung a leak!) Are you up to it ? Mel

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 04:10:30 (EDT) From: Pat:C) Email: None To: Scott T. Subject: And 2 Muslims died too Message:

People from 40 countries died in the WTC attack. It was New York after all - the most cosmopolitan city in the world.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 10:45:22 (EDT) From: Katie Email: None To: Pat:C) Subject: likely far more than 2, Pat [nt] Message:

[nt]

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Sep 20, 2001 at 16:55:10 (EDT) From: bill Email: None To: All Subject: Some decent financial analysis Message:

What, then, will world leaders attempt to do in order to prevent a global recession and thereby deny the terrorists their ultimate triumph? Fortunately, the policy solutions are quite straightforward. Virtually all of them are sure to be deployed in the next few months. First, central banks all over the world must be ready to cut interest rates at the first signs of any renewed consumer weakness. There is already talk of an imminent G-7 meeting with precisely this objective in mind. The US Federal Reserve has never shown any compunction here toward monetary ease, and we would not be surprised to see the Fed’s recent 'baby steps' consisting of 25 to 50 basis points cuts now being augmented by rate cuts of a much greater magnitude. A further 200 basis points of ease is not out of the question. The Bank of England also appears willing to put aside its worries about the persistent strength of British consumption, rising consumer debt and a stubbornly strong housing market in light of the events of the last week. Consequently, there is now a widespread belief in the City that interest rate reductions here are imminent as well, possibly in a co-ordinated fashion with the Americans. In the past, the European Central Bank has shown less inclination to join in with such co-ordinated policy intervention, but in the current context, we think any such inhibitions will be quickly cast aside. As the London Times economics correspondent, Anatole Kaletsky has argued, 'In the present emergency, inaction by the ECB would be every bit as culpable, one might almost say treasonous, as refusal by the French or German Government to support US military action. The management of the ECB must be made to understand this — and within days, not months.' Secondly, action must be taken to ensure that oil prices fall, rather than rise. Fortunately, OPEC has already moved quickly to give reassurances about the security of world oil supplies, causing oil prices to fall after their sharp surge last Tuesday. Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, Kuwait and the UAE have all specifically indicated that they will bring more unused production capacity on stream to push oil prices down. A declining oil price will have an effect not unlike that of a tax cut, if the fall is of a sufficient magnitude. Obviously, current political tensions between the West and the Islamic world, coupled with the prospects of increased military activity in the Middle East might constrain the extent of the fall in the oil price, but the Bush Administration will likely quietly make clear to OPEC that failure to pump this extra oil would be regarded as a deliberate act of sabotage if not economic war against the US. Third, there is the role of US fiscal policy. With his 10-year tax cut plan (clearly designed under a very different set of circumstances) recently signed into law, President Bush had already begun to move American fiscal policy in a more stimulative direction. As Andrew Smithers has noted, tax cuts in the US would allow private sector savings to rise without national savings having to do so, since the public sector surplus would in effect be transferred to the private sector via the medium of fiscal policy. More will needed to be done on this front to maintain consumer spending, as we suggested last week, but any inhibitions about tapping into a fictional Social Security lock-box have disappeared. Leaving aside the imperatives for increased national defence expenditure, Washington has already pledged $40 billion (an original $20 billion was doubled as it went through Congress) as a down payment on a massive campaign to fight terrorism and rebuild lower Manhattan. Even Democrats, who have hitherto excoriated the President for endangering the long-term health of social security, have discussed the idea of bringing the 10-year tax cut forward and supplementing this action with cuts in the payroll tax. Referring to the 'lock-box debate' Democrat Senator Dick Durbin’s recent comments reflect the changed political circumstances: 'That debate is over at this point…I am not going to bury my head in the sand and say that I am taking that position [to safeguard the Social Security lock-box] regardless of America’s security.' Similarly, GOP leaders have discussed more aggressive moves on capital gains and the administration’s chief economic advisor, Lawrence Lindsey, has proposed accelerating depreciation tax allowances as another possible measure to revive economic activity. In the area of fiscal policy it is clear that President Bush is now pushing on an open door. He will no doubt display an increased willingness to take favourable advantage of the current lack of Congressional impediments. In effect, the president is being given a blank check for spending in what he described last Thursday as the first war of the 21st century. Finally, there is Japan. During a decade of economic stagnation, Japan Inc., has largely avoided the kind of company shutdowns and bankruptcy auctions that have been a characteristic feature of the American economy during recessions. But so bad have been economic conditions recently that layoffs, even amongst Japan’s largest corporations, (the traditional providers of lifetime employment), are finally picking up speed: in the last 3 weeks alone, Hitachi has announced the that it would slash 14,700 jobs, mostly in Japan, Toshiba announced that it would reduce its Japanese workforce by 19,000 through early retirements and attrition, Oki Electric has said it was cutting 2,200 domestic jobs, and Fujitsu has indicated plans for the shrinkage of up to 16,000 jobs globally, including Japan. In response to these intensifying deflationary pressures, the new Japanese Government has promised yet another comprehensive economic package at the end of this month, and is quickly dropping all previous pledges toward greater fiscal restraint. Even before last week’s disaster in New York, there were increasing signs that the government was getting ready to confront the banking system’s non-performing loans problem in a much more aggressive manner than it had hitherto contemplated (and the condition of these loans is certainly not going to improve in light of the latest threats to the global financial system). After an elaborate display of kabuki two weeks ago, Hakuo Yanagisawa, head of Japan’s Financial Services Authority, reluctantly acceded to the IMF’s request to come in and do a proper audit of the country’s banking system. Any genuine assessment of Japan’s bad-loan problem from an outside authority such as the IMF is bound to put it somewhere in the region of 180 trillion to 237 trillion yen—vastly above official Japanese figures but well within the range of sensible estimates advanced recently by foreign analysts in Tokyo. Once the true picture is established, outright nationalisation of Japan’s troubled financial institutions becomes a very realistic policy option for the government, given the political repercussions of extending a public bailout equivalent to about 40 per cent of Japan’s GDP; nationalisation is perhaps the only way for Japan’s FSA to 'save face' because of the number of times in the past this body has promised the Japanese electorate that no further public funds would be directed toward bailing out the banks. It is also the way that banking crises of this scale in other countries, such as Sweden in the 1980s, have invariably been resolved. It is important to note that nationalisation per se will not solve Japan’s underlying problems. Every single one of Japan’s non-performing loans could be taken off the banks’ books tomorrow, but this still would not solve the underlying problem of non-existent domestic demand. Which is where the Bank of Japan comes in. In two separate moves last week, the Japanese central bank raised liquidity levels by around two trillion yen ($16.67 billion), a massive amount approaching the sums made available during the financial panic that gripped Japan in the autumn of 1997. That is impressive, given the central bank’s previous reluctance even to contemplate a modicum of reflationary stimulus in the absence of further structural reform commitments undertaken by the government. In the words of long-time Japan observer and author, Patrick Smith, the BOJ’s actions 'should now stand as a fundamental shift in monetary policy—and not a one-off holiday from the bank’s customary vigilance against an inflationary threat that doesn’t exist.' A government decision to nationalise the banks could ensure that the policy launched last Wednesday is sustained for the duration. Why? Two reasons: The BOJ has been playing a dangerous game of chicken with the country’s politicians, foolishly withholding the requisite monetary reflation in exchange for tangible evidence of restructuring and banking reform. A decisive resolution of the bad debt issue through outright nationalisation would in effect call the central bank’s bluff and force it to end its current exercise of sado-monetarism above and beyond the short-term palliatives brought about as a consequence of last week’s gruesome activities in America. In addition, that drastic step would blow apart any long-term pretence of restoring some control to Japan’s Italianate levels of government debt (the reduction of which is still an important long-term objective, even if not a priority at this juncture). In Japan, both public and private sector debt is excessive and likely to become even more so. Inflation therefore is the only sensible solution toward alleviating this problem. This can only come through the pursuit of an aggressive policy of debt monetisation by the central bank. The resultant decline in debt service strains would directly address Japan’s underlying lack of demand problem and help get the economy back in motion. We are witnessing one of those rare, but fortuitous, occasions in which the imperatives of domestic policy happily coincide with the pressures of 'gaiatsu'. Given the changes that have happened in Japan in the past six months, the layoffs, the persistent threats of further debt downgrades by S&P, Moody’s and Fitch, it is amazing that nothing tangible in the way of significant monetary reflation has yet been done by the central bank. The extent of the problems should have made this policy choice self-evident for the BOJ. Sadly, this has clearly not proved to be the case thus far. But the sense of global crisis created by Tuesday’s outrage appears to be just the catalyst needed to break Japan’s political paralysis and ensure some bold steps on the part of the central bank. The actions taken thus far (and the promise of more to come) by all of the world’s leading financial and monetary authorities are typical reflationary measures that have been deployed in the past 40 years during peacetime. But the other important consideration to bear in mind today is that the US, indeed the nations of NATO, are now on war footing. Both the President and his Secretary of State have made such a declaration explicitly. Consequently, we must now assess economic policy through the prism of military policy. In wartime, markets do not operate freely. There is a tendency toward increased regulation and centralised, government-directed activity, (even those governments which, under normal circumstances, would normally champion the operation of free markets). Profit maximisation, returns on capital and investment, all of these otherwise laudable capitalist objectives are temporarily subsumed in the pursuit of a broader objective. Therefore, it is not fanciful to envisage significant intervention in the markets, on a scale not witnessed for years (if ever), as another policy outcome of the attack on US soil. The rapid extension of moral hazard over the past several years has already engendered a greater socialisation of risk and a correspondingly larger role for governments in the operations of the capital markets. Such intervention has uncomfortably co-existed with notions of free enterprise and market efficiency. Generally speaking, policy makers are robustly criticised when they are perceived to be interfering with the operation of the marketplace. In the context of a wartime economy, however, such intervention becomes more acceptable politically. What is criticised in peacetime as a reckless expansion of moral hazard is now seen as a patriotic and necessary response to a national crisis. With consumer confidence in the dumps, and a heightened sense of crisis accentuating an increasing predisposition to build up personal savings, global co-ordinated easing, and a possible support mechanism for the markets themselves, all become much easier to pursue politically. Similarly, even though we may lose the consumer in the short-term, (consequently, rendering the near term air pocket in economic activity dramatic), we may get to quicker resolution of the economic crisis if fiscal restraints are now broken open globally, as we suspect they must be to meet the military objective of stable G7 economies and financial markets. Ideally, these four elements would be combined into a co-ordinated global response to last Tuesday’s outrage, which would parallel the united military strategy their leaders must now all devise. The hope of the authorities is that the aggregate effect of such actions would have an electrifying impact on business and financial confidence, largely negating the economic damage threatened by the attack. It is too early to judge how effective these measures will be; the extent of collateral damage to the exchanges, the loss of human capital, the prospective liabilities of the insurance companies, all of these have yet to be quantified adequately. What is clear is that the central bankers will take off their hair shirts. There will be no further talk about 'irrational exuberance' or threats to take away the punch bowl. And governments of the G-7 will commit themselves to do all they can to confront the current threat to Western civilisation, regardless of the fiscal cost. The orthodoxies of fiscal rectitude and monetary restraint are no more.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Sep 20, 2001 at 19:48:07 (EDT) From: Scott T. Email: None To: bill Subject: Re: Some decent financial analysis Message:

bill: What is criticised in peacetime as a reckless expansion of moral hazard is now seen as a patriotic and necessary response to a national crisis. Thanks for posting the article. Very interesting. --Scott

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Sep 20, 2001 at 19:15:28 (EDT) From: Joe Email: None To: bill Subject: We are definitely in recession.... Message:

Thanks for the article. Where did that come from? No doubt about that -- in recession. The 100,000 or so job layoffs announced the last few days in the airlines and Boeing are just the most dramatic. There are about 6 jobs associated with every airline job, so that really multiplies. I just see it with my clients. All my developer clients are having meetings, trying to decide what to do. Nobody wants to move. The economy was already in recession before the attacks of last week. Now consumer spending is diving, especially things like on houses and cars. I wonder how SUVs will be selling especially if oil supplies get disrupted, or if the military starts using lots more oil and the prices go up, or there are shortages. Also the insurance market was already the hardest in 20 years, before last week, and now, who knows? You can't do anything development-wise without it, and it's almost impossible to get, and if you can the costs are incredible. I also tend to think that the downturn won't be all that brief. We had a huge, huge technology bubble in the economy, that went on for years, and so I expect that now that it has burst, we will be in the trough for awhile. Although there will be increased military spending, that no longer has the stimulus value it used to. It used to involve accross the board manufacturing. Now, it's mostly highly technical stuff and so spread less broad. One thing that really shocked me was how little in reserves the airlines have, even big ones like Continential and United. A week of shut down and they are practically out of cash. Although the international stimulus might help, the US economy is still about 90% internal and so without consumer and business spending, it's really hard for there to be growth. Next month's unemployment numbers might be kind of ugly. Some economists say we are heading into a downturn like Japan. Long, show growth. I hope they are wrong. And as for the stock market, I think it's interesting to see what the heads of the brokerage houses are saying. It's mostly positive, but then you look at what they're doing, and it's sell, sell, sell. When will the bargain hunters come in?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Sep 20, 2001 at 17:00:14 (EDT) From: bill Email: None To: bill Subject: An interview with bin laden Message:

Bin Ladin - 'Destroying America Is My Religious Duty' 9-19-1 In January 1999, Time magazine published an interview with Osama bin Laden. Polite and regularly praising God, bin Laden sipped water from a cup and cradled an AK-47 as he spoke to Rahimullah Yusufzai at a small encampment in the Afghan desert. He said he enjoyed horse riding and playing soccer, but walked with a stick because of a bad back. Aides say his contact with the world is limited to newspaper and radio reports. He has a satellite telephone but it is rarely used because he fears America will track the signal. Being labelled Public Enemy No 1 didn't worry him, he said, adding that America should expect Muslim reactions in proportion 'to the injustice they inflict' Time: Are you responsible for the bomb attacks on the two American embassies in Africa? Bin Laden: The International Islamic Front for Jihad against the US and Israel has, by the grace of God, issued a crystal-clear fatwa [decree] calling on the Islamic nation to carry on jihad [holy war] aimed at liberating holy sites. The nation of Muhammad has responded to this appeal. If the instigation for jihad against the Jews and the Americans in order to liberate al-Aksa Mosque and the Holy Ka'aba [Islamic shrines in Jerusalem and Saudi Arabia] is considered a crime, then let history be a witness that I am a criminal. Our job is to instigate and, by the grace of God, we did that, and certain people responded to this instigation. Time: Do you know the men who have been arrested for these attacks? What I know is that those who risked their lives to earn the pleasure of God are real men. They managed to rid the Islamic nation of disgrace. We hold them in the highest esteem. Time: But all those arrested are said to have been associated with you. Wadih el-Hage [an alleged bin Laden associate who is being held in custody in New York City on charges stemming from the attacks on the embassies] was one of our brothers whom God was kind enough to steer to the path of relief work for Afghan refugees. I still remember him, though I have not seen him or heard from him for many years. He has nothing to do with the US allegations. As for Mohamed Rashed al-'Owhali [another suspect in the bombings], we were informed that he is a Saudi from the province of Najd. The fact of the matter is that America, and in particular the CIA, wanted to cover up its failure in the aftermath of the events that took place in Riyadh, Nairobi, Dar es Salaam, Capetown, Kampala - and other places, God willing, in the future - by arresting any person who had participated in the Islamic jihad in Afghanistan. We pray to God to end the plight [of the arrested men], and we are confident they will be exonerated. Time: How do you react to the December attack on Iraq by US and British forces? There is no doubt that the treacherous attack has confirmed that Britain and America are acting on behalf of Israel and the Jews, paving the way for the Jews to divide the Muslim world once again, enslave it and loot the rest of its wealth. A great part of the force that carried out the attack came from certain Gulf countries that have lost their sovereignty. Now infidels walk everywhere on the land where Mohammed was born and where the Koran was revealed to him. The situation is serious. The rulers have become powerless. Muslims should carry out their obligations, since the rulers of the region have accepted the invasion of their countries. These countries belong to Islam and not the rulers. Time: What can the US expect from you now? Any thief or criminal or robber who enters another country in order to steal should expect to be exposed to murder at any time. For the American forces to expect anything from me personally reflects a very narrow perception. Thousands of millions of Muslims are angry. The Americans should expect reactions from the Muslim world that are proportionate to the injustice they inflict. Time: The US says you are trying to acquire chemical and nuclear weapons. Acquiring weapons for the defence of Muslims is a religious duty. If I have indeed acquired these weapons, then I thank God for enabling me to do so. And if I seek to acquire these weapons, I am carrying out a duty. It would be a sin for Muslims not to try to possess the weapons that would prevent the infidels from inflicting harm on Muslims. Time: The US is trying to stop the flow of funds to your organisation. Has it been able to do so? The US knows that I have attacked it, by the grace of God, for more than 10 years now. The US alleges that I am fully responsible for the killing of its soldiers in Somalia. God knows that we have been pleased at the killing of American soldiers. This was achieved by the grace of God and the efforts of the mujahideen from among the Somali brothers and other Arab mujahideen who had been in Afghanistan before that. America has been trying ever since to tighten its economic blockade against us and to arrest me. It has failed. This blockade does not hurt us much. We expect to be rewarded by God. Time: Is your Islamic message having an impact? Winds of change have blown in order to lift the injustice to which the world is subjected by America and its supporters and the Jews who are collaborating with them. The time will come, sooner rather than later, when criminal despots who betrayed God and his Prophet, and betrayed their trust and their nation, will face the same fate. Time: But there are many Muslims who do not agree with your kind of violence. Fighting is a part of our religion and our sharia [an Islamic legal code]. Those who love God and his Prophet and this religion cannot deny that. Whoever denies even a minor tenet of our religion commits the gravest sin in Islam. Those who sympathise with the infidels, such as the PLO in Palestine or the so-called Palestinian Authority, have been trying for tens of years to get back some of their rights. They laid down arms and abandoned what is called violence and tried peaceful bargaining. What did the Jews give them? They did not give them even one per cent of their rights. Time: America, the world's only superpower, has called you Public Enemy No 1. Are you worried? Hostility towards America is a religious duty. We hope to be rewarded for it by God. To call us Enemy No 1 or 2 does not hurt us. Osama bin Laden is confident that the Islamic nation will carry out its duty. I am confident that Muslims will be able to end the legend of the so-called superpower that is America.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Sep 20, 2001 at 17:01:47 (EDT) From: bill Email: None To: bill Subject: Latest report on bad binnie Message:

[nt]

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Sep 20, 2001 at 17:02:59 (EDT) From: bill Email: None To: bill Subject: above post is not above but here Message:

[nt]

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Sep 20, 2001 at 17:25:51 (EDT) From: JohnT Email: None To: bill Subject: Oh! No it's not! [nt] Message:

[nt]

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Sep 20, 2001 at 19:40:49 (EDT) From: David Email: dave@nowhere.com To: JohnT Subject: Another chilling interview Message:

Here is another interview with BL including the details of setting it up. PART 1 A conversation with the most dangerous man in the world. Editor's note: What follows is an article on Osama bin Laden that was published in the February 1999 issue of Esquire. It has not been updated. We have posted it here simply because it contains some unique background information on the lead suspect in the attack on America. --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- -- The gunfire started with a few shots, but in seconds it was thundering. On cue, dozens of Arab men began firing their rifles into the air when the headlights of the first four-wheel-drive vehicle crested the mountaintop. My right ear was pounding. I turned, expecting to see a cannon, but instead it was just a smiling boy—he might have been fifteen—and he was firing his machine gun an inch from my ear. I assumed that this was some kind of test, a rite of passage. He wanted to see fear. I'd been a reporter and a police official in New York. I'd heard my share of shots fired in anger. I just smiled at the kid and gently pushed the gun away. This was my way of saying, Nice try, but you didn't make me jump. No matter, the kid was right back an inch from my ear, firing away. Now it wasn't funny anymore. I glared at him, but let's face it, the little prick had an AK-47 with a thirty-round clip. How far could I get with hard eyes? One thing I learned in New York during the crack wars of the late eighties: Teenagers with machine guns are best not fucked with. So as I watched the man arrive and his loyal soldiers discharged their weapons in ecstasy, this kid was doing his best to make me deaf. The mountaintop in southern Afghanistan was a long way from home, but in another way it wasn't. I was almost sure that night that the man I had come to meet, the man who was inspiring all this firepower, had pressed the buttons that blew up the World Trade Center in New York. Small world. Just minutes before this explosive welcome, I had been told, 'Mr. bin Laden will be here shortly.' The tall bearded man with the elaborate turban had not introduced himself by name, but he seemed to be, for lack of a better title, Osama bin Laden's press secretary. 'We have prepared a great welcome. Whenever he comes, there is always celebration.' Yellow trails from tracer bullets streaked at odd angles, crisscrossing the black, star-crowded skies. Fireworks shot up, and sparks fell like orange rain, evaporating before they hit the ground. As the gunfire continued, the motorcade of three four-wheel-drives crossed the flat dirt encampment. Scores of bin Laden's most devout followers were here, all carrying Chinese- and Russian-made machine guns. Several were posted strategically with rocket-propelled grenades. For months, I had been trying to arrange an interview with the man. Now, two months before the destruction of U. S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania by bin Laden's truck bombs, it was happening. It was after midnight on this mountaintop, and Osama bin Laden was not yet a household name in the United States. Still, a grand jury in New York had for a year been hearing evidence about his role as a key organizer and financier of anti-American terrorism. The FBI suspected that bin Laden—or at least bin Laden's money—had been behind everything from the World Trade Center bombing to the downing of American helicopters in Somalia to bombings that targeted American servicemen in Saudi Arabia and Yemen. And by now, bin Laden knew that his targets were beginning to wake up to the threat he posed. That was the very reason I wanted to interview him, and the reason getting such an interview would not be a simple process. His public-relations apparatus is a sophisticated and complex network of agents and intermediaries. The first discussions took place in the old, ornate Jefferson Hotel in Washington. A couple of ABC News producers, Chris Isham and Len Tepper, brought me to meet with a trusted contact who had good connections among Islamic fundamentalists. Soon he sent word back: We would have to travel to London and meet with some of bin Laden's people. Bin Laden, it seems, has people all over. Two meetings, both in Tudor-style homes a half hour's drive from central London. We removed our shoes, drank cider and water, and made our intentions toward bin Laden known. We told his people we would raise the issues that concerned him, and 'tell his side' and enough about his background so people would get a broader understanding of him. 'Instead of just pounding on the ‘terrorist on the mountain' theme,' I told one of bin Laden's agents, 'we could frame his issues about America in such a way that people might find his arguments reasonable.' The man smiled. 'It may be better if he does not appear to be too reasonable,' he said. FROM LONDON, WE WERE TO MOVE on to Islamabad and await further instructions at the Marriott. We had made the first cut. After a day in the Pakistani capital, a man arrived and said his name was Akhtar. We would only ever know him as Akhtar. But during the next few weeks, he would become the most important person in our world, our passport, our safe passage. He was tall, maybe six two, thin and lanky, and he walked to an inaudible beat, with one hand crooked back, swinging slightly. A rolling strut, the walk of an urban black kid. Where he picked it up I never learned. Akhtar was Afghani and spoke almost no English and only a little Arabic—just enough so that our Iraqi translator, whom I'll call Ali, could understand him. Akhtar told Ali he would have to inspect us, our rooms, our gear. He was such a no-nonsense guy, it sometimes just made me want to laugh. A lesson: Something about being from New York or being American or, hell, being human makes one laugh at inappropriate times. Such as when in the presence of committed warriors whom your government has taken to calling terrorists. Good idea to check that impulse, within reason. Also, resist the urge to crack jokes, especially if your hosts aren't much for jokes. When the knock came at my door early the next morning, it was a surprise. Akhtar and another man, a heavyset guy, came in. 'They just want to see you,' Ali explained as the two men carefully looked at me in my boxer shorts. They looked at my open suitcase on the bed stand. Akhtar and the other man looked in the bathroom. I was not sure what they were looking for. I assumed just telltale signs that we were CIA agents or something. The two men left for further negotiations in Ali's room. That night, Akhtar called Ali at the hotel. 'It is happening,' Ali told me when he relayed Akhtar's instructions. 'Be ready at 7:00 a.m., and be dressed like him.' Ali, cameraman Rick Bennett, and I immediately took a cab from the hotel to a run-down strip of stores and found the 'Cash Departmental Store,' where we each purchased a suit for about fifteen dollars. Rick went all out and got the vest. A suit was a knee-length shirt, baggy pants, and rope—the white cotton belt with fringe that would hold up the one-size-fits-all pants if you knew how to tie it. We suspected we were going to Afghanistan, but none of us had the necessary visas to get into Afghanistan or back into Pakistan. Akhtar told us that his 'people' would handle everything. The next morning, curt instructions: Get to the Islamabad airport. Before leaving, I dropped a copy of my police badge and 'retired' ID card into a FedEx envelope to Robert Tucker, my lawyer in New York. The last thing I wanted bin Laden's people to find was my old badge. I could just hear myself trying to explain the police credentials: I swear, I was just a clerk. Really! In public relations! (Tucker later told me that when he got the badge and ID with no note, he assumed I'd been killed. 'Then,' he said, 'I wondered if I could have your car.') In time, Akhtar also showed up at the airport. He looked us over. I was wearing the light-brown baggy pants and the oversized shirt that I'd bought the day before. It seemed to be the uniform for millions in this region. The outfit, which was meant to make me blend in at the airport and on the road, was offset slightly by the white socks I wore under the sandals, the Armani prescription glasses, and the Cuban cigars I'd picked up in London. I wasn't fitting in. Rick and Ali wore the same outfit in light gray. Akhtar led us to the gate. We were traveling on sealed orders. As we boarded the plane, we were handed tickets. We were going to Peshawar, the pearl of Pakistan. It was hazy when we got off the plane, very hazy. As you drive into Peshawar, smoke fills the air and sticks at the bottom of your throat. Something seemed to be burning almost everywhere—rubbish, wood, tires. We checked into the Hotel Grand, a 1950s Miami Beach art-deco affair located down an alley off the main road. Hotel security was a man in a green uniform who wore a red beret and carried a Chinese-made machine gun. The very friendly clerks who signed us in made note of the odd collection of nationalities—American, Canadian, Iraqi, and Pakistani—and they knew enough not to ask any of us what our business was in Peshawar. After we checked in, Akhtar strutted into the night, carrying the plastic bag that held his things. I went out on the fifth-floor balcony to light up one of the Romeo y Julieta Churchills. Just what Peshawar needed: more smoke. I imagined what this sad, bustling city was like during the Afghan war, when it had been the staging area for the mujahideen. This place had been a world-class hotbed of militant organizers and recruiters, CIA operations officers, and KGB spies. Even now, it is the back office of the militant Islamic movement for the region. I looked out at the hovels and junkyards and watched the moon come up through the smoke. Akhtar called the hotel in the morning and told us once again to get to the airport. And again, we were handed tickets in the waiting area. We walked across the tarmac to a prop plane headed for Bannu, in northern Pakistan. With each stop, our trip was taking us further back in time, each place getting more primitive in custom and lifestyle. Here, donkeys pulled carts, and men and women carried sacks hanging from sticks across their shoulders or baskets on top of their heads. In Bannu, we waited outside the tiny airport as vans and buses passed by. After an hour, a van packed with locals stopped, and an old man got out and greeted Akhtar. We all crammed into the van, which was already too crowded. We had been told not to speak. The other passengers already knew we were Westerners, but they didn't need to know that some of us were American. The van drove for two hours. People got off; more people got on. At a village that was nothing more than mud huts and thatched roofs, a loud bang came from the roof of the van. A young man with a cloth bag tied to the end of a branch scampered off the roof and ran toward the huts. The van itself was the only sure reminder that we were not two thousand years in the past. Minor revelation: For most Americans, me included, experience with the ancients is pretty much confined to the Bible. In the Bible is a world rife with plagues and pestilence, a world where things are worth killing and dying for, a world from a time before kill ratios and collateral damage and unacceptable levels of casualties. A world of huts. A world where there is no such thing as a losing battle. In modern America, we no longer have the stomach for endeavors that don't seem like sure bets, which can make things tricky when you're up against someone who doesn't give a damn, someone who is willing to risk everything, and gladly. At Bannu, it felt as if we were crossing over into that world, where the ancient texts aren't so ancient, where martyrs are made. When the van reached a small town, we got into another van, which took us for another hour, farther north through mountains and barren valleys, stopping at the last town before a wilderness that leads to the Afghan border. The old man drove the van into the courtyard of a small house, and metal gates closed behind us. We were to remain unseen in this village. The old man said that this place had been a safe house for mujahideen fighters headed for the Afghan war. The walls were covered with pictures of tanks and grenades. A pair of loaded AK-47's hung from nails on the walls. Akhtar brought in a stainless-steel bowl filled with meat on the bone, placed it on the floor, and invited us to eat. There was pita bread and Pepsi. We sat on the floor, eating with our hands. In two hours, we were on the road again, in the back of a covered Japanese pickup, our gear hidden under bags of flour. Near the Afghan border, the truck stopped. Most of Afghanistan is controlled by the Taliban, a Muslim fundamentalist group that believes, among other things, that television is evil (a sentiment gaining popularity in the West) and that no living thing should be photographed or videotaped. So sneaking three American television journalists with camera equipment past a Taliban border checkpoint posed difficulties. Akhtar gave us the options: We could 1) don long black veils with narrow slits for eyes and cross into Afghanistan disguised as women, or 2) walk over the mountains under cover of darkness and hope to avoid the Taliban's patrols. Ali had strong feelings on the subject. 'We are not women,' he said indignantly. 'We will not wear veils. We will walk, as men.' An hour into the journey, Ali was wheezing and barely able to continue. He had not mentioned his asthma. 'I want to go back to truck and be woman now,' he said before hauling himself up to walk again. I lagged behind with him while Rick and our two guides led the way. At one point, I noticed that the guides were holding hands. 'Ali,' I whispered as I nodded in their direction, 'you didn't mention that this was a gay terrorist group.' Ali, still very asthmatic, patiently explained that among Muslim men it is customary to hold hands while walking. It is a sign of respect and friendship. It is perfectly masculine. 'Yeah,' I said. 'I was joking.' A moment passed. We walked in silence, save for Ali's wheezing. 'Would you hold my hand, Ali?' I asked. 'No,' he replied. It was still dark when we finally made it into Afghanistan. A truck was waiting with our gear. We drove for several more hours, mostly through dry riverbeds, before we reached the first of bin Laden's three camps. We were stopped on a dirt road. Two of bin Laden's people confiscated our camera gear and drove away. We stayed in a hut, sleeping on the floor, which was covered with brown and red flannel blankets. Pillows lined the walls. 'You are not prisoners here; you are our guests,' said one of bin Laden's aides. 'Still, we would prefer it if you stayed inside. We don't want to advertise your presence.' Several of bin Laden's soldiers were assigned to guard us. They slept in the hut next to ours. We washed from a bowl. Water came from a spigot just outside. An outhouse was up the hill. We spent our time reading or smoking and bullshitting with bin Laden's men, one of whom spoke pretty good English. We would eat with the soldiers. Bread, meat, tea. It was hot and dry. It had occurred to us that the interview might not be for days, or that after a few days we could be told that there would be no interview at all. That is the way these things go sometimes. Days of waiting, and then nothing. Most of that kind of waiting—for Castro or Qaddafi—is done in nice hotels. This was beginning to suck. FINALLY, JUST AS I BEGAN TO LOSE TRACK OF TIME, we hit the road. An hour into this leg and, suddenly, gunfire. It was rapid-fire, from machine guns; I could see the muzzle flash through the tinted windows. It was coming from up the hill. Four short blasts, about thirty rounds, then another thirty from the opposite side of the road. My mind was racing. Several times during the three-hour drive between camps, men with guns had jumped out from both sides of the road and screamed in Arabic for the truck to halt, for the windows to come down. Those men were part of al Qaida, bin Laden's army. But now who was shooting at us? And why? Were we going to die? I was trying hard to duck my head between my legs, but with three of us stuck together across the backseat, there was no room to get our heads down. My stomach was in knots. Now I was really thinking: Fuck this. Now it's really not worth it. . . . bam bam bam bam . . . Why am I going to die to interview some asshole with radical views and a lot of money? . . . bam bam bam bam . . . For Christ's sake, I could have done that in New York. . . . bam bam bam bam . . . Then a second wave of thoughts flashed through my head: I was not hearing the sound of metal being hit. The shots were missing. Our guides were not ducking. If they were not worried, maybe this was okay. Slowly, I raised my head. The shooters in the road were yelling for us to halt, to open the doors. The gunfire had been warning shots. For crying out fucking loud. Looking at their faces between the blinding beams of their flashlights, I could see they were very young, perhaps eighteen or nineteen. They had apparently not received the radio message from the last checkpoint that the boys from New York were coming up. It was a little cold out that night, but I was wiping sweat off my forehead. After a little tension and much talk, the driver settled the problem, and we were moving again. We passed one more checkpoint—without incident—before reaching the camp where bin Laden would meet us. In the camp, generators were rumbling. The smell of gasoline was thick in the air. Rick Bennett was agitated because bin Laden's people had taken his camera days before, and it didn't look as though he was going to get it back. Now they wanted to give him another camera. A Panasonic home-video camera. Bennett had not come halfway around the world to shoot a home video. He wanted his $65,000 television camera back, and he wanted it back now! Just then, the gunfire erupted. Bin Laden's convoy arrived. Now the show that was being staged for us was in full tilt, and we had no camera with which to record it. Bin Laden's cameraman handed Bennett the Panasonic. Bennett started taping. That's when the kid started shooting in my ear. Then he ran alongside Bennett and was firing within an inch of his ear, too, as he walked backward with this crappy camera, taping bin Laden's arrival. INTO THE DIN OF GUNFIRE, he walked quickly, surrounded by seven bodyguards. Each had an AK-47. Their eyes darted in every direction for any attacker. This was either merely theatrical or entirely pointless, because with hundreds of rounds being fired into the air, it would have been impossible to pinpoint an assassin. Take your pick. At bin Laden's side was his military commander, Muhammad Atef. Behind him, Ayman al-Zawahiri, the leader of Islamic Jihad, an Egyptian group that has merged with bin Laden's growing army. Bin Laden, with his simple white turban and long black beard, stood six three and was the tallest man in the group. Despite the chaos of the scene, his eyes were calm, fixed, and steady. He walked by me and ducked his head to step into a rectangular hut that had been set up for our meeting. One of his aides waved off the gunfire the way an emcee might quell a standing ovation. Everyone kept shooting. Somewhere, all these bullets were falling back down to the earth. Osama bin Laden had made his entrance. After his security detail crowded in behind him, I followed into the hut. Aside from his height, the first thing that struck me about bin Laden was his voice: It was soft and slightly high, with a raspy quality that gave it the texture and sound of an old uncle giving good advice. Bin Laden settled onto a bench covered with red cushions at the head of the long, rectangular room with clay walls painted white. Sitting down, he propped his own gun against the wall behind him. Twenty of his gunmen lined the benches on either side of the long room, leaning in, straining to hear whatever he might say. Bin Laden's clothes told the story of his entangled themes. He wore a green army field jacket with no insignia. Draped over the jacket was a gold shawl, and under the army jacket was the traditional Muslim clothing that made him look like me. Osama bin Laden has a firm handshake. We exchanged pleasantries in the polite but stilted manner one uses when speaking through a translator. His aides had insisted the day before that I give them a list of my questions in writing. As bin Laden was getting settled, one of them said to me, 'I have very good news. Mr. bin Laden will answer each of your questions.' Then he added that bin Laden's answers would not be translated on the spot. 'You can take the tape to New York and have them translate it there.' 'If the answers are not translated now, how can I ask follow-up questions?' I asked bin Laden's man. 'Oh, that will not be a problem,' he told me. 'There will be no follow-up questions.' At this point, Rick, using stronger terms than one might want to with alleged terrorists, demanded his camera back. Suddenly, all his equipment reappeared. Looking to break the ice, I said to the translator, 'Tell Mr. bin Laden that for a guy who comes from a family known for building roads, he could sure use a better driveway up this mountain.' Okay, so admittedly it wasn't much of a joke, but bin Laden's interpreter appeared stricken. 'No, no, no,' I said, 'don't translate, never mind,' waving off the remark. 'It's okay,' I said, trying to prevent an international incident. Not funny. Sorry. Jesus. There was another problem. As I continued my lame attempts at small talk, flies kept landing on bin Laden's face and white turban. Sensing that this was undercutting their leader's dignity, his aides asked bin Laden and the gunmen in the room to step outside so that they might spray. A few minutes later, in a cloud of insecticide, we began. OSAMA BIN MUHAMMAD BIN AWAD BIN LADEN was born forty-one years ago in Saudi Arabia, one of twenty sons of wealthy construction magnate Muhammad bin Laden. The kingdom's Bin Laden Group is a $5 billion concern. The family's close ties to the Saudi royal family made it easy to get huge government contracts to build roads through the cities and deserts. It is likely that Osama bin Laden would have gone to school, settled in London, and focused on living comfortably—if history hadn't intervened. On December 25, 1979, the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan. Bin Laden, then twenty-two, left for the fighting immediately. When he arrived, he wasted no time. Spending his money, he financed the recruitment, transportation, and arming of thousands of Palestinians, Tunisians, Somalians, Egyptians, Saudis, and Pakistanis to fight the Russians. Bin Laden brought in his own bulldozers and dump trucks. Grizzled mujahideen fighters still tell of the young man who rode the bulldozers himself, digging trenches on the front lines. The men who follow bin Laden have all heard the stories, and they pass them on to the younger men. By his own account, he was in the thick of the action. He says he got the rifle he carries now in hand-to-hand combat. 'We went through vicious battles with the Russians,' bin Laden told me. 'The Russians are known for their brutality. They used poison gases against us. I was subjected to this. We lost many fighters. But we were able to deter many commando attacks, unlike anything before.' I asked him why a man of wealth, from a powerful family, had gone to Afghanistan to live in trenches and fight the Russian invaders on the front lines. 'It is hard for one to understand if the person does not understand Islam,' he said, patiently explaining his interpretation of Islam for a citizen of his sworn enemy. 'During the days of jihad, thousands of young men who were well-off financially left the Arabian Peninsula and other areas and joined the fighting. Hundreds of them were killed in Afghanistan, Bosnia, and Chechnya.' Of course, by the time of our meeting, the enemy had shifted. The Soviet Union no longer existed. The enemy was us. And when I asked bin Laden if he was worried about being captured in an American raid, he quickly dismissed the possibility, turning instead to the reasons he hates the United States. 'The American imposes himself on everyone. Americans accuse our children in Palestine of being terrorists—those children, who have no weapons and have not even reached maturity. At the same time, Americans defend a country, the state of the Jews, that has a policy to destroy the future of these children. 'We are sure of our victory against the Americans and the Jews as promised by the Prophet: Judgment day shall not come until the Muslim fights the Jew, where the Jew will hide behind trees and stones, and the tree and the stone will speak and say, ‘Muslim, behind me is a Jew. Come and kill him.' ' Bin Laden never raises his voice, and to listen to his untranslated answers, one could imagine that he was talking about something that did not much concern him. Nonchalant. He does not smile. He continued, looking down at his hands as if he were reading invisible notes. 'Your situation with Muslims in Palestine is shameful—if there is any shame left in America. Houses were demolished over the heads of children. Also, by the testimony of relief workers in Iraq, the American-led sanctions resulted in the death of more than one million Iraqi children. All of this is done in the name of American interests. We believe that the biggest thieves in the world and the terrorists are the Americans. The only way for us to fend off these assaults is to use similar means. We do not worry about American opinion or the fact that they place prices on our heads. We as Muslims believe our fate is set.' His interview technique was formidable. Aside from the advantage of not allowing for simultaneous translation, bin Laden's approach to questions could have been taught by an American public-relations adviser: First, get out your message. Then, if you like, answer the question. Bin Laden believes that the United States, which was so heavily involved in supporting the Afghan rebels, misses the profound point of that exercise: Through sheer will, even superpowers can be defeated. 'There is a lesson to learn from this for he who wishes to learn,' he said. 'The Soviet Union entered Afghanistan in the last week of 1979, and with Allah's help their flag was folded a few years later and thrown in the trash, and there was nothing left to call the Soviet Union.' The war changed bin Laden. 'It cleared from Muslim minds the myth of superpowers,' he said. He was blooded, a hero among militant Muslims, with perhaps three thousand men waiting to follow him. But follow him where, into what battle? Many of these men had not been home for years. By then, fighting was all some of them knew. And there were huge stockpiles of weapons and grenades and rocket launchers, many of them bought for the mujahideen rebels by the CIA. In December 1992, bin Laden found the battle he'd been waiting for. The United States was leading a UN-sanctioned rescue mission into Somalia. In the midst of a famine, the country's government had completely broken down, and warring tribes—largely Muslim—had cut off relief efforts by humanitarian groups. Somalians were starving to death in cities and villages, and the U. S., which had moved quickly to rescue oil-rich Kuwait, had come under mounting criticism for doing nothing. When the Marines landed in the last days of 1992, bin Laden sent in his own soldiers, armed with AK-47's and rocket launchers. Soon, using the techniques they had perfected against the Russians, they were shooting down American helicopters. The gruesome pictures of the body of a young army ranger being dragged naked through the streets by cheering crowds flashed around the world. The yearlong American rescue mission for starving Somalians went from humanitarian effort to quagmire in just three weeks. Another superpower humiliated. Another bin Laden victory. 'After leaving Afghanistan, the Muslim fighters headed for Somalia and prepared for a long battle, thinking that the Americans were like the Russians,' bin Laden said. 'The youth were surprised at the low morale of the American soldiers and realized more than before that the American soldier was a paper tiger and after a few blows ran in defeat. And America forgot all the hoopla and media propaganda . . . about being the world leader and the leader of the New World Order, and after a few blows they forgot about this title and left, dragging their corpses and their shameful defeat.' I asked bin Laden why he would kill American soldiers whose work was to restore order and allow for the distribution of food. 'Why should we believe that was the true reason America was there?' he replied. 'Everywhere else they went where Muslims lived, all they did was kill children and occupy Muslim land.' During the two days I had waited at the camp for bin Laden, some of his fighters sat on the floor of our hut and told war stories. One soldier, with a big grin, told of slitting the throats of three American soldiers in Somalia. When I asked bin Laden about this, he said, 'When this took place, I was in the Sudan, but this great defeat pleased me very much, the way it pleases all Muslims.' The Somalia operation, in some ways, made bin Laden. During the Afghan war, the CIA had been very aware of him (although the agency now insists it never 'controlled' him), but in Somalia, bin Laden had taken a swing at the biggest kid in the school yard and given him a black eye. The next fight, a few weeks later, would begin with a sucker punch. It was snowing in New York on February 26, 1993, when a massive truck bomb exploded at the World Trade Center, tearing through three levels of the building's underground garage, basement, and foundation. At the time, I was a reporter for NBC. As I walked through the scene, I saw a cop I knew from an antiterrorist unit. Initial reports were that it had been a gas explosion or a transformer that blew up. 'They're not saying this now,' he warned, 'but this was a bomb. Too big to be a car, probably a truck on the lower level of the garage. There just isn't anything down there that could blow up and make a hole this big.'

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Sep 20, 2001 at 19:47:53 (EDT) From: David Email: Dave@nowhere.com To: David Subject: Part2 and Link URL Message:

PART 2 Six people were killed, and more than a thousand were injured. It was the first major international terrorist attack on U. S. soil. Within weeks, the FBI had tracked down four of the bombers, a collection of militant Muslims, most of whom had fought in Afghanistan and had become followers of a blind sheik in Jersey City named Omar Abdel Rahman. The organizer of the bombing plot, Ramzi Yousef, boarded a plane at Kennedy airport a few hours after the explosion and escaped. In New York, the FBI had been given two mandates: Find the rest of the bombers, and find out whom they are working for. The agents began the tedious job of tracing bank accounts that Yousef had been using to buy the components of the huge bomb. The money trail led from a Jersey City bank where Yousef had used an ATM card to Detroit to London to Pakistan and finally to Afghanistan. FBI agents and New York detectives on the Joint Terrorist Task Force debated: Was it the Iranians? The Iraqis? The Libyans? The consensus among the detectives was that Ramzi Yousef was an intelligence operative working for some hostile foreign power. But instead, investigators have since uncovered a series of connections between Yousef and groups funded by an individual, Osama bin Laden. But bin Laden denied to me that he was behind the bombing and claimed he didn't know Ramzi Yousef. 'Unfortunately,' he said with a wave of his hand, 'I did not know him before the incident.' Next, Ramzi Yousef was seen in Manila with another of bin Laden's associates, Afghan war hero Wali Khan Amin Shah. They were busy planning to blow up a dozen American jetliners over the Pacific. Once again, Yousef had no job but seemed to have plenty of money to finance his plans. The FBI finally caught up to him on February 7, 1995, in Pakistan. He was living in a very pleasant guesthouse called the Su Casa house in Islamabad. It was one of the many guesthouses that bin Laden had set up to quarter his fighters. Government sources say that Khan is now cooperating with the FBI. The sources tell me that Khan had been very busy moving around the world, setting various bin Laden plans into motion. He told the agents he went to mail drops and fax machines to receive coded instructions from bin Laden's bases in the Sudan and Afghanistan and that he was in Manila to set up training camps for terrorists when he was ordered to survey the routes that President Clinton would be using during an official state visit to the Philippines. Last winter, Khan, wearing a bright-orange jumpsuit, sat in a closed room in the Metropolitan Correctional Center in lower Manhattan, patiently explaining to the feds that the mercury found in his apartment in Manila was not for bomb making but was rather to be placed inside the bullets that would be used to shoot President Clinton. 'That way,' Khan said, 'if the shot didn't kill him, he would die by poisoning.' Sitting in the hut on bin Laden's mountain in Afghanistan, I asked bin Laden if he had tried to kill Clinton. 'As I said, every action elicits a similar reaction,' he explained. 'What does Clinton expect from those that he killed, assaulting their children and mothers?' But he was quick to sidestep the question of his culpability, very careful not to implicate himself. He wasn't in Somalia, but he liked what he saw. He didn't blow up American bases in Saudi Arabia, but those who did are martyrs. He didn't pay for the World Trade Center bombing or the plot to kill Clinton, but they were good ideas. For the future, bin Laden told me his first priority is to get the American military out of Saudi Arabia, the holiest of lands in Islam. 'Every day the Americans delay their departure, they will receive a new corpse.' Already, U. S. forces have been dealt devastating blows there. Nineteen servicemen were killed in the 1996 bombing of the air-force barracks in Dhahran, and five U. S. military personnel were killed in a similar bombing in Riyadh in 1995. Investigators believe bin Laden is tied at some level to both attacks. Bin Laden said that the American military would leave Saudi Arabia, regardless of the fact that the Saudi royal family welcomes the American presence. 'It does not make a difference if the government wants you to stay or leave. You will leave when the youth send you in wooden boxes and coffins. And you will carry in them the bodies of American troops and civilians. This is when you will leave.' Civilians? 'We do not differentiate between those dressed in military uniforms and civilians; they are all targets in this fatwa.' Bin Laden argued that American outrage at attacks on American civilians constitutes a great double standard. Bin Laden believes that what we consider to be terrorism is just the amount of violence required to get the attention of the American people. His aim is to get Americans to consider whether continued support of Israel is worth the bloodshed he promises. 'So we tell the Americans as people,' bin Laden said softly, 'and we tell the mothers of soldiers and American mothers in general that if they value their lives and the lives of their children, to find a nationalistic government that will look after their interests and not the interests of the Jews. The continuation of tyranny will bring the fight to America, as Ramzi Yousef and others did. This is my message to the American people: to look for a serious government that looks out for their interests and does not attack others, their lands, or their honor. And my word to American journalists is not to ask why we did that but ask what their government has done that forced us to defend ourselves.' His last words to the camera were, 'It is our duty to lead people to the light.' Ali had been told to sit in the back of the room during the interview. When it was over, I went looking for him. 'So, do we have a story?' I whispered when I found him. 'Please tell me it wasn't just an hour of ‘Praise Allah' bullshit.' 'No,' Ali said. 'We have a very good story.' I asked Ali what bin Laden had said that would make this news. 'He was looking right into your face,' Ali said, 'and he was saying that you—you people, the Americans—would be going home from the Middle East in coffins and in boxes.' 'He said that?' I asked, excited. 'And while he was saying this, what was I doing?' Ali looked at me a bit oddly and said, 'You were nodding like you agreed with his plan.' During the hour-long interview, bin Laden, assuming correctly that I did not understand a word he was saying, had taken to looking at his translator as he gave his answers. Clearly, he did not understand the basic conventions of the American television interview. Imagine that. So, to keep his responses directed toward our camera, to make it seem like we were rocking along together, I engaged him in knowing eye contact and nodded thoughtfully. 'So, Ali, you're telling me he's promising genocide, and I'm nodding like an asshole?' 'Yes,' Ali said, smiling. But we had our little story, and a few weeks later, in a few minutes of footage, Osama bin Laden would say hi to America. Not many people would pay attention. Just another Arab terrorist. Bin Laden was once again surrounded by his men, leaving the way he came in. It was past two in the morning as the gunfire started again. This time, Rick shot the whole scene. But as we packed our gear, bin Laden's press aide and his security chief came over to inspect our tape. Looking carefully at each scene of bin Laden arriving and leaving, they ordered any face not covered with a kaffiyeh to be erased. When I objected, they said the deal was simple: If we did not delete the faces, we would not leave with the tape. And so, into the night, they played and rewound, played and rewound. Over each face, the two would confer. 'He travels,' one would say to the other, and we'd have to delete that second or two of footage. According to the FBI, last summer, a group of these men 'traveled' for bin Laden to Kenya and Tanzania. On August 7, two truck bombs destroyed the American embassies in both countries. Two hundred thirteen dead in Kenya. Twelve of them were Americans. In Tanzania, none of the eleven killed were Americans. Most were Africans. Many of them were Muslims. Two weeks after the bombings, President Clinton ordered a missile attack on the very site where we had met bin Laden. All three of his camps were obliterated, and there were casualties. In anticipation of this American retaliation, bin Laden, al-Zawahiri, Atef, and most of the leadership had gone into seclusion. AKHTAR, WHO HAD VANISHED AT THE AFGHAN BORDER on our trek in, was among those cheering, 9mm in his shoulder holster, as bin Laden came and went. Akhtar travels, too. He very obligingly escorted us out of Afghanistan and drove us all the way back to Islamabad. Meanwhile, bin Laden's reach has now been documented among Albanians fighting the Serbs in Kosovo. Wherever Muslims are in trouble, it seems, Osama bin Laden will be there, slaying enemies, real or perceived. A modern nightmare, really—a big-screen villain, a freelancer with the resources of a state but without all the nasty obligations. Sort of a Ford Foundation for terrorists—or freedom fighters, depending on whom you ask. After the American cruise-missile attacks, intelligence sources told me that bin Laden had been intercepted talking on satellite phones, trying desperately to get damage assessments and news of casualties. The same sources said that bin Laden had shifted his operations from Khost to Kandahar and that he was building new camps. To try to arrange another meeting, Chris Isham and I asked Ali to return to London. A few days later, the same people we had been dealing with in London were arrested by Scotland Yard's Anti-Terrorist Branch on 'suspected connections to bin Laden's terrorist group.' One was being held for possible extradition to the United States. We sent one more request to bin Laden, this time through our man in Peshawar, along with a list of questions. We haven't heard back. Bin Laden's old house, a walled mansion with a tower, has become a guesthouse for his men. These men, new volunteers, seem to be showing up in greater numbers since the bombing. Some will fight in Kashmir, others will fight on the front lines against the Taliban's opposition, and some, of course, will 'travel' for bin Laden. After dark, around Kandahar, motorcades of twenty cars with tinted windows speed through the city. No one there has to wonder who it is. Osama bin Laden races through the darkness, taillights vanishing in a cloud of dust, a most wanted man. The day after the American counterstrike, an ABC News colleague in Pakistan got a call from Ayman al-Zawahiri, who had been at the camp with us that night. Al-Zawahiri said bin Laden was alive and very well and that he had a message for us: 'The war has just started. The Americans should wait for the answer.' [ esquire article ]

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Sep 20, 2001 at 16:42:01 (EDT) From: Sir Dave Email: None To: All Subject: The courage of an airline stewardess Message:

Her fellow airline hostesses lay dead from stab wounds but she was still able to phone her boss and give explicit details of the hijacking. And then she saw the twin towers approaching... See the above link to Sky News. [ Final phone call from Flight 11 ]

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Sep 20, 2001 at 23:51:43 (EDT) From: Francesca :C) Email: None To: Sir Dave Subject: Thanks, Sir Dave Message:

I was really touched by that one. As painful as it is, I am devouring stories of the people. It makes me see this tragedy on a human level. Love, Francesca

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 00:43:32 (EDT) From: silvia Email: None To: Francesca :C) Subject: devouring Message:

So many tragedies we hear of in REAL life. Thanks god we are not premies.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Sep 20, 2001 at 20:29:09 (EDT) From: Scott T. Email: None To: Sir Dave Subject: Re: The courage of an airline stewardess Message:

David: I can't get over the way the passengers on these doomed planes behaved. It's almost as though there was a conspiracy of bravery and sacrifice. Not one single instance of anyone whimpering in fear and impotence. Thanks for the link. --Scott Squared

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 00:44:10 (EDT) From: silvia Email: None To: Scott T. Subject: fight or flight Message:

Fight is surviving...

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Sep 20, 2001 at 16:22:25 (EDT) From: PatD Email: None To: All Subject: from the London Times Message:

HOME BRITISH NEWS WORLD NEWS SPORT BUSINESS COMMENT FEATURES SPECIALS Politics Law Reports Loutchansky v The Times Jeffrey Archer Middle East The Balkans America At War Football Rugby Golf Racing Formula One Other Sports Calendar 2001 That summer... Swimming Markets Personal Finance Accountancy Target 2.5 Competition Trade Leads Accountancy Results Letters to the Editor Obituaries Court & Social Arts Puzzles and Games Education Media Fashion & Style Crème Travel Health Food & Drink Science Television & Radio Faith Property Motoring Appointments Weekend Play John Diamond Law Books Style Guide Talking Point From the Archive BSE Crisis Clipper Foot-and-mouth Good University Guide The Times Clearing 2001 Björk The Euro BACK TO MAIN INDEX E-MAIL THIS PAGE TO A FRIEND E-MAIL THE SECTION EDITOR THURSDAY SEPTEMBER 20 2001 Anatole Kaletsky: Our pathological need to talk up the enemy We all know that truth is the first casualty in every war. But the “war against terrorism” declared last week by President Bush has given an unfamiliar, and potentially very dangerous, twist to this old cliché. During the past ten days, emotion, hysteria and misinformation have pushed facts, figures and calm calculations almost completely out of the newspapers and airwaves. This outbreak of irrationality was to be expected, not only in the normal pattern of warfare, but especially because of the psychological trauma so many of us suffered in watching the living nightmare of September 11. What is more surprising — and far more alarming — is the direction in which the world’s collective unconscious has begun to move. Instead of the boastful overconfidence and defiant patriotism that would normally distort political language in this early stage of a serious military confrontation, most news and analysis about the looming conflict has been been twisting public opinion in exactly the opposite way — with defeatist misinformation, morally dubious self-flagellation, exaggerations of the enemy’s invincibility and glamorised accounts of his methods and goals. Watching TV and reading the papers since the start of this crisis, I have been increasingly reminded of the strange mental pathology known as Stockholm syndrome, whose most famous victim was the American heiress Patty Hearst. This is the chilling psychological reversal whereby victims of brutality and hostages of murderous gangsters sometimes become fanatical supporters of the people who terrorised them — or even, in the case of the Ottoman janissaries, massacred their families before their eyes. How else can one explain what has now become the standard analysis of the confrontation that lies ahead? This analysis consists of a series of profoundly defeatist propositions that are taken as given even by the most ardent advocates of military retaliation. Yet each of these propositions is at most only half true. Consider how the standard argument goes: First, the enemy in this war is said to be invisible and therefore impossible to defeat. Secondly, the sinister invisibility of the terrorist threat is said to have filled America with a paranoid fury. Since it cannot “get” the terrorists, America is now bent on a racist anti-Islamic retribution that will kill thousands of poor and defenceless people. This irrational lashing out will inevitably breed more terror and will therefore advance the terrorists’ evil goals. If the retribution is directed at Afghanistan, the reasoning goes, the result will be even worse. The Afghans are the world’s most vicious fighters and they have never been defeated in war. Afghanistan has been the graveyard of imperial powers since Alexander the Great. Moreover, an attack on Afghanistan would achieve nothing, even if a bloody disaster could be averted. Obviously, there is a grain of truth in each of these statements. But then, there was also a grain of truth in Hitler’s claims that Jewish bankers had enriched themselves at the expense of German workers or in Stalin’s belief that kulak peasants were hoarding their bread. These grains of truth did not justify the extermination of the Jews or the slaughter and starvation of untold millions of Ukrainian peasants. And propagandist half-truths about the battle that lies ahead should not be allowed to justify a spineless policy that could prove almost as dangerous and destructive of humanitarian values as the appeasement of the 1930s. So let us consider the defeatist case, point by point. There is nothing invisible or invincible about the enemies in this war. The suicidal hijackers have already been identified, several dozen suspected accomplices have been arrested around the world and Osama bin Laden’s direct involvement in the previous attacks on American targets, including the World Trade Centre, has already been established. Of course, there might well be other atrocities in the future, even if these particular terrorists could be captured and their network broken. But nobody would suggest that the police should stop bothering to pursue murderers on the ground that some will inevitably get away, while other potential killers are born every day. Turning to America’s response, far from lashing out, threatening thousands of defenceless people or betraying irrational fury, the Bush Administration has focused on a very reasonable and potentially achievable task. There is no indication that the US plans to bomb civilians in Afghanistan or in any other country to “retaliate” against the massacre in New York. Instead of retaliation or retribution, the US appears to have set two positive and precise goals: to capture or kill bin Laden and other known terrorists; and to “end states” that are known to sponsor or support terrorists. No reasonable person would object to the first aspiration, although it may be difficult to achieve. It is the second aim of “ending” terrorist states that seems to have sent a chill round the globe. The phrase “ending states”, which was deliberately used on Monday by Paul Wolfowitz, the US Deputy Defence Secretary, may indeed inspire apocalyptic fears of mass civilian casualties and Dresden-style carpet bombing. But is this really what America intends? It seems much more likely that Mr Wolfowitz was choosing his words very carefully when he spoke of ending terrorist states, rather than nations or countries. Far from planning to liquidate countries or subdue entire peoples, the US has a much narrower and more legitimate target. It wants to eliminate terrorist regimes, not the people who live in their countries. In a conventional war, the distinction between a state and the people it rules might appear just a hypocritical diversion. But in a confrontation with Afghanistan, the distinction between the wretched, impoverished Afghan people and their monstrous Taleban oppressors could not be more clear. To me, the most amazing feature of the phoney war which has been raging for the past ten days in the world’s media has been the lack of attention to the horrors which the sadistic Taleban fanatics have inflicted upon the people of Afghanistan. What the Taleban have done in the past five years to the people of Afghanistan — above all to the women, but also to the large ethnic minorities, to millions of now landless peasants and to smaller non-Muslim groups — ranks as one of the greatest crimes ever committed against humanity. If any government in the world attempted to crush a racial group such as Africans or Jews with the sort of oppressive, humiliating and murderous laws imposed on all Afghan women by the Taleban, the civilised world would long since have taken the most extreme measures — quite possibly including military action — to eliminate this regime. But even if the moral case for eliminating the Taleban is irrefutable, how could this possibly be achieved? Surely Afghanistan is an impossible military target, with an unbroken record of defeating mighty foreign powers? This widespread belief seems, again, to be based on a series of half-truths. If America’s goal were permanently to conquer Afghanistan and subdue its people, then history, geography and the ferocity of the Afghan fighters might indeed militate against it. But if the objective is merely to destabilise and topple the Taleban regime, history and geography are very much on America’s side. The country has always been ethnically divided and has rarely had a stable central government, with much of it ruled by robber barons, motivated more by booty and money rather than national pride or religious zeal. Afghanistan’s history consists of an endless series of struggles between warlords, internal rebellions, government coups and periods of vassalage to neighbouring powers. Given the unprecedented misery which the Taleban have inflicted on the country (there are more refugees from Afghanistan than from any other country, including even Congo and Rwanda), it is distinctly possible that many Afghans would welcome a carefully targeted strike by American and European paratroops as a potential liberation, not an invasion by a conquering power. Terrorism may be a mental disease which can never be fully defeated, but America and the civilised world could surely topple the Taleban. That would send an unforgettable message to the leaders of other terrorist regimes. anatole.kaletsky@thetimes.co.uk Copyright 2001 Times Newspapers Ltd. This service is provided on Times Newspapers' standard terms and conditions. To inquire about a licence to reproduce material from The Times, visit the Syndication website. America at War September 20, 2001 DAY-BY-DAY COVERAGE Sept 12 Sept 13 Sept 14 Sept 15 Sept 17 Sept 18 Sept 19 DONATIONS HOME BRITISH NEWS WORLD NEWS SPORT BUSINESS COMMENT FEATURES SPECIALS Politics Law Reports Loutchansky v The Times Jeffrey Archer Middle East The Balkans America At War Football Rugby Golf Racing Formula One Other Sports Calendar 2001 That summer... Swimming Markets Personal Finance Accountancy Target 2.5 Competition Trade Leads Accountancy Results Letters to the Editor Obituaries Court & Social Arts Puzzles and Games Education Media Fashion & Style Crème Travel Health Food & Drink Science Television & Radio Faith Property Motoring Appointments Weekend Play John Diamond Law Books Style Guide Talking Point From the Archive BSE Crisis Clipper Foot-and-mouth Good University Guide The Times Clearing 2001 Björk The Euro I agree pretty much with the following article. Sorry it's scrappily presented (by me) BACK TO MAIN INDEX E-MAIL THIS PAGE TO A FRIEND E-MAIL THE SECTION EDITOR THURSDAY SEPTEMBER 20 2001 Anatole Kaletsky: Our pathological need to talk up the enemy We all know that truth is the first casualty in every war. But the “war against terrorism” declared last week by President Bush has given an unfamiliar, and potentially very dangerous, twist to this old cliché. During the past ten days, emotion, hysteria and misinformation have pushed facts, figures and calm calculations almost completely out of the newspapers and airwaves. This outbreak of irrationality was to be expected, not only in the normal pattern of warfare, but especially because of the psychological trauma so many of us suffered in watching the living nightmare of September 11. What is more surprising — and far more alarming — is the direction in which the world’s collective unconscious has begun to move. Instead of the boastful overconfidence and defiant patriotism that would normally distort political language in this early stage of a serious military confrontation, most news and analysis about the looming conflict has been been twisting public opinion in exactly the opposite way — with defeatist misinformation, morally dubious self-flagellation, exaggerations of the enemy’s invincibility and glamorised accounts of his methods and goals. Watching TV and reading the papers since the start of this crisis, I have been increasingly reminded of the strange mental pathology known as Stockholm syndrome, whose most famous victim was the American heiress Patty Hearst. This is the chilling psychological reversal whereby victims of brutality and hostages of murderous gangsters sometimes become fanatical supporters of the people who terrorised them — or even, in the case of the Ottoman janissaries, massacred their families before their eyes. How else can one explain what has now become the standard analysis of the confrontation that lies ahead? This analysis consists of a series of profoundly defeatist propositions that are taken as given even by the most ardent advocates of military retaliation. Yet each of these propositions is at most only half true. Consider how the standard argument goes: First, the enemy in this war is said to be invisible and therefore impossible to defeat. Secondly, the sinister invisibility of the terrorist threat is said to have filled America with a paranoid fury. Since it cannot “get” the terrorists, America is now bent on a racist anti-Islamic retribution that will kill thousands of poor and defenceless people. This irrational lashing out will inevitably breed more terror and will therefore advance the terrorists’ evil goals. If the retribution is directed at Afghanistan, the reasoning goes, the result will be even worse. The Afghans are the world’s most vicious fighters and they have never been defeated in war. Afghanistan has been the graveyard of imperial powers since Alexander the Great. Moreover, an attack on Afghanistan would achieve nothing, even if a bloody disaster could be averted. Obviously, there is a grain of truth in each of these statements. But then, there was also a grain of truth in Hitler’s claims that Jewish bankers had enriched themselves at the expense of German workers or in Stalin’s belief that kulak peasants were hoarding their bread. These grains of truth did not justify the extermination of the Jews or the slaughter and starvation of untold millions of Ukrainian peasants. And propagandist half-truths about the battle that lies ahead should not be allowed to justify a spineless policy that could prove almost as dangerous and destructive of humanitarian values as the appeasement of the 1930s. So let us consider the defeatist case, point by point. There is nothing invisible or invincible about the enemies in this war. The suicidal hijackers have already been identified, several dozen suspected accomplices have been arrested around the world and Osama bin Laden’s direct involvement in the previous attacks on American targets, including the World Trade Centre, has already been established. Of course, there might well be other atrocities in the future, even if these particular terrorists could be captured and their network broken. But nobody would suggest that the police should stop bothering to pursue murderers on the ground that some will inevitably get away, while other potential killers are born every day. Turning to America’s response, far from lashing out, threatening thousands of defenceless people or betraying irrational fury, the Bush Administration has focused on a very reasonable and potentially achievable task. There is no indication that the US plans to bomb civilians in Afghanistan or in any other country to “retaliate” against the massacre in New York. Instead of retaliation or retribution, the US appears to have set two positive and precise goals: to capture or kill bin Laden and other known terrorists; and to “end states” that are known to sponsor or support terrorists. No reasonable person would object to the first aspiration, although it may be difficult to achieve. It is the second aim of “ending” terrorist states that seems to have sent a chill round the globe. The phrase “ending states”, which was deliberately used on Monday by Paul Wolfowitz, the US Deputy Defence Secretary, may indeed inspire apocalyptic fears of mass civilian casualties and Dresden-style carpet bombing. But is this really what America intends? It seems much more likely that Mr Wolfowitz was choosing his words very carefully when he spoke of ending terrorist states, rather than nations or countries. Far from planning to liquidate countries or subdue entire peoples, the US has a much narrower and more legitimate target. It wants to eliminate terrorist regimes, not the people who live in their countries. In a conventional war, the distinction between a state and the people it rules might appear just a hypocritical diversion. But in a confrontation with Afghanistan, the distinction between the wretched, impoverished Afghan people and their monstrous Taleban oppressors could not be more clear. To me, the most amazing feature of the phoney war which has been raging for the past ten days in the world’s media has been the lack of attention to the horrors which the sadistic Taleban fanatics have inflicted upon the people of Afghanistan. What the Taleban have done in the past five years to the people of Afghanistan — above all to the women, but also to the large ethnic minorities, to millions of now landless peasants and to smaller non-Muslim groups — ranks as one of the greatest crimes ever committed against humanity. If any government in the world attempted to crush a racial group such as Africans or Jews with the sort of oppressive, humiliating and murderous laws imposed on all Afghan women by the Taleban, the civilised world would long since have taken the most extreme measures — quite possibly including military action — to eliminate this regime. But even if the moral case for eliminating the Taleban is irrefutable, how could this possibly be achieved? Surely Afghanistan is an impossible military target, with an unbroken record of defeating mighty foreign powers? This widespread belief seems, again, to be based on a series of half-truths. If America’s goal were permanently to conquer Afghanistan and subdue its people, then history, geography and the ferocity of the Afghan fighters might indeed militate against it. But if the objective is merely to destabilise and topple the Taleban regime, history and geography are very much on America’s side. The country has always been ethnically divided and has rarely had a stable central government, with much of it ruled by robber barons, motivated more by booty and money rather than national pride or religious zeal. Afghanistan’s history consists of an endless series of struggles between warlords, internal rebellions, government coups and periods of vassalage to neighbouring powers. Given the unprecedented misery which the Taleban have inflicted on the country (there are more refugees from Afghanistan than from any other country, including even Congo and Rwanda), it is distinctly possible that many Afghans would welcome a carefully targeted strike by American and European paratroops as a potential liberation, not an invasion by a conquering power. Terrorism may be a mental disease which can never be fully defeated, but America and the civilised world could surely topple the Taleban. That would send an unforgettable message to the leaders of other terrorist regimes. anatole.kaletsky@thetimes.co.uk Copyright 2001 Times Newspapers Ltd. This service is provided on Times Newspapers' standard terms and conditions. To inquire about a licence to reproduce material from The Times, visit the Syndication website. America at War September 20, 2001 DAY-BY-DAY COVERAGE Sept 12 Sept 13 Sept 14 Sept 15 Sept 17 Sept 18 Sept 19 DONATIONS HELP CROSSWORD SEARCH CONTACT US TERMS & CONDITIONS

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Sep 20, 2001 at 17:00:55 (EDT) From: Pat:C) Email: None To: PatD Subject: I'm seeing double Message:

Yes, Pat, it's a good article and I think articulates thoughtful peoples' ideas well. You may want to edit your post and remove the repetition. It's hard on us Irishmen. I thought maybe I was drunk and seeing double. ;)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Sep 20, 2001 at 16:27:32 (EDT) From: PatD Email: None To: PatD Subject: Re: from the London Times Message:

I'd never get a job in eye tea but this article pretty much sums up my own views. Pat Dorrity

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Sep 20, 2001 at 16:54:14 (EDT) From: Dermot Email: None To: PatD Subject: Good article Pat Message:

Yep Iv'e fallen for the 'not since Alexander the Great' argument , especially after reading the SAS guys angle. However this guy here is right , the taleban really are a bunch of fanatical bastards and surely a coalition could topple them and ,yep, liberate Afghanistan. Interesting.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index