Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
it's plagerism if you don't and when it's not clear you are not writing it yourself. it can also be very deceptive, especially when things are taken out of context. you should give credit to the author. And in political discussions such as those on this board, source means alot.
beyond that it's just plain being considerate.
so are you too lazy to post the links to your favorite talk show host's articles or still can't figure out how to paste a link? is that why you are being so snippy?
tsk tsk... you should have read ahead before you spoke
plagerism - a piece of writing that has been copied from someone else and is presented as being your own work
I gave you the opportunity to say oops and say yeah, I copied it... buy your smart aleck attitude suggests guilt
I try not to jump to conclusions... gosh, I could have assumed you were plagerizing the information.
what's weird is that wasn't all over the news here...
my guess is that, as is typical with drudge, the whole thing was sensationalized based on one or two attention seeking idiots on the street and blown out of proportion based on very little evidence and yet you swallowed it whole without question.
have you read today's articles in the SF Gate about the incident? Anything there about him being a terrorist??? Not that I can find. Have alink to that video? I question your ability to give us an unbiased interpretation.
why won't you solve the problem by providing the link to that SF gate article you are referring to?
and frankly, I wouldn't put it past you to distort or even lie
it's one of my pet peeves... as you say, it just takes a couple of seconds for the person already looking at the page to copy and paste the link.
and then sometimes you have to wonder if some people aren't trying to take credit for something they didn't write or even worse distort the information. In the past I have found some posters doing that, so I'm usually in the habit of checking when in doubt.
yeah I guess I should have known that you couldn't have written something like that... I'll know better in the future
good one... sadly true
when you quote things you should give links...
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/trinitite
The [Ohio class] submarine has the capacity for 24 Trident missile tubes in two rows of 12. The dimensions of the Trident II missile are length 1,360cm x diameter 210cm and the weight is 59,000kg. The three-stage solid fuel rocket motor is built by ATK (Alliant Techsystems) Thiokol Propulsion. The US Navy gives the range as "greater than 7,360km" but this could be up to 12,000km depending on the payload mix. Missile guidance is provided by an inertial navigation system, supported by stellar navigation. Trident II is capable of carrying up to twelve MIRVs (multiple independent re-entry vehicles), each with a yield of 100 kilotons, although the SALT treaty limits this number to eight per missile. The circle of equal probability (the radius of the circle within which half the strikes will impact) is less than 150m. The Sperry Univac Mark 98 missile control system controls the 24 missiles.
yeah right
what a bunch of crock... anybody can get a free blog at blogger.com. I would site this same paragraph from the blog which came from on of the SF articles I posted links to as evidence that there is no indication at this point that he did it for any other reason than being a nut case.
Those involved in the investigation -- speaking on condition of anonymity -- discount any mental illness, saying the 29-year-old Afghanistan native seemed coherent, unrepentant and claimed that he repeatedly drove at pedestrians because he "just wanted to.
I searched within SFGate before I wrote my post to you and found only articles that said the opposite of what you are saying.
I'd really like to see the link to your article from SFGate
DRIVER'S RAMPAGE
THE HUMAN TOLL
THE VICTIMS: 'No pattern' in targets of rampage
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/08/30/MNGVQKRRQ61.DTL
DRIVER'S RAMPAGE
THE HUMAN TOLL
SUSPECT: Family cites history of mental problems
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/08/30/MNGVQKRRQ81.DTL
DRIVER'S RAMPAGE
Swath of central San Francisco terrorized as SUV guns for pedestrians
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/08/30/MNGPOKRNUA71.DTL
HIT-AND-RUN: Within half an hour, 14 pedestrians picked off one by one on streets of San Francisco
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/08/30/MNGVQKRSQC1.DTL
think about it -- why would any intelligence agency declare him dead w/o any evidence -- much better to consider him alive
ROFL!!! so now you are saying there is no evidence to declare him dead... so why are you so determined to do so? YOU are completely hilarious!
the only link I saw you provide was to one of the many pictures of crime scenes related to the incident. Because JUST ONE of the crime scenes was in front of a jewish community center, you jumped to wild conclusions. I live near SF and on the local news it portrayed the guy as a nut case very early on.
I didn't make any comment about the other incidences you talk about, but just because there might be something to one or more of those other cases, does not mean this was one of those.
It's your kind of hysteria that caused things like the salem witch hunt.
you are so blinded by your prejudices you can't even wait to see what the reality is. Yours is the kind of emotional reaction that breeds more violence in the world.
Latest news makes a strong case that he's just a mental case.
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/08/30/MNGVQKRRQ81.DTL
I remember that at the time and was reminded of it again during that movie On Native Soil. Very strong sign of integrity and compassion.
if it was just one guy... maybe... but you have to look at their background. both were life long republicans.
Clarke served under Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton and George W. Bush.
and here's O Neil's biography
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_O%27Neill
I use these two as examples from the many available for the very reason I think they are very credible.
He wasn't in charge on the US intelligence community... he got information from them. Interestly in his book he talks about the attempts to take out bin Laden during the Clinton administration and the problems with timely/accurate intelligence.
He knew enough at the beginning of the Bush administration to hound Condi Rice for a high level meeting on the subject of bin Laden and al quada. His requests were ignore until just a week or so before 911. Post 911 his correct opinions were ignored again. The fact is that the Bush administration had reports about bin Laden threat and ignored it. Then post 911 tried to pin it on Iraq when Iraq had not been involved at all.
Much of this account is backed up by the book The Price of Loyalty which is largely based on information from Paul ONeil... another life long Republican asked to be part of the Bush administration who left in disgust... and when he tried to speak out was trashed Rovian style.
again you think you are better than the US intelligence community in determining the authenticity of those tapes?
ROFL!!!!!
you were just talking out of your ___ and you know it
done.
I do think the book is worth reading if you are going to talk about al quaeda and/or Iraq. He was there at the heart of it and an expert on the subject.
http://travel.yahoo.com/p-travelguide-577448-map_of_africa-i
sudan is not nigeria
"I know it was long but did you bother to read that article..." - Gulfbreeze
funny, the book written by Richard Clarke, who was the al quaeda expert in the Clinton admin and asked to stay over for Bush admin, said there were no ties between Iraq/Sadam and al quaeda... that they didn't even like each other much less cooperate.
Against All Enemies by Richard Clarke
when you've read that, we'll continue this discussion
hey hap... what about the audio tapes? no comment?
But the economic agenda for the next president couldn’t be clearer.
And the economic agenda of THIS president couldn't be clearer.
Downward Mobility
Published: August 30, 2006
If you’re still harboring the notion that the economy is “good,” prepare to be disabused.
Even the best number from yesterday’s Census Bureau report for 2005 is bad news for most Americans. It shows that median income rose 1.1 percent last year, to $46,326, the first increase since it peaked in 1999. But the entire increase is attributable to the 23 million households headed by someone over age 65. So the gain is likely from investment income and Social Security, not wages and salaries.
For the other 91 million households, the median dropped, by half a percent, or $275. Incomes for the under-65 crowd were hurt by a decline in wages and salaries among full-time working men for the second year in a row, and among full-time working women for the third straight year. In all, median income for the under-65 group was $2,000 lower in 2005 than in 2001, when the last recession bottomed out.
Despite the Bush-era expansion, the number of Americans living in poverty in 2005 — 37 million — was the same as in 2004. This is the first time the number has not risen since 2000. But the share of the population now in poverty — 12.6 percent — is still higher than at the trough of the last recession, when it was 11.7 percent. And among the poor, 43 percent were living below half the poverty line in 2005 — $7,800 for a family of three. That’s the highest percentage of people in “deep poverty” since the government started keeping track of those numbers in 1975.
As for the uninsured, their ranks grew in 2005 by 1.3 million people, to a record 46.6 million, or 15.9 percent. That’s also worse than the recession year 2001, reflecting the rising costs of health coverage and a dearth of initiatives to help families and companies cope with the burden. For the first time since 1998, the percentage of uninsured children increased in 2005.
The Census findings are yet another indication that growth alone is not the answer to the economic and social ills of poverty, income inequality and lack of insurance. Economic growth was strong in 2005, and productivity growth was impressive. What have been missing are government policies that help to ensure that the benefits of growth are broadly shared — like strong support for public education, a progressive income tax, affordable health care, a higher minimum wage and other labor protections.
President Bush is unlikely to push for those changes, wed as he is to tax cuts that mainly benefit the wealthy. But the economic agenda for the next president couldn’t be clearer.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/30/opinion/30wed1.html?_r=1&th&emc=th&oref=slogin
I don't think you read the whole article I posted to you.... try this part... audios as recent as the death of al-Zarqawi... you haven't been paying attention.
In addition, the official said, the conclusion that bin Laden is in Chitral is based on the length of time it takes for bin Laden's audiotapes to make their way to news outlets like Al-Jazeera when he comments on important events, such as the death of al Qaeda in Iraq leader, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. It took three weeks for bin Laden's reaction to appear on the world's television screens.
What evidence do you have that indicates he would be dead?
bringing democracy to the Iraqi's in action :(
"When we feel love and kindness toward others, it not only makes others feel loved and cared for, but it helps us also to develop inner happiness and peace."
~~HH the Dalai Lama
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=13003297
I did that recently (inadvertently discouraged a friend of mine) and I feel awful about it. Hard to undo once it's done.
and you have proof he's dead? and your GUESS is better than the US intellegence community and the military?
talk about a cut and run attitude
I'll bet that sister in law isn't happy LOL
true.
it wasn't about the reasons they said then or now... it's about oil and the military industrial complex... it's about power and greed
I like it :)
it started in Fremont and he drove all over... so far they are reporting he is just a nut case
you're jumping to wild conclusions
Trees and tapes may hint at bin Laden location
POSTED: 12:13 p.m. EDT, August 28, 2006
By Peter Bergen
CNN
<< I guess you know better than the CIA and the military >>
And it's the consensus view of both the U.S. intelligence community and the American military that bin Laden is in Pakistan.
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- U.S. intelligence officials say Osama bin Laden is likely hiding in Pakistan, and the former head of the CIA's bin Laden unit says the United States will have to be "extraordinarily lucky" to get the al Qaeda leader.
"Sometimes you get lucky," Michael Scheuer, who headed the CIA's bin Laden unit from 1996-1999, told CNN. "But looking for Osama bin Laden in the Hindu Kush is not like looking for Eric Rudolph in North Carolina."
Gary Berntsen, who led a CIA paramilitary unit pursuing bin Laden shortly after the September 11, 2001 attacks, said Pakistan is a country bin Laden knows well. He feels at home there and enjoys popular support. It's also a country where the U.S. military is not welcome.
"It's likely that he's in Pakistan," he told CNN as part of a documentary, "In the Footsteps of bin Laden."
Berntsen said there are Pakistanis who remember bin Laden's work from the 1980s, when he set up what is known as the Services Bureau in Peshawar to help refugees fleeing the Soviets in Afghanistan.
"They have as a custom [of] not turning in individuals," Berntsen said. "He has sought refuge among them." (Watch bin Laden's 1997 declaration of war -- 1:42)
The bottom line: Nearly five years after he escaped the U.S. siege at Tora Bora in eastern Afghanistan, Osama bin Laden is believed to be still alive and still inciting terror. And it's the consensus view of both the U.S. intelligence community and the American military that bin Laden is in Pakistan.
Mahmud Durrani, the Pakistan ambassador to the United States, said Pakistan remains "fully committed" to the war on terrorism. Pakistan is not only pursuing bin Laden, but all his associates, he said.
"Our commitment is total and absolute," Durrani said. "This is in our national interest. We want to get rid of extremism and terrorism."
Would he like bin Laden captured or killed?
"I would like to see bin Laden strung up from the tallest pole," Durrani said. "He is no friend of Pakistan."
He added that he believes bin Laden is "somewhere in Afghanistan." (Watch how bin Laden escaped from Tora Bora -- 2:04)
Hiding with minimal security?
According to a U.S. military intelligence official familiar with the hunt, bin Laden is likely hiding in an area called Chitral, in the far north of Pakistan, bounded by Afghanistan to the west and China to the north.
Contrary to popular belief, the official said, bin Laden most likely isn't living in a cave but in a house, possibly with a family and no more than two bodyguards.
The official, who spoke on condition of anonymity due to the sensitive nature of the hunt, said the thinking that bin Laden is in Chitral is based in part on trees that are peculiar to that region that can be seen in a 2003 video of bin Laden walking in a mountainous region.
In addition, the official said, the conclusion that bin Laden is in Chitral is based on the length of time it takes for bin Laden's audiotapes to make their way to news outlets like Al-Jazeera when he comments on important events, such as the death of al Qaeda in Iraq leader, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. It took three weeks for bin Laden's reaction to appear on the world's television screens.
However, Durrani said Chitral is "the last place Osama bin Laden would be," citing both cultural and religious differences.
"They don't like him," he said. "In Chitral, he would stand out like a sore thumb." (Watch Peter Bergen describe meeting bin Laden -- 2:07)
Scant intelligence on elusive terror chief
Even with the knowledge of bin Laden's possible whereabouts, a longtime American counterterrorism analyst said "there is very limited collection on him personally."
That's intelligence community shorthand for the fact that the usual avenues of gathering information on a target such as bin Laden are yielding little or nothing. Those avenues typically include intercepts of phone calls and e-mails, as well as intelligence from spies.
Durrani said Pakistan and the United States are working cooperatively to share intelligence.
The belief that bin Laden is in Pakistan is also based in part on common sense. Every senior al Qaeda leader who has been captured since September 11, 2001 has been run to the ground in Pakistan. Also, the terrorist organization has deep roots in the country, where it was founded by bin Laden in 1988.
Bin Laden started visiting Pakistan in the early 1980s and is comfortable there. He enjoys a degree of safety there because while there are some 20,000 U.S. troops and 15,000 NATO troops inside neighboring Afghanistan, none are able to go into Pakistan because no Pakistani government will allow foreign troops on its territory.
And despite what the Pakistan ambassador says, some believe the Pakistani government has had little appetite for hunting down bin Laden as he arguably enjoys more popularity in Pakistan than any Pakistani politician. (Click here for a slide show on bin Laden's appeal)
Intercepting the messengers
And so bin Laden is benefiting from a stalemate, hunkered down in Pakistan safe from the U.S. military and unlikely to face a concerted Pakistani effort to find him. This situation has gone on for nearly five years, and it could carry on indefinitely.
According to the U.S. military intelligence official, bin Laden is not in the same place as al Qaeda's No. 2; the far more visible Ayman al-Zawahiri already this year has released 11 videotapes to bin Laden's five audiotapes.
Al-Zawahiri likely is based in the Pakistani tribal territory of Waziristan, which is about halfway up Pakistan's western border with Afghanistan. The official said that while the "center of gravity" of al Qaeda is in Waziristan, "nothing tells me that [bin Laden] is there."
The official said bin Laden relays messages to other members of al Qaeda through a system of couriers, adding that in the past there has been some success in intercepting these messengers.
"We have hit couriers from time to time," this official said.
The official said bin Laden likely has access to news by listening to BBC radio and possibly via an Internet connection using an HF modem, an inexpensive device that connects users to the Web using radio waves.
As to whether bin Laden remains important to al Qaeda and the wider jihadist militant movement, the U.S. military intelligence official said that the terrorist leader continues to have "iconic value -- Stalin and Hitler could not talk to a billion people."
"Bin Laden can [release] a tape, and the day after it's heard by a billion people."
CNN.com producer Wayne Drash contributed to this report.
http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/asiapcf/08/23/bergen.binladen/index.html?section=cnn_latest
Did you know that the Bush admin came into office with plans to invade Iraq? Did you know that the first meeting after 911 the first talk was of invading Iraq? That when Bush was told that there was no connection between Iraq and Al Quaeda, he told them to look again.
The invasion of Iraq was on the Bush agenda from day one.
911 was the excuse they were looking for.
Do you think it was right of them to lie about why they wanted to invade Iraq? Do you think it's right to out a CIA operative because her husband told the truth about some of the evidence being used to build the case for war? Do you remember what the main thing our forces were ordered to protect upon entering Iraq?
Do you really think it's okay to invade a country and then try to brainstorm reasons to justify it? Kinda sounds like what you are trying to do here.