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.
That wedge implies another possible high for the 3rd touch to the upper line @ 845. However, if 830 goes, then the rally is done IMO.
<al Qaida forces will no longer find Iraq a safe harbor.>
There is no evidence that Al Quaeda are hiding in Iraq. Iran is more likely. Should we wage war there too?
<It is too difficult and too expensive to move forces >
We shouldn't have been there to begin with.
I couldn't agree with you more...
Again my anti war stand is misunderstood. I agree Saddam needs to be removed, along with Kim Jong. But all options should be considered before war. Without spending too much time expressing the whys, read Zeev post #153 on this thread. I share the same concerns.
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=464455
And by attacking Iraq, all that will stop? If anything else, it will fuel the fire to the anti-American sentiment. Moderate Muslims will become fundamentalists and the hatred continues.
Yeah... thats just great.
Horsegirl... <If I had a boy>
I take it then you don't. Because if you did, you'd question harder as to why this war is necessary ? and why we must strike first based on a pre-emptive premise? Would you go out and attack someone first because you think that someone will harm you? Are you willing to lose your blood over a fear that you'll be attacked first? Ironically, in AMERICA a pre-emptive attack on your neighbor would put you in jail very promptly. So think real hard before you give up your nonexistent son.
As a mother of 2 sons and a daughter, I will never send them GLADLY to ANY WAR. Especially one that is not justified in my eyes. Especially one that thinks not of its thereafter ramifications and especially one that begins because of greed for oil control.
<I will not buy anything French, or German ( the Nazis) and will never go see a movie that Sean Penn, Susan Saradon, or martin Sheen r in, they should all move to Iraq if they love it so much, for me I want to stay here and god bless america>
I think you misunderstand the anti war ethos. It is not for love of Iraq. Speaking for myself, it is for saving innocent Americans and Iraquis blood from being spilled wastefully.
A few questions for you. Does God bless solely on America ? Does he not bless the French, Germans, Swiss, and some Islamic nations? After all, is he not the same GOD all Christians, Jews, and Muslims worship?
Hey give the guy a break.. The money for the WAR has to come from somewhere other than social security fund. <NG>
<they come into my house all the time and steal the last glass of orange juice, put my checkbook in another room, and lose my reading glasses>
Guess you better load up on the ammo and shoot them down.
A letter to the Observer (London) from Terry Jones (of Monty Python)
Sunday January 26, 2003
The Observer
I'm really excited by George Bush's latest reason for
bombing Iraq: he's running out of patience. And so am
I! For some time now I've been really pissed off with
Mr Johnson, who lives a couple of doors down the
street.
Well, him and Mr Patel, who runs the health food shop.
They both give me queer looks, and I'm sure Mr Johnson
is planning something nasty for me, but so far I
haven't been able to discover what.
I've been round to his place a few times to see what
he's up to, but he's got everything well hidden.
That's how devious he is. As for Mr Patel, don't ask
me how I know, I just know - from very good sources -
that he is, in reality, a Mass Murderer. I have
leafleted the street telling them that if we don't act
first, he'll pick us off one by one.
Some of my neighbours say, if I've got proof, why
don't I go to the police? But that's simply
ridiculous. The police will say that they need
evidence of a crime with which to charge my
neighbours.
They'll come up with endless red tape and quibbling
about the rights and wrongs of a pre-emptive strike
and all the while Mr Johnson will be finalising his
plans to do terrible things to me, while Mr Patel will
be secretly murdering people.
Since I'm the only one in the street with a decent
range of automatic firearms, I reckon it's up to me to
keep the peace. But until recently that's been a
little difficult. Now, however, George W. Bush has
made it clear that all I need to do is run out of
patience, and then I can wade in and do whatever I
want!
And let's face it, Mr Bush's carefully thought-out
policy towards Iraq is the only way to bring about
international peace and security. The one certain way
to stop Muslim fundamentalist suicide bombers
targeting the US or the UK is to bomb a few Muslim
countries that have never threatened us.
That's why I want to blow up Mr Johnson's garage and
kill his wife and children. Strike first! That'll
teach him a lesson. Then he'll leave us in peace and
stop peering at me in that totally unacceptable way.
Mr Bush makes it clear that all he needs to know
before bombing Iraq is that Saddam is a really nasty
man and that he has weapons of mass destruction - even
if no one can find them. I'm certain I've just as
much justification for killing Mr Johnson's wife and
children as Mr Bush has for bombing Iraq. Mr Bush's
long-term aim is to make the world a safer place by
eliminating 'rogue states' and 'terrorism'. It's such
a clever long-term aim because how can you ever know
when you've achieved it?
How will Mr Bush know when he's wiped out all
terrorists? When every single terrorist is dead? But
then a terrorist is only a terrorist once he's
committed an act of terror. What about would-be
terrorists? These are the ones you really want to
eliminate, since most of the known terrorists, being
suicide bombers, have already eliminated themselves.
Perhaps Mr Bush needs to wipe out everyone who could
possibly be a future terrorist? Maybe he can't be sure
he's achieved his objective until every Muslim
fundamentalist is dead? But then some moderate
Muslims might convert to fundamentalism. Maybe the
only really safe thing to do would be for Mr Bush to
eliminate all Muslims?
It's the same in my street. Mr Johnson and Mr Patel
are just the tip of the iceberg. There are dozens of
other people in the street who I don't like and who -
quite frankly - look at me in odd ways. No one will be
really safe until I've wiped them all out. My wife
says I might be going too far but I tell her I'm
simply using the same logic as the President of the
United States. That shuts her up. Like Mr Bush, I've
run out of patience, and if that's a good enough
reason for the President, it's good enough for me. I'm
going to give the whole street two weeks - no, ten
days - to come out in the open and hand over all
aliens and interplanetary hijackers, galactic outlaws
and interstellar terrorist masterminds, and if they
don't hand them over nicely and say 'Thank you', I'm
going to bomb the entire street to kingdom come.
It's just as sane as what George W. Bush is proposing
- and, in contrast to what he's intending, my policy
will destroy only one street.
Terry Jones
Courtesy of tooearly of SI
Its a yoke.. <G>
Wouldn't a war raged by the US/Britain without UN support undermines UN's purpose as well? The truth is, the UN may have already lost its credibility when it allowed violations of its resolutions to go un-noticed. Many of which were violated by Israel. The question is, which rule do you enforce and which not?
The Bush administration is firm in declaring war over Saddams failure to disarm, and yet turns a blind eye when it comes to Israel. Which is clearly why so many Muslims questions Bush's true reasons IMO.
A list of UN Resolutions against "Israel"
1955-1992:
* Resolution 106: " . . . 'condemns' Israel for Gaza raid".
* Resolution 111: " . . . 'condemns' Israel for raid on Syria that killed fifty-six people".
* Resolution 127: " . . . 'recommends' Israel suspends it's 'no-man's zone' in Jerusalem".
* Resolution 162: " . . . 'urges' Israel to comply with UN decisions".
* Resolution 171: " . . . determines flagrant violations' by Israel in its attack on Syria".
* Resolution 228: " . . . 'censures' Israel for its attack on Samu in the West Bank, then under Jordanian control".
* Resolution 237: " . . . 'urges' Israel to allow return of new 1967 Palestinian refugees".
* Resolution 248: " . . . 'condemns' Israel for its massive attack on Karameh in Jordan".
* Resolution 250: " . . . 'calls' on Israel to refrain from holding military parade in Jerusalem".
* Resolution 251: " . . . 'deeply deplores' Israeli military parade in Jerusalem in defiance of Resolution 250".
* Resolution 252: " . . . 'declares invalid' Israel's acts to unify Jerusalem as Jewish capital".
* Resolution 256: " . . . 'condemns' Israeli raids on Jordan as 'flagrant violation".
* Resolution 259: " . . . 'deplores' Israel's refusal to accept UN mission to probe occupation".
* Resolution 262: " . . . 'condemns' Israel for attack on Beirut airport".
* Resolution 265: " . . . 'condemns' Israel for air attacks for Salt in Jordan".
* Resolution 267: " . . . 'censures' Israel for administrative acts to change the status of Jerusalem".
*Resolution 270: " . . . 'condemns' Israel for air attacks on villages in southern Lebanon".
* Resolution 271: " . . . 'condemns' Israel's failure to obey UN resolutions on Jerusalem".
* Resolution 279: " . . . 'demands' withdrawal of Israeli forces from Lebanon".
* Resolution 280: " . . . 'condemns' Israeli's attacks against Lebanon".
* Resolution 285: " . . . 'demands' immediate Israeli withdrawal form Lebanon".
* Resolution 298: " . . . 'deplores' Israel's changing of the status of Jerusalem".
* Resolution 313: " . . . 'demands' that Israel stop attacks against Lebanon".
* Resolution 316: " . . . 'condemns' Israel for repeated attacks on Lebanon".
* Resolution 317: " . . . 'deplores' Israel's refusal to release Arabs abducted in Lebanon".
* Resolution 332: " . . . 'condemns' Israel's repeated attacks against Lebanon".
* Resolution 337: " . . . 'condemns' Israel for violating Lebanon's sovereignty".
* Resolution 347: " . . . 'condemns' Israeli attacks on Lebanon".
* Resolution 425: " . . . 'calls' on Israel to withdraw its forces from Lebanon".
* Resolution 427: " . . . 'calls' on Israel to complete its withdrawal from Lebanon.
* Resolution 444: " . . . 'deplores' Israel's lack of cooperation with UN peacekeeping forces".
* Resolution 446: " . . . 'determines' that Israeli settlements are a 'serious
obstruction' to peace and calls on Israel to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention".
* Resolution 450: " . . . 'calls' on Israel to stop attacking Lebanon".
* Resolution 452: " . . . 'calls' on Israel to cease building settlements in occupied territories".
* Resolution 465: " . . . 'deplores' Israel's settlements and asks all member
states not to assist Israel's settlements program".
* Resolution 467: " . . . 'strongly deplores' Israel's military intervention in Lebanon".
* Resolution 468: " . . . 'calls' on Israel to rescind illegal expulsions of
two Palestinian mayors and a judge and to facilitate their return".
* Resolution 469: " . . . 'strongly deplores' Israel's failure to observe the
council's order not to deport Palestinians".
* Resolution 471: " . . . 'expresses deep concern' at Israel's failure to abide
by the Fourth Geneva Convention".
* Resolution 476: " . . . 'reiterates' that Israel's claim to Jerusalem are 'null and void'".
* Resolution 478: " . . . 'censures (Israel) in the strongest terms' for its
claim to Jerusalem in its 'Basic Law'".
* Resolution 484: " . . . 'declares it imperative' that Israel re-admit two deported
Palestinian mayors".
* Resolution 487: " . . . 'strongly condemns' Israel for its attack on Iraq's
nuclear facility".
* Resolution 497: " . . . 'decides' that Israel's annexation of Syria's Golan
Heights is 'null and void' and demands that Israel rescinds its decision forthwith".
* Resolution 498: " . . . 'calls' on Israel to withdraw from Lebanon".
* Resolution 501: " . . . 'calls' on Israel to stop attacks against Lebanon and withdraw its troops".
* Resolution 509: " . . . 'demands' that Israel withdraw its forces forthwith and unconditionally from Lebanon".
* Resolution 515: " . . . 'demands' that Israel lift its siege of Beirut and
allow food supplies to be brought in".
* Resolution 517: " . . . 'censures' Israel for failing to obey UN resolutions
and demands that Israel withdraw its forces from Lebanon".
* Resolution 518: " . . . 'demands' that Israel cooperate fully with UN forces in Lebanon".
* Resolution 520: " . . . 'condemns' Israel's attack into West Beirut".
* Resolution 573: " . . . 'condemns' Israel 'vigorously' for bombing Tunisia
in attack on PLO headquarters.
* Resolution 587: " . . . 'takes note' of previous calls on Israel to withdraw
its forces from Lebanon and urges all parties to withdraw".
* Resolution 592: " . . . 'strongly deplores' the killing of Palestinian students
at Bir Zeit University by Israeli troops".
* Resolution 605: " . . . 'strongly deplores' Israel's policies and practices
denying the human rights of Palestinians.
* Resolution 607: " . . . 'calls' on Israel not to deport Palestinians and strongly
requests it to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention.
* Resolution 608: " . . . 'deeply regrets' that Israel has defied the United Nations and deported Palestinian civilians".
* Resolution 636: " . . . 'deeply regrets' Israeli deportation of Palestinian civilians.
* Resolution 641: " . . . 'deplores' Israel's continuing deportation of Palestinians.
* Resolution 672: " . . . 'condemns' Israel for violence against Palestinians
at the Haram al-Sharif/Temple Mount.
* Resolution 673: " . . . 'deplores' Israel's refusal to cooperate with the United
Nations.
* Resolution 681: " . . . 'deplores' Israel's resumption of the deportation of
Palestinians.
* Resolution 694: " . . . 'deplores' Israel's deportation of Palestinians and
calls on it to ensure their safe and immediate return.
* Resolution 726: " . . . 'strongly condemns' Israel's deportation of Palestinians.
* Resolution 799: ". . . 'strongly condemns' Israel's deportation of 413 Palestinians
and calls for there immediate return.
Thanks to Thnktwice of SI for the above info.
http://www.siliconinvestor.com/stocktalk/subject.gsp?subjectid=36624&startid=74737
Please note I am not against nor am I for Israel's actions and reactions to the Palistinians. (My favorite sister is a converted Jew). My point is, it is hypocrisy to declare war against Iraq based on the premise that it violated UN resolution 1441 and "attack before we're attacked". Additionally and more importantly, a pre-emptive strike against another nation would set precedent in international law for others to do the same using the same justification. And how would we correct that error?
Why not offer the 200/300 bil it would cost US to get rid of Saddam to the Iraqui people if they oust out their dictator themselves. Through that means, innocent lives lost will be minimal, UN credibility remains, Saddam is gone, and America won't lose face, not to mention more united world support diplomatically and financially.
I never understood why some people chose war when its clearly not the last resolve.
Wouldn't a war raged by the US/Britain without UN support undermines UN's purpose as well? The truth is, the UN may have already lost its credibility when it allowed violations of its resolutions to go un-noticed. Many of which were violated by Israel. The question is, which rule do you enforce and which not?
The Bush administration is firm in declaring war over Saddams failure to disarm, and yet turns a blind eye when it comes to Israel. Which is clearly why so many Muslims questions Bush's true reasons IMO.
A list of UN Resolutions against "Israel"
1955-1992:
* Resolution 106: " . . . 'condemns' Israel for Gaza raid".
* Resolution 111: " . . . 'condemns' Israel for raid on Syria that killed fifty-six people".
* Resolution 127: " . . . 'recommends' Israel suspends it's 'no-man's zone' in Jerusalem".
* Resolution 162: " . . . 'urges' Israel to comply with UN decisions".
* Resolution 171: " . . . determines flagrant violations' by Israel in its attack on Syria".
* Resolution 228: " . . . 'censures' Israel for its attack on Samu in the West Bank, then under Jordanian control".
* Resolution 237: " . . . 'urges' Israel to allow return of new 1967 Palestinian refugees".
* Resolution 248: " . . . 'condemns' Israel for its massive attack on Karameh in Jordan".
* Resolution 250: " . . . 'calls' on Israel to refrain from holding military parade in Jerusalem".
* Resolution 251: " . . . 'deeply deplores' Israeli military parade in Jerusalem in defiance of Resolution 250".
* Resolution 252: " . . . 'declares invalid' Israel's acts to unify Jerusalem as Jewish capital".
* Resolution 256: " . . . 'condemns' Israeli raids on Jordan as 'flagrant violation".
* Resolution 259: " . . . 'deplores' Israel's refusal to accept UN mission to probe occupation".
* Resolution 262: " . . . 'condemns' Israel for attack on Beirut airport".
* Resolution 265: " . . . 'condemns' Israel for air attacks for Salt in Jordan".
* Resolution 267: " . . . 'censures' Israel for administrative acts to change the status of Jerusalem".
*Resolution 270: " . . . 'condemns' Israel for air attacks on villages in southern Lebanon".
* Resolution 271: " . . . 'condemns' Israel's failure to obey UN resolutions on Jerusalem".
* Resolution 279: " . . . 'demands' withdrawal of Israeli forces from Lebanon".
* Resolution 280: " . . . 'condemns' Israeli's attacks against Lebanon".
* Resolution 285: " . . . 'demands' immediate Israeli withdrawal form Lebanon".
* Resolution 298: " . . . 'deplores' Israel's changing of the status of Jerusalem".
* Resolution 313: " . . . 'demands' that Israel stop attacks against Lebanon".
* Resolution 316: " . . . 'condemns' Israel for repeated attacks on Lebanon".
* Resolution 317: " . . . 'deplores' Israel's refusal to release Arabs abducted in Lebanon".
* Resolution 332: " . . . 'condemns' Israel's repeated attacks against Lebanon".
* Resolution 337: " . . . 'condemns' Israel for violating Lebanon's sovereignty".
* Resolution 347: " . . . 'condemns' Israeli attacks on Lebanon".
* Resolution 425: " . . . 'calls' on Israel to withdraw its forces from Lebanon".
* Resolution 427: " . . . 'calls' on Israel to complete its withdrawal from Lebanon.
* Resolution 444: " . . . 'deplores' Israel's lack of cooperation with UN peacekeeping forces".
* Resolution 446: " . . . 'determines' that Israeli settlements are a 'serious
obstruction' to peace and calls on Israel to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention".
* Resolution 450: " . . . 'calls' on Israel to stop attacking Lebanon".
* Resolution 452: " . . . 'calls' on Israel to cease building settlements in occupied territories".
* Resolution 465: " . . . 'deplores' Israel's settlements and asks all member
states not to assist Israel's settlements program".
* Resolution 467: " . . . 'strongly deplores' Israel's military intervention in Lebanon".
* Resolution 468: " . . . 'calls' on Israel to rescind illegal expulsions of
two Palestinian mayors and a judge and to facilitate their return".
* Resolution 469: " . . . 'strongly deplores' Israel's failure to observe the
council's order not to deport Palestinians".
* Resolution 471: " . . . 'expresses deep concern' at Israel's failure to abide
by the Fourth Geneva Convention".
* Resolution 476: " . . . 'reiterates' that Israel's claim to Jerusalem are 'null and void'".
* Resolution 478: " . . . 'censures (Israel) in the strongest terms' for its
claim to Jerusalem in its 'Basic Law'".
* Resolution 484: " . . . 'declares it imperative' that Israel re-admit two deported
Palestinian mayors".
* Resolution 487: " . . . 'strongly condemns' Israel for its attack on Iraq's
nuclear facility".
* Resolution 497: " . . . 'decides' that Israel's annexation of Syria's Golan
Heights is 'null and void' and demands that Israel rescinds its decision forthwith".
* Resolution 498: " . . . 'calls' on Israel to withdraw from Lebanon".
* Resolution 501: " . . . 'calls' on Israel to stop attacks against Lebanon and withdraw its troops".
* Resolution 509: " . . . 'demands' that Israel withdraw its forces forthwith and unconditionally from Lebanon".
* Resolution 515: " . . . 'demands' that Israel lift its siege of Beirut and
allow food supplies to be brought in".
* Resolution 517: " . . . 'censures' Israel for failing to obey UN resolutions
and demands that Israel withdraw its forces from Lebanon".
* Resolution 518: " . . . 'demands' that Israel cooperate fully with UN forces in Lebanon".
* Resolution 520: " . . . 'condemns' Israel's attack into West Beirut".
* Resolution 573: " . . . 'condemns' Israel 'vigorously' for bombing Tunisia
in attack on PLO headquarters.
* Resolution 587: " . . . 'takes note' of previous calls on Israel to withdraw
its forces from Lebanon and urges all parties to withdraw".
* Resolution 592: " . . . 'strongly deplores' the killing of Palestinian students
at Bir Zeit University by Israeli troops".
* Resolution 605: " . . . 'strongly deplores' Israel's policies and practices
denying the human rights of Palestinians.
* Resolution 607: " . . . 'calls' on Israel not to deport Palestinians and strongly
requests it to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention.
* Resolution 608: " . . . 'deeply regrets' that Israel has defied the United Nations and deported Palestinian civilians".
* Resolution 636: " . . . 'deeply regrets' Israeli deportation of Palestinian civilians.
* Resolution 641: " . . . 'deplores' Israel's continuing deportation of Palestinians.
* Resolution 672: " . . . 'condemns' Israel for violence against Palestinians
at the Haram al-Sharif/Temple Mount.
* Resolution 673: " . . . 'deplores' Israel's refusal to cooperate with the United
Nations.
* Resolution 681: " . . . 'deplores' Israel's resumption of the deportation of
Palestinians.
* Resolution 694: " . . . 'deplores' Israel's deportation of Palestinians and
calls on it to ensure their safe and immediate return.
* Resolution 726: " . . . 'strongly condemns' Israel's deportation of Palestinians.
* Resolution 799: ". . . 'strongly condemns' Israel's deportation of 413 Palestinians
and calls for there immediate return.
Thanks to Thnktwice of SI for the above info.
http://www.siliconinvestor.com/stocktalk/subject.gsp?subjectid=36624&startid=74737
Please note I am not against nor am I for Israel's actions and reactions to the Palistinians. (My favorite sister is a converted Jew). My point is, it is hypocrisy to declare war against Iraq based on the premise that it violated UN resolution 1441 and "attack before we're attacked". Additionally and more importantly, a pre-emptive strike against another nation would set precedent in international law for others to do the same using the same justification. And how would we correct that error?
Why not offer the 200/300 bil it would cost US to get rid of Saddam to the Iraqui people if they oust out their dictator themselves. Through that means, innocent lives lost will be minimal, UN credibility remains, Saddam is gone, and America won't lose face, not to mention more united world support diplomatically and financially.
I never understood why some people chose war when its clearly not the last resolve.
Get a life and go to the politics board.
Sound familiar?
Larry... What is "DWZ" indicator?
Entirely different situation. We had REAL threats then, not purported ones. Russia/Cuba HAD NUKES that COULD reach US.
Too late. Zeev can delete it if he wishes.
OOPS!!! Sorry, thought I was in the politic thread.
YUP. Joe screwed many investors, BIG and small, but I don't see his sons shredding up the Constitutions and our civil rights while they were in power. Nor did I see the Kennedies compromising the American people for the sakes of self interests.
Misunderstood your post, thought you meant during
Reagan/Bush.
How the BUSHIES got their money.
During the late '30s through '50s Grandpa Prescott Bush was one of the 7 directors of a now defunct bank called Union Banking Corporation, which was owned by Nazi Industrialists. The Nazis filtered their money thru a Dutch bank and hid approx. 3 mil in Union Banking Corp.
As a director of the bank, do you think Prescot was unaware of the Nazi connection?
Prescott and his father Sam Bush received 1.5 mil before the US government finally seized all assets and disolved the bank.
Very convenient... No?
<Since Reagun/Bush41 I believe we have stopped giving out WMD to foreign countries>
You're incorrect. It was Rumsfeld himself that signed the release of anthrax and a number of other biological viruses from the CDC over to Saddam himself during the Reagan/Bush Sr. administration.
Possible bullish Rising Three Methods. The formation requires 2 more trading days before confirmation, so it may be too soon to predict.
http://www.litwick.com/indicators/2133.html
http://stockcharts.com/def/servlet/SC.web?c=$COMPQ,uu[h,a]daclyyay[db][pb50!b200!f][vc60][iut!Ul14!L...
On vacation in Fort Lauderdale.
Notice the Billings and Bookings trend.
Yup, bottom must be in. <G>
Book to bill .92
http://www.semi.org/web/wpress.nsf/33fa5c225257afa5882565e3006d9c77/0d314fbb7b416bd888256cd1007a4fa9....
What was expected?
Usually around 5:30
<BRCM>
Perhaps that's why Henry Nicholas jumped ship. He won't have to report the sales of remainder of his shares.
<the criminals have to take care of options>
Not unless the delta hedge kicks in.
Cuz the sherrif didn't shoot him dead ???? <g/ng>
<We already did - a couple of years ago.>
You're right, it was dimmed 2 years ago. But the changed bulb turned out to be bad . Now its dark and getting darker.
Unrequited.
What do you want? A pat on the back for making a few accurate calls? Whooptidoo. So What!!!We all have one time or another. So getoverit!!!
Your peacocked presence is profanely revolting.
ROFLOL!!!!
Volcker. Old, but not popularity controlled. Won't hesitate to cause pain in order to control a possible bubble. BJMHO.
Agreed.. spintales and propagandas.
Maine... The real fear is Larry Kudlow replacing Greenie.
don't you see how brown Kudlow's nose is? Perhpas in hopes that if/when Sir Prints a lot will croak, he will be awarded with the printing machine.
Contrary, I think if Sir Greenie is suddenly removed from his position for whatever reasons, the market will tank. He's been the market's savior for so long, the uncertainty of who'll step up to the plate to continue the tradition/or not will cause enough fear among traders to bail, and bail fast.... JMHO
Wait til Ron Paul from Texas drills him. You'll hear some hard core questions.
Gem-x is nothing more than a crude egotistical con artist. I believe he's been banned on every SI board he visited, including the one he created.
Zeev.. Are you anticipating the bounce to continue tomorrow? To 1320 perhaps then resume to the 1195 target to finish the 1st stage of the Nasacre