OT: Bhutto Assassinated
 

Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>Bill L., I can appreciate an intelligent political debate. But I can't appreciate an idiot who comes on here and blames America for 9/11. I can't imagine why you would even want to live in a country that would do such a thing to its people. Since that's you how feel, why not move to Egypt? Saudi Arabia? You'd do swell there. But if you stay here, remember one thing: when the jihadists come here and look for heads to chop off they'll take the appeasers and cowards first -- so get ready.

OT: Bhutto Assassinated
 

Posted By: <b>howard</b><p>What is the point of that photo, Dan? No one here is disputing that the U.S. supported Hussein at one time. Politics makes for strange bedfellows. It does not mean that we are obligated to stay "friends" forever. During WW2 photos were taken of Roosevelt yukking it up with Stalin because they had common enemies. If photography had been invented centuries ago there would likely be photos of Caesar shaking hands with Pompey and Richard the Lionheart having a grand time with Saladin (or his agents). So what?

OT: Bhutto Assassinated
 

Posted By: <b>Dave S</b><p>Jeff--nicely said!<br />Bill L.--You started your ranting on the Veteran's Day thread...I can only wonder if you have ever seen a loaded body bag? Your kind of thinking certainly should...

OT: Bhutto Assassinated
 

Posted By: <b>bill latzko</b><p>while you are often witty, you fail to recognize in this case that MANY people believe that we were behind 9/11. You may CHOOSE not to, but that doesn't make you correct.Your "move to Saudi Arabia" blah blah is no different than the "Love it or Leave it" crowd in the 60's and 70's who supported a MASS SLAUGHTER of 2,000,000 or so people in the guise of anti-Communism. What was your stance then???<br /><br /> By the way, I don't recall if you were one of the people who ranted and raved about how Bush is supported by western europe --and perhaps you were one who mentioned how many countries you were in,I don't recall. Just because a leader of a country carries out a course of action or supports another leader doesn't mean it's people favor it. ;the best example is our own dictator's war in Iraq and the most recent elections here. I too have lived overseas for 10 years; have had contacts through work etc with people of the most extreme left parties to the MSI (neo-facist party in Italy)--Our policies in Vietnam as they are NOW were and now vehemently opposed by a VAST majority of most of the people in Europe. Just because Tony A.(that's for assh___)Blair supported us did not indicate the feelings of the British people PEACE

OT: Bhutto Assassinated
 

Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>Bill, intelligent people can disagree on politics; that's been shown here. And I have no doubt that a small percentage of our population believes that Bush was behind 9/11. A small percentage also believes that the moon is made of green cheese. I think if you take the average IQs of those who believe that Bush was behind 9/11, however, and compare it to the Dems and the Republicans that believe otherwise, you'll find that those less intelligent and uneducated are more likely to take your position. That's enough for me.

OT: Bhutto Assassinated
 

Posted By: <b>Joe D.</b><p>why do I read this thread in the morning.... I have to go, but I would try to make four quick points -<br /><br />1) David S - it sounds as if terrorism attacks on this country don't matter to you because, heck they won't come to a farm house in Iowa. Thats a pretty self-centered thought process. I would hope you would have more compassion for your fellow Americans who kick in taxes so that you have a nice place to live in Iowa. I find it ironic that a person with that selfish / self-centered of view - would even care about the people from other countries. The two don't go together. So - you are not self-centered or selfish, you just favor the other guys over your own countrymen. You also seem to think terrorists are after symbols and not people. They most definitely want to MAXIMIZE the deaths of people in their attacks - it adds to the impact. They don't just consider it a plus if people are around, they look and wait for the most people to be around. They could have taken down the towers at 4am. Why didn't they? They wanted a full house to hopefully murder as many people as they can. They chose the exact time those towers would have the most people in them - and the world stage would be the biggest. When they blew up the train in Spain... did they go at a time where they would be the only ones on the train. Stop sanitizing what they do. <br /><br />2) Bill L - your opinions and views are extremely different than mine... I don't think I could type anything in response to them. Politics aside though - I wouldn't mind bellying up to the bar with you. (not taking anything personally.<br /><br />3) Someone actually emailed me sort of a bash on George Bush this morning (Bush's resume) - how funny is that?<br /><br />4) Bob Dylan must be included in the list.

OT: Bhutto Assassinated
 

Posted By: <b>howard</b><p>Bill, does the MSI still exist? I ask because you have lived overseas for ten years and my impression was that the MSI was dissolved over ten years ago (maybe you meant ten years total, not necessarily the last ten years?). Also, what work did you did that you had contact with such diverse groups?<br /><br />Howard

OT: Bhutto Assassinated
 

Posted By: <b>Kenneth A. Cohen</b><p>To Bill L. and other self-righteous spewers of epithets - <br /><br />It's when epithets such as "dictator Bush" are invoked is when people put their intellectual bankrupcy on display. Was Bush not elected twice? (Oh yea, I forgot, he stole both elections.) Do you have some basis for a belief that he intends to cancel the next elections? Until that happens, or you show yourself capable of learning and understanding the meaning of the word "dictator," or of injecting semi-intelligent policy alternatives instead of resorting to name calling and advancing stale conspiracy theory, no rational person could ever take you seriously.<br /><br />Over and out.

OT: Bhutto Assassinated
 

Posted By: <b>howard</b><p>Joe D., I got the same e-mail this morning. Maybe someone from this forum sent it out to everyone. Anyone else get it?

OT: Bhutto Assassinated
 

Posted By: <b>Joe D.</b><p>Yeah.... I am sure it was someone on this board that emailed it to both of us (and probably others as well).<br /><br />

OT: Bhutto Assassinated
 

Posted By: <b>howard</b><p>David S.,<br /><br />"What happened on 9/11, the WTC attack in 1993, and the Pan Am bombing were not terrorist attacks..."<br /><br />A few lines later:<br /><br />"if another terrorist attack happens in America..."<br /><br />"Another" one? I thought there weren't any. Please clarify.

OT: Bhutto Assassinated
 

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>I got the resume email too, but didn't open it.<br /><br />I have no problem that we are a bunch of people with differing political views. But I think we could all do ourselves a favor by looking at the world with a little perspective. Perhaps even a more moderate approach would make sense.<br /><br />The events in the world aren't so black and white. Anyone who comes on this thread with "the answer"- that is only their opinion or point of view matters- really doesn't know very much at all.<br /><br />I am appreciative of the posters who know more about world events than I do. I read the posts and determine whether they make a sensible point or not. I do not profess to have all the answers, and I abhor those who present these bizarre and extreme positions.<br /><br />While I am not a fan of Bush and neither is Bill L (clearly), to say Bush was behind 9/11 is just a stupid statement. Why would you say that?<br /><br />The world is volatile and complicated and I can assure you not one person who posted on this board has the knowledge or ability to fix it. But there have been some very intelligent posts, and of course some whacky ones too. I say to everyone: chill out and moderate!<br /><br />Edited to add of course Bob Dylan belongs on that list. Just a temporary memory lapse.

OT: Bhutto Assassinated
 

Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>"What happened on 9/11, the World Trade Center attack in 1993 and the Pan Am bombing were not terrorist attacks, they were publictiy attacks."<br /><br />"If you want TERROR, try the Son of Sam and the two guys who were shooting people from the back of their van and from the trunk of their car and then driving off. THAT is terror. ... THAT type of crime SCARES people because THEY could be next."<br /><br />"That is why I wasn't scared of being attacked on 9/11. I wasn't in or around a highly public building or area. Again, I was MORE scared of the people driving crazily on the road trying to find gasoline before the prices spiked even higher."<br /><br />These statements are equal in insanity to Bill L's claiming Bush was behind 9/11. <br /><br />David, you're aware that the Son of Sam did his killing in a very small area of NYC, right? So you were scared of that but not scared of 9/11? <br /><br />And considering that 35% of all the country's commuters are coming into or out of the NY metro area, I can assure you that a large part of our country's population -- maybe everyone but you -- is afraid of a terrorist attack. Maybe you're just really, really brave.<br /><br />Edited to add: Wait, I change my mind. David, you're not really, really brave: you were afraid of people driving like crazy trying to find gasoline! I'm more afraid of a cockroach than that. <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

OT: Bhutto Assassinated
 

Posted By: <b>Steve</b><p>Two things for certain,<br />Bhutto was one special lady and the vintage hobby has it's share of psychotics and those undiagnosed.<br /><br />American government, Imperfect of course... The cause of all the worlds' ills? Not buying it. One small example. <br /><br />Upon graduation in June, My son, and MANY other young Americans have signed on to the Peace Corps to do 27 months, to help improve the quality of life in African villages -while living amongst them. More shameful American influence across the globe. <br /><br />Try using your entire field of vision.

OT: Bhutto Assassinated
 

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>Steve- I wish your son a safe trip. He is doing a great thing.

OT: Bhutto Assassinated
 

Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>Steve, that's wonderful news. Your kid is very special.

OT: Bhutto Assassinated
 

Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>Very commendable of your son. For the most part our children are a reflection of ourselves....take care and be safe.....happy holidays...

OT: Bhutto Assassinated
 

Posted By: <b>Dan Bretta</b><p>I only posted those pictures because Ted Z for some reason felt the need to blame Clinton for all the world's terror woes. Terrorism started before Lockerbie. Why didn't Ronald Reagan do anything about the Iranian backed Hezbolla?...you know the guys who killed 250 US Marines in Lebanon on Reagan's watch. Instead of punishing Iran for that attack and holding the American's hostage in Tehran he went behind the US Congress's back and sold weapons to a terrorist nation to fund his war in Central America.

OT: Bhutto Assassinated
 

Posted By: <b>David Smith</b><p>Jeff L,<br /><br />Yes, the Son of Sam committed his crimes in a small area. Guess what, the people who lived in that area were TERRORIZED!! They were scared to go out and scared to live their lives normally. I thik that is the definition of terror.<br /><br />What happened on 9/11 was a publicity stunt. The terorists didn't just go and randomly pick individuals, they picked large, public symbols of America. If the terrorists attack again, I have no doubt they will do the same thing.<br /><br />New York City is large and has a lot of people but 99.95% of those people were safe on 9/11 because they didn't live or work in an area or building that was a symbol.<br /><br />As far as my situation that day, I don't know where you live or if you have to drive but when gas prices were going from around $2 dollars to $3, $4 and even $5 dollars, it was scary to drive. People were speeding and a couple of times I saw them run red lights to get in line at a gas station or convenience store. Once in those lines, they were none to happy and tempers and emotions were on edge. Based on that, I WAS scared of what some idiot might do and that I might not make it home.<br /><br />David

OT: Bhutto Assassinated
 

Posted By: <b>howard</b><p>My God, you're right! The speeding cars were much scarier than the attacks! I live in NYC and I never saw a speeding vehicle until that very day. What was really scary, though, were the paper boys. They were so anxious to be the first to deliver the news that they threw their papers EXTRA hard! I was nearly hit with one and I still suffer from flashbacks. <br /><br />Cars running red lights! Oh, the humanity!<br /><br />If you're a comedian I congratulate you and thank you for making me laugh. Otherwise, go get some help.

OT: Bhutto Assassinated
 

Posted By: <b>David Smith</b><p>Jeff L,<br /><br />The two times that terrorists have attacked America, did they hit pizza joints or hair salons?? NO!!<br /><br />America is further away and logistically harder for the terrorists to bring in the items they need to make teh bombs (but I even question that with the way the border security is).<br /><br />England, France and Spian are geographically closer to the hot bed of Islamic extremists and with hte open borders of the European Union, it is asier for people to move from country to country. Also, some of the terrorists are home grown over there. They live in those countries and attack the people there. <br /><br />Before 9/11, the largest and deadlest attack on American soil was on the Alfred P Murray building in Oklahoma City. Carried out, I believe, by right wing (Republican) extremists. Again, a LARGE, public, Government building.<br /><br />David

OT: Bhutto Assassinated
 

Posted By: <b>David Smith</b><p>Howard,<br /><br />I used your definition of a terrorist attack. If I had said a publicity attack, then people would have thought Paris Hilton or Britney Spears had done something to someone or had something done to them.<br /><br />David

OT: Bhutto Assassinated
 

Posted By: <b>JimB</b><p>Steve,<br />Your son is doing a truly wonderful thing. You should be proud.<br />JimB

OT: Bhutto Assassinated
 

Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>David, I simply am speechless at your words. All I will say is that you are ignorant as to the effect of 9/11 on New Yorkers. And you are ignorant to suggest that Islamic terrorists need sophisticated weaponry which will be difficult to get into the U.S. in order for them to blow themselves up. <br /><br />I don't know where you live (I'm guessing someplace out west) but I can tell you that I felt more empathy to the victims and citizens of Oklahoma City after the bombing (PS-Tim McVeigh did not commit his crime on behalf of the Republican party) than you feel towards New Yorkers after 9/11.

OT: Bhutto Assassinated
 

Posted By: <b>Bill</b><p>I'm taking a solid guess that a few people on here don't understand the definition of "Terrorism". <br /><br />Check out the fifth paragraph.<br /><a href="http://www.terrorism-research.com/" target="_new" rel="nofollow">http://www.terrorism-research.com/</a><br><br>Change your socks, drink water, and drive on.

OT: Bhutto Assassinated
 

Posted By: <b>bill latzko</b><p>Joe--I'll be glad to buy the first round if we ever "belly up" at the bar!!!<br /><br />Howard--lived in Italy for much of late 1968-1980; met people of all political viewpoints through daily life itself, through my work in the import business; believe it or not,(get ready for this everyone) my first girlfriend spoke no English and I spoke no Italian when I first arrived as a student--we broke up later over disagreeing about everything; it was later rumored that she helped the neo-facist Tuti escape from the police after he masterminded(committed??) the bombing of one of the train stations in Italy in the early 70's. <br /><br />Jeff--what an absurd statement on your part. I guess you're the expert on people's IQ on this net 54 and of course IQ determines whether you are right or not on a political issue. Guess the liberals are all below 100 on the IQ scale. And BUSH?????????????<br /><br />

OT: Bhutto Assassinated
 

Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>Bill -- you're insulting liberals to suggest that they believe that Bush was behind 9/11. Only idiots and uneducated people think this and I hardly think that liberals should be described as such -- especially since I'm a social liberal. Don't try to climb on the liberal bandwagon spouting such ridiculous crap; trust me, they don't want you either.<br /><br />Edited to add: Bill, I heard a young George W. Bush was behind that train explosion.

OT: Bhutto Assassinated
 

Posted By: <b>Brad</b><p>Jeff,<br /><br />Only idiots and uneducated' people think this??? Don't you mean the Media' doesn't want you to think for yourself?<br /> <br />WTC Building 7: You'd be shocked to know how many people believe 9/11 was an inside job! I guess I'm one of the idiots!

OT: Bhutto Assassinated
 

Posted By: <b>Joann</b><p>Ted - I don't exactly pride myself in being a law student. Right now it feels a little more like a status I am stuck with! I've put too much into it to turn back, but have a long ways to go.<br /><br />As to the logical argument, here goes. Yes, FDR interred the Japanese-Americans during World War II. However, this is seen as a low point in both application of war powers and sanctity of constitutional rights in the US. It happened, but there is a collective national embarassment about it. So I don't think it's a good poster child for justifying Bush's current actions. <br /><br />There is even some thinking that Lincoln was wrong to suspend habeas corpus although much less than with FDR as described above. I'm not sure how you could conduct a Civil War and retain habeas. <br /><br />More importantly, though, both of those instances involved traditional warfare in which the enemy was a known country or armed force, with uniforms and territory to take. Imprisonment was going to end when the hostilities ended, and in traditional warfare the war usually ends with a definable act - surrender, taking over the land of the opposition, etc. <br /><br />The "War on Terror" is almost a euphenism in the same manner as the War on Poverty and the War on Drugs. Who, exactly, is the enemy? And more important to the discussion of a president claiming war powers and suspending civil liberties, how will we know when it's over? Who will declare victory? When will it be okay to stop eavesdropping on American citizens? When will the government no longer have the right to get your library or book-buying records without your knowledge, and with no warrants or even ascertainable reason to need them? Bush has never even attempted to describe what an end to the "war" would look like. <br /><br />The question of what exactly the war is, and what specifically will define the end, are very important when a president is claiming "war powers" to suspend important citizen rights. Since Bush is loosely using the term "war" to claim very substantial "war powers", at minimum he is responsible to define what the war is, when it will end, and carefully limit the scope of his suspensions. Neither FDR nor Lincoln faced such a loosely defined conflict.<br /><br />Bottom line: Bush's assault on the constitution is far more widespread in the breadth of the rights he is eroding, the much larger net he is throwing in terms of people affected, and the undefined ... undefinable! ... length of time for which he intends to keep these rights compromised. He claims the unimpeded right to listen in on a phone conversation between two American citizens both located within the US. That is far removed from FDR targeting an ethnicity or Lincoln suspending a very particular right in a very particular instance for a defined (at least by event) length of time.<br /><br />So Ted ... you may not find it persuasive, but I believe it is at least logical. And I still consider you a great guy and walking T206 encyclopedia - despite our obvious political differences.<br /><br />J<br /><br />

OT: Bhutto Assassinated
 

Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>Brad, so far two people think this as far as I can tell. Oh wait, three -- I forgot Rosie O'Donnell.

OT: Bhutto Assassinated
 

Posted By: <b>Brad</b><p>I'm just open mined to all' info provide and made a logical decision!<br /><br />

OT: Bhutto Assassinated
 

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>Brad- when you say 9/11 was an inside job, who on the inside committed it? Who flew those two planes into the buildings? I'm not be glib, I just never heard this theory before.

OT: Bhutto Assassinated
 

Posted By: <b>Brad</b><p>Who ever controls the Money "Bankers" control everything! <br /> <br /> <br />It's not about inside, it's about which side do you want to be on? I believe this planet is heading towards a One World Government "NWO". (IMHO)<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />

OT: Bhutto Assassinated
 

Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>Bill just sent me an email in which he simply wrote "stick it up your ass."<br /><br />See, Bill? I told you -- only an idiot would believe that George Bush was responsible for 9/11! It didn't take long for you to prove me right. <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

OT: Bhutto Assassinated
 

Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>So Brad, who controls the "Money Bankers"? <br /><br />Barry, can you guess where this one is going?

OT: Bhutto Assassinated
 

Posted By: <b>bill latzko</b><p>tried to forward you an email-said yours on the net 54 was "too long" mine is forazzurri1@aol.com--could you forward yours pls bill

OT: Bhutto Assassinated
 

Posted By: <b>Brad</b><p>Aaron Russo - Architecture Of A Prison Planet (Pt1)<br /><br /><object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/NbhzgZqWt8k&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/NbhzgZqWt8k&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object><br /><br />

OT: Bhutto Assassinated
 

Posted By: <b>Brad</b><p>business_1012002yahoo.ca

OT: Bhutto Assassinated
 

Posted By: <b>bill latzko</b><p> JoAnn thank you for your ability to express so eloquently beliefs and sentiments many of us share. I will admit that mastering foreign languages was easier for me than expressing myself in English..........but that doesn't make my ideas wrong or my IQ low as per the legal expert Mr. Lichtman to whom I did send the above mentioned email----and of course, that still does not make me the idiot, Mr L. it just shows I react emotionally rather than logically at times to right wing drivel such as yours. You CALL yourself a social liberal as you wallow in your jingoistic (that's an SAT word!!!) fascism.

OT: Bhutto Assassinated
 

Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>Bill, you're still an idiot. Are you going to stalk me too?

OT: Bhutto Assassinated
 

Posted By: <b>David Smith</b><p>Jeff L,<br /><br />You and I may disagree on things but even I don't think the World Trade Center collapse was because of an inside job.<br /><br />Also, I had written a LONG response to tell my side of things but decided to delete it. I did this because talking about Bush, the terrorists and the unneeded war and deaths of US troops REALLY upsets me. Some of the things I said would definitely enflame and anger more people on this baord more than they already are. That is something I don't want to do. It is bad enough that MY blood pressure is increased, I don't need to raise anybopdy else's.<br /><br />The last thing I am going to say is this. YOU as a New York City resident should be one of the first people screaming for Bush's impeachment and the arrest and imprisonment of his cronies, no matter what your political background is.<br /><br />Because of what Bush has (and has NOT done), your Federal, state, county and city taxes have probably gone up.<br /><br />NYC is just as likely to be attacked again because Bush didn't follow through in Afghanistan.<br /><br />When you look at Bush's invasion of Iraq (something the extremists can use as a recruiting tool - "see, America DOES hate the Muslims") it has made MORE enemies of America and the liklihood of an attack is increased.<br /><br />Bush has trampled on the Constitution and Democracy (he thinks he is King George and can do whatever he wants, whenever he wants) yet he sends troops overseas to die in the NAME of Freedom and Democracy. THAT is complete hypocrisy.<br /><br />Finally, with our Civil Liberties eroded, what happens if (when?) another attack occurs on the US? We will be LESS free, our debt (to foreign nations like China) will be higher and we will STILL have been attacked. Add to this higher oil prices (which affect every citizen) and the weaker US dollar (because of the lack of trust in OUR Government) and THAT is a LOT of BAD things that Bush has brought on this country.<br /><br />David

OT: Bhutto Assassinated
 

Posted By: <b>Kenneth A. Cohen</b><p>Steve,<br /><br />Does your son know yet where he's going to do his Peace Corps service? My oldest boy left this past June and is in Central Ghana.

OT: Bhutto Assassinated
 

Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>David, I actually agree with some of what you say -- though then I think you reach wrong conclusions on certain issues which I identified. I'm not a real big Bush supporter for a number of reasons, mainly because I feel he should accept responsibility for the defective intelligence that led to the Iraq invasion. Sadly, because of the capital spent on that war we are unable to deal with a more evil situation which exists in Iran. All that being said, Saddam was an evil man who deserved to go. I was happy to see him go. I also think that for whatever the reason we are in Iraq (oil not being one of the reasons) we need to deal with that situation effectively. We cannot let Iraq fall into the hands of the demonic Muslim fascists who spend their days thinking of ways to kill us.<br /><br />I also think you need to be more realistic to how easily America could turn into Israel, i.e., a daily barrage of suicide bombers trying to walk into banks, restaurants, supermarkets, etc. with simple bombs strapped onto their backs: bombs filled with explosives and ball bearings and nails -- all designed to rip as much flesh as possible from their victims. I can tell you that as a New Yorker we feel this threat every single day. On the subways, on the streets, in all sorts of public places. And we expect it to return at some point soon. That it hasn't happened already is a minor miracle in my eyes. However, there has been terrorist killings by Muslim fanatics in other parts of the country since 9/11: Seattle, Los Angeles Airport, etc. Don't diminish the threat just because you don't deal with it every day.

OT: Bhutto Assassinated
 

Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>Ken, Steve: you must be very proud of your kids. I only hope my boys would follow that lead.

OT: Bhutto Assassinated
 

Posted By: <b>DMcD</b><p>I read somewhere that surveys taken in the Moslem world show that a great majority of the people there think that the Jews were behind 9/11 and it is widely believed that all Jewish employees were advised to take the day off beforehand. Utter rubbish, of course, but apparently it has a lot of traction amongst the Arab masses. I also have seen on numerous occasions cars bearing bumperstickers claiming "9/11 was an inside job." I'm with Barry (and I'm not be glib, either) in wondering who these inside perpetrators are supposed to be. I don't like Bush one bit ("I'm a uniter not a divider" still sticks in my gut all these years later like a bad meal) but I am not nearly cynical enough to think he and Cheney were in on the plot. Patently idiotic. Money bankers? Sieg heil, baby. And what's with all the friggin' apostrophes?<br />

OT: Bhutto Assassinated
 

Posted By: <b>Joann</b><p>Some comments on the exchange above on the difference between living in NYC and living inland.<br /><br />Maybe I will be the first and only one to admit this, but as someone living in the Midwest I don't think I have the same fear or appreciation of the threat as those that live in the high-target areas.<br /><br />And before I get blasted with responses and emails, let me be clear in saying I was horrified that day as was everyone. I don't think anyone doesn't "get it" so to speak - just as, as Jeff said, a resident of NYC could feel for the victims in OKC. So it's not that I am indifferent to it.<br /><br />But in my everyday life, I honestly don't really fear for my safety because of a terrorist attack. I am not sure that the very visceral sense of constant exposure can resonate with people on the interior the same way it does for those in the more at-risk cities. <br /><br />I think David ctown is right in that the targets that day were symbolic and not designed necessarily to maximize casualties, and most symbolic targets tend to be on the coasts and/or in big cities. <br /><br />The WTC was the most prominent symbol of US capitalism and economic advancement. The fact that it was filled with people was probably at least partly a coincidence. They didn't fly into it at 4:00 a.m. because I don't think there are a lot of planes flying anywhere into the area at 4:00 a.m.<br /><br />They picked the targets, times and flights based on the airline schedules, not the work habits of Manhattanites. They intentionally picked cross-country flights because they would naturally have the most fuel onboard. They didn't take the very first flights out of NY (that would have left more around 5:30 or 6:00 a.m.) because they wanted to go through security at smaller airports and then catch connections out of NYC. So the fact that they hit around 9:00 a.m. was probably more because of logistics, not intent. In fact, I think at the time the commentary was that it was lucky it was before 9:00 and not later in the morning because once the WTC got humming there may be as many as 50,000 people in the towers. <br /><br />Also, the PA flight was destined for either the White House or Capitol. Both are very much symbols of the US, and definitely not places where maximum number of deaths would be a priority. Same with the Pentagon.<br /><br />So I think there is a good argument to be made that symbolic targets are important to them - or at least some combination of symbolism, number of people killed, and overall dramatic effect - and that any future incident would be similary targeted. <br /><br />This thinking would tend to concentrate targets along the coast, and to recognizable structures or places. Just based on that, I don't know if a Midwesterner can really stand in the shoes of a New Yorker in terms of thinking that any hour of any day you could be in danger just by going to work.<br /><br />Not saying it's right or wrong or good or bad - just that it's probably reality until they hit something like Toledo or Tulsa or Pierre or Muskegon or Little Rock. Now THAT would equally and collectively scare the crap out of all of us b/c it would introduce the factor of randomness of target.<br /><br /><br />Joann

OT: Bhutto Assassinated
 

Posted By: <b>Kenneth A. Cohen</b><p>David,<br /><br />Though Americans should entertain and express the sorts of concerns you raise, I respectfully submit that you lack historical perspective. Attempts among the the three equal branches of government at agrandisement of power at the expense of the others is part and parcel of our history. If anything, you should probably be incensed at Congress for shrinking before its constitutional prerogatives and duties - mainly war powers and general oversight. Even if Bush is as bad as you say, a view that I personally do not hold though he leaves much to be desired, I feel certain that the country will continue to thrive. Even if he is as big a usurper as you profess, I am confident that the genius of the Founding Fathers in the form of the system of Checks and Balances will carry the day as it has in the past. <br /><br />Ken<br /><br />

OT: Bhutto Assassinated
 

Posted By: <b>Kenneth A. Cohen</b><p>Joann -<br /><br />I have a question for you and/or the other legal minds. This is not a challenge to your views, just a straightforward question.<br /><br />Are there any Bush Administration practices in combatting terror that have been ruled constitutionally invalid by the Supreme Court - yet are still being continued following such a ruling? In other words, is the Administration in defiance of any court edicts?<br /><br />Ken <br /><br />PS - How I got here from Ms. Bhutto I can only wonder. <br /><br />

OT: Bhutto Assassinated
 

Posted By: <b>David Smith</b><p>Kenneth,<br /><br />The Founding Fathers expected the Congress, Senate and Judicial system to have some say in matters. With Bush, he has put his cronies in charge at the Justice System (Alberto Gonzalez) and used "matters of National security" and "Presidential prerogitive" (I can not think of the actual term right now) to hide informatioin from not only the public but also the Congress and Senate.<br /><br />Yes, I think the Congress and Senate are partially to blame for NOT having the balls to stand up to the President BUT when he hides most everything and very few people have all the facts and can not see the total picture, they can only see what the President wants them to see, it is hard to fight against that and to get the American public behind the idea the President is wrong. That is why I hope the next President opens up most everything Bush has kept secret and shows what ALL really happened.<br /><br />David<br /><br />Edited to add this.<br /><br />Furthermore, looking at what Bush has done (usurped powers that previously Congress and Justice has had) it sets bad precedent for FUTURE Presidents. What I mean by this is; if Bush feels he has the right to waterboard detainees (even though it is against our laws and, I think, the Geneva Convention, what stops future Presidents from doing it and worse? what stops them from taking the next step and using it against American citizens or politicians they don't agree with? Bush said the waterboarding took place overseas in secret military prisons, so what if a future President wants to take an outspoken US citizen overseas to one of these prisons?<br /><br />What if a future President wants to illegally eavesdrop on an outspoken citizen or political opponent and use that info against them to shut them up? <br /><br />Bush is using these tactics in the name of fighting terrorism but what if a future Presidnet uses them because of personal bias? What if Southern Baptist Mike Huckabee wins and decides to use these tactics against people of other religions who don't believe in the God that he believes in or against Atheists?<br /><br />What if Hillary uses these tools against Republicans or men? What if Obama uses them against women or whites? <br /><br />Once a President starts down this hill (doing whatever he/she wants, whenever they want, whether it is legal or not just because they want to or feel they have the right to because they are President) where does it stop??<br /><br />Going down this path, I could become President and illegally eavesdrop on everyone on this board and find some dirt on you and use it to acquire cards and/or memorabilia I want to own. Heck, if the cards are stored in a bank, I could have the safety deposit boxes opened up under the guise that whatever was in those boxes was a threat to National Security. I could have you arrested and use Presidential need to know as the reason and to also keep you imprisoned for as long as I like with you NEVER going to trial. <br /><br />David

OT: Bhutto Assassinated
 

Posted By: <b>Kenneth A. Cohen</b><p>David -<br /><br />I believe the term you're looking for is Executive Privilege. The only remark I'd like to make is that none of what you just mentionned is really historically unprecedented in relations among the 3 branches. Doesn't mean you have to like it, but it's nothing new. <br /><br />Ken

OT: Bhutto Assassinated
 

Posted By: <b>Dan Bretta</b><p>Did someone mention "oversight"? Heh! The chairman of the Oversight Committee is Joe Lieberman - So far he has conducted ZERO investigations into the Bush administration. Pelosi and Reed are the worst congressional leaders the Democrats have EVER had.

OT: Bhutto Assassinated
 

Posted By: <b>David Smith</b><p>Dan,<br /><br />Two possible reasons for that.<br /><br />1) They have NO BALLS to do what is right<br /><br />2) Bush, through illegal eavesdropping, has gained dirt on them and they want to keep their jobs.<br /><br />David

OT: Bhutto Assassinated
 

Posted By: <b>Dan Bretta</b><p>They're all worthless...Repubs and Dems alike. Good thing the Republicans didn't kill the filibuster a few years back like they wanted because they sure are fond of it nowadays (setting records for filibustering they are <a href="http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/13977.html" target="_new" rel="nofollow">http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/13977.html</a> )....and to let them do with a cloture vote?? Disgusting.

OT: Bhutto Assassinated
 

Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>Did we ever find out who the "bankers" were?

OT: Bhutto Assassinated
 

Posted By: <b>Dan Bretta</b><p>Geez Jeff, seeing all those rare Cobb cards flowing into your collection I thought you were ON that banking committee. <img src="/images/wink.gif" height=14 width=14>

OT: Bhutto Assassinated
 

Posted By: <b>howard</b><p>C'mon, Jeff...you know who the bankers are. Didn't your father give you a bank for your Bar Mitzvah like mine gave me?

OT: Bhutto Assassinated
 

Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>Dan, Howard, you guys must be part of the Tribe. Everyone knows that we control the banking industry (and the media, too -- you know the ones that are keeping the Truth from us.). We're the only people that get blamed for 9/11 more than Bush!

OT: Bhutto Assassinated
 

Posted By: <b>Kenneth A. Cohen</b><p>"Bush, through illegal eavesdropping, has gained dirt on them and they want to keep their jobs."<br /><br />Come on, David. Now you're getting into Bill L. territory! <br />

OT: Bhutto Assassinated
 

Posted By: <b>Kenneth A. Cohen</b><p>When I was Bar Mitzvahed I was promised a seat on the Trilateral Commission when I grew up. Unfortunately it fell through when some dude from the Elders of Zion took precedence.<br /><br />BTW, not to hijack the thread, but I actually went to a card show today.

OT: Bhutto Assassinated
 

Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>"Bush, through illegal eavesdropping, has gained dirt on them and they want to keep their jobs."<br /><br />This is true: Bush has info that the Speaker of the House wears women's underwear.

OT: Bhutto Assassinated
 

Posted By: <b>Brad</b><p><i>Did we ever find out who the "bankers" were?</i><br /><br />Jeff, here's your answer again!<br /><br /><object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/BPU8w7Bxc0A&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/BPU8w7Bxc0A&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

OT: Bhutto Assassinated
 

Posted By: <b>Joe D.</b><p>I married a banker, and I am pretty sure she was not involved.<br />I am pretty sure none of my banker-in-laws were involved either.<br /><br />btw... when did this become an 'All in The Family' thread? - I thought this was a Seinfeld crowd<br /><br />

OT: Bhutto Assassinated
 

Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>Joe, very sad. Most amazing is that the bigots don't even try to hide it! I'm thinking it might be best to stick to cards from now on.

OT: Bhutto Assassinated
 

Posted By: <b>Joann</b><p>Yeesh. That video leaves me to pondering what interest Chase Manhattan could possibly have in carrying my insigificant little mortgage.<br /><br />Kenneth - honestly I don't know the answer to your question about the SC rulings. They have struck down some of his practices related to the detainees in Cuba, but I'd have to try to look it up to see if any of the surveillance/FISA etc kinds of practices have even made it to the SC. I don't think anything is being done that was specifically struck down, but I think the more important point might be the extent to which the administration will force people and organizations to have to go that long and expensive route just to get a ruling. <br /><br />I also completely agree with you about Congress. Regardless of the role of the courts, I don't know how much of this could have happened with a stronger Congress. But we had a Vice President that was bound and determined to explore and expand the power of the Executive Branch, while at the same time we had a Congress that was pretty much a 870-legged lapdog of the President. Not a good combination, and you are right - I do forget the extent to which the mysterious 6-year disappearance of Congress contributed to Bush's excesses.<br /><br />Joann<br /><br />Oh - Joe D - got your email, and I'll try to find where I got that from, but I do see your point. For what it's worth, your views are among those I specifically have in mind when I say that I am able to see valid thinking among those that I truly respect, even though our opinions diverge at some point.