What The Holy Hell Is Going On?

[Got 6, Want More]

Henry,

I didn't say anything like that. Someone else posted way back that Osama bin Laden's son was a student at Harvard. I could not believe that was accurate, but posted the article only because of that tie being mentioned.

Yes, a lot of old money is tainted. But the Kennedy's terrorism is essentially confined to Hyannisport and the Vineyard, and not quite of the same scope and evil of Osama.

Again, to reiterate, I made no accusations and do not even know if the article is accurate, and that is why I wrote "perhaps".

[HankWP]

Originally posted by Sarumite
Henry -

It's my understanding that the relationship between Bin Laden and his family is being investigated. In other words, it's unclear that they are as estranged as it may appear. If true, this would be disturbing, and I think you'd agree Harvard would have to take some action.

Yes, I agree Sarumite... it would be very disturbing indeed... controls would be needed for future donations and heads should roll "if" the money is at all related to Osama Bin Laden... when Rudy tookover the big push was to get money in house.... and that he did... 19.3 billion dollars in endowment... Harvard Corporation has a canny way of making things "go away"...

No offense taken Colonel... none at all mate.

Got 6... sorry I jumped at you... I admit, I have not really been myself here on this e-board or anywhere else... for me, it is hard to imagine that the loss of so many people would have such a great impact... and I realize that I should not growl at everything adverse...

As for the story, I am sure money came from the Bin Laden family... which ones, should be clarified, especially now... IMO, the article is vague where it could/should be stronger and clear... but the New York Times is probably the most accurate and integrity driven newspaper organization, less the 1999 Entremed Cancer Cure debaucle...

I apologize, I of all argumentative people on this board, intentionally started this thread not to flame but to bring us together. My apologies to all.

Henry.

[BCeagle]

Henry,

We are all very saddened and angered by what happened. It's not a world that peace loving people envisioned. A lot of our grandparents fought or served in the second world war thinking that they made the world safe for their children, grandchildren, great-grandchildren. Like everyone else I was moved with tears at this national tragedy.

As for Bin Larden, I read somewhere on the internet that the family had 16-17 children. I think the parents are very embarassed by this one child of theirs named Asama. It has been said that he has been disowned and there have been 4 assasssination attempts on him in Saudi Arabia. What we're not clear on is who is for or against him in his family. I'm convinced he has to be taken out and other terrorists and their network eliminated to make the world safe again from these religious fanatics.

Saudi Arabia appears to be with us most of the time but other times they don't appear very supportive as they have very strict Muslims who could overthrow the ruling family if they lean too much towards the US who is associated with supporting Israel. I wish things were black and white but the world is not as simple as that which makes policy making very difficult. Let's hope our leaders make the right decisions and hope we Americans can pull together in supporting each other and the country, and doing our part as citizens by putting on a uniform, donating money, give blood, or just putting a flag up to show support.

[Rodentsrule!]

Originally posted by Ralph Baer
Has anyone else noticed the Eaglebunny/Newton1/Chris!!!! has not been heard from since last Monday?

Ralph, let's just hope that unlike when it comes to College Puck, Chris has realized that his opinion isn't the only one and since he can't resist a good fight he has opted not to post.

Any other reason for the lack of his presence is simply not worth thinking about at the moment... the implications would be staggering and horrific.

God Bless America!

[Ralph Baer]

I agree that Chris!!!! does not seem to post when there is n o way to stir a controversy. Also he has disappeared for a week or more several times in the past. It just seemed like a conincidence.

[Rodentsrule!]

Let's hope it is just coincidence.

[Jenna]

I would know for sure if Chris was not alright. Chris is fine. In my eyes, everyone deals with this tragic event in different ways. I am sure he will be back soon

I will call him today and double check on him.

[The Sicatoka]

From the Drudge Report:

CIA PROBE: MILLIONS OF SHARES SOLD ON EVE OF DISASTER; DID BIN LADEN PULL OFF THE SICKEST SHARE DEAL EVER?
DAILY MAIL
09/18/01

The CIA has asked the City regulators in London to investigate suspicious sales of millions of shares before last Tuesday's attacks in America in the belief that the paper trail will lead to the terrorists.

MORE

Osama Bin Laden could have pulled off a sick financial coup shortly before the attacks that devastated America.

Britain's City watchdog, the Financial Services Authority, has launched an inquiry into unusual share price movements in London before last week's atrocities.

Other investigations have been launched in the U.S., Germany, Japan and Italy. The authorities fear that the Saudi-born multi-millionaire's followers might have used a technique known as 'short selling' shares in commodities such as insurance companies, airlines and tourism which they knew would plunge after the attack.

Short selling involves borrowing shares from a broker, then selling them.

You use the money raised to buy the shares when the price has gone down, give them to the broker and pocket the difference.

So if you sold a million shares at GBP 8 each, and they then went down to GBP 5, you could make a quick GBP 3million less the broker's fees and commission.

'It would be a particularly ghoulish kind of insider dealing,' said one source.

'But if we find anyone profiteering out of the tragedy it could be a good lead for the investigation into exactly who is responsible.'

The authorities are also looking for any unusual buying activity in sectors likely to go up, such as building or arms manufacturers.

Germany's security watchdog has launched an inquiry into 'suspect' share price movements in the run-up to the atrocities.

It is expected to home in on Munich Re, the world's biggest reinsurer, which lost 13 per cent of its value in the week before the attacks.

Fellow reinsurer Swiss Re and the French insurance giant Axa also suffered price falls before the outrage.

In cases of widespread short selling, the brokers start to follow the trend to cover themselves and this can force the market down.

U.S. Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill said: 'We are going to track down every terrorist and confiscate their money wherever it is in the world.

'And I think we'll have the co-operation of every financial institution in every civilised society.

'We're going to shut these people down.'

A similar investigation is under way in Japan, where it is believed to be focusing on dealings in futures contracts.

In the futures market, investors bet on the future price of shares or commodities and can make enormous gains if their gambles prove correct.

Bin Laden comes from a wealthy Saudi business family and is believed to have financial tentacles reaching across the globe.

He is reported to have used a Milan brokerage to invest in European stock markets.

The Swiss authorities are also looking closely at his links with their country's notoriously secretive banking system.

END

Credit: Drudge Report http://www.drudgereport.com/flash.htm on 09/18/01

[BCeagle]

If this is true, can they freeze his ill-gotten gains if they have enough evidence since he obviously had inside information? This is another way to cut him off besides hounding him militarily. I'm sure they're looking at all the innocent looking fronts he uses to fund his network. If we can freeze his assets, we can hinder some of his movements and make things more difficult.

[jen]

Originally posted by Rodentsrule!



Any other reason for the lack of his presence is simply not worth thinking about at the moment... the implications would be staggering and horrific.

God Bless America!

His name has been listed as logged on, he's just not posting.

[dagies]

I found this. Read the article about Islamic justification for killing innocents in war. It is enlightening. Also makes you wonder why there was such Arabic outrage over some of the collateral damage in the Gulf War.

There are some other interesting articles as well.


http://www.ict.org.il/

[Scott Murphy]

If you view money as the "lifeline" to terrorist organizations, it is imperative to cut off or hinder their access to funds. Fortunately, stock and similar transactions leave footprints, especially in the major markets, so it should be reasonable to expect for US/European investigators to look at any possible irregular trading. I also read that Japanese regulators are examining futures and shorts trading in insurance and reinsurance companies prior to last week's disaster.

Unfortunately, as somebody who is familiar with the myriad ways to hide money from scrutiny, it may be difficult to track down every player in Bin Laden's financial transactions or to completely cut off his access to funding. At the very least , we can make it extremely difficult for him and his patsies to move money, and put the boot on the banks and brokers who have assisted him one way or another. Perhaps relegating them to moving cash in suit cases and duffles. That said, it will require a concerted international effort to press financial institutions and offshore banking havens to crack down on transfers and other transactions linked to Bin Laden et al.

[RoyalTea]

from what i've read, it seems that the people in afghanistan are divided into two groups: those that are for the taliban & bin laden, and those who are against the taliban & bin laden.

those who are smart enough to not support the taliban have proved it by getting the hell out of kabul. those that are stupid enough to support the taliban proved it by staying in kabul.

it's been a week. anybody who hasn't fled kabul yet obviously isn't planning on doing it at all.

when the extradition of bin laden is denied, i say that we wipe the city of kabul off the face of the earth. i'm not worried about killing innocent civilians, because anybody who is still is in that city supports the taliban and is an enemy.

i think that these fundamentalists don't have any reason to fear the united states, since they've never experienced what our military is capable of. it's about time that we show them what a fleet of b-52s is capable of.

[HankWP]

I agree royaltea... I would not mind so much if they bombed the hell out of that place... it would send a message...

Henry.

[jk]

Well, friends, a week has passed, and I remain troubled. I am sure this is more the rule than the exception at this point, but it's where I am regardless. I sit here insulated in the Midwest, not having lost any friends or colleagues, and this event still weighs on me. I understand from co-workers that the situation in NYC is much worse than we know here or from the press, and my heart goes out to everyone out there (including DC).

I am angry less, sad more, and scared about the same. Initially I was mostly burning with rage. Now I want all the bad guys to pay - all the cells in all the countries - but I don't really want to level a region.

My fear last Tuesday was borne from sitting in a tall building amid so much uncertainty. Now I worry that the sense of relative calm that has come over the U.S. is premature. My view is: The bad guys were obviously 2 steps ahead of us through 9/11; what exactly has occurred to suggest that they aren't still 2 steps ahead of us? Nothing, in my opinion. The entirety of our response was very predictable and the whole affair is still going according to their plan. I worry that their next action could use different, much worse weapons. Which of course is all the more reason to pursue our actions against them with extreme prejudice and speed.

Well, I'm hoping to soon laugh more, sleep better and care about college hockey again. Here's one to laugh about: I'm finding myself singing the national anthem in the shower.

And again, I have nothing to complain about compared to the real victims on the East Coast.

Stay safe, everyone.

[Bobo]

I post this in response to RoyalTea;s assertion that only Taliban supporters are left in Kabul. It's not that simple, it would be easier to think about and deal with if it were, but it isn't.

"TomPaine.commentary
LOOK BEFORE LEAPING

Tamim Ansary is a writer who lives in San Francisco.

I've been hearing a lot of talk about "bombing Afghanistan back to the Stone Age." One talk radio host said this would mean killing innocent people, people who had nothing to do with this atrocity, but, "We're at war, we have to accept collateral damage. What else can we do?" Minutes later, another TV pundit asked if we "have the belly to do what must be done."

And I thought about these issues being raised especially hard, because I am from Afghanistan. Even though I've lived here for 35 years, I've never lost track of what's going on there. So I want to tell anyone who will listen how it all looks from where I'm standing.

I speak as one who hates the Taliban and Osama bin Laden. There is no doubt in my mind that these people were responsible for the atrocity in New York. I agree that something must be done about those monsters.

But the Taliban and bin Laden are not Afghanistan. They're not even the government of Afghanistan. The Taliban are a cult of ignorant psychotics who took over Afghanistan in 1997. Bin Laden is a political criminal with a plan. When you think Taliban, think Nazis. When you think bin Laden, think Hitler. And when you think "the people of Afghanistan," think "the Jews in the concentration camps."

It's not only that the Afghan people had nothing to do with this atrocity. They were the first victims. They would exult if someone came in and took out the Taliban and the rat's nest of international thugs holed up in their country.

Some say, "Why don't the Afghans rise up and overthrow the Taliban?" The answer is, they're starved, damaged, incapacitated, exhausted. Credible international aid organizations estimate that there are 500,000 disabled orphans in Afghanistan -- a country with no economy, no food. Two million men were killed during the war with the Soviets. There are millions of Afghan widows -- and the Taliban has been executing women for being women. The soil is littered with landmines. The farms were all destroyed by the Soviets. These are a few of the reasons why the Afghan people have not overthrown the Taliban.

We come now to the question of bombing Afghanistan back to the Stone Age. Trouble is, that's been done. The Soviets took care of it already. Make the Afghans suffer? They're already suffering. Level their houses? Done. Turn their schools into piles of rubble? Done. Eradicate their hospitals? Done. Destroy their infrastructure? Cut them off from medicine and health care? Too late. Someone already did all that. New bombs would only stir the rubble of earlier bombs. Would they at least get the Taliban? Not likely.

In today's Afghanistan, only the Taliban eat. Only they have the means to move around. They'd slip away and hide. Maybe the bombs would get some of those disabled orphans, they don't move too fast, they don't even have wheelchairs. But flying over Kabul and dropping bombs wouldn't really be a strike against the criminals who did this horrific thing. Actually it would only help the Taliban -- by crushing the same people they've been raping all this time.

So what can be done, then?

Let me now speak with true fear and trembling. The only way to get bin Laden is to go in there with ground troops. When people speak of "having the belly to do what needs to be done," they're thinking in terms of having the belly to kill as many as needed. Pushing aside moral qualms and killing innocent people, what's actually on the table is Americans dying. And not just because some Americans would die fighting their way through Afghanistan to bin Laden's hideout. It's much bigger than that. Will other Muslim nations just stand by? We're flirting with a world war between Islam and the West.

And guess what: that's bin Laden's program. That's exactly what he wants. That's why he did this. Read his speeches and statements. It's all right there. He really believes Islam would beat the west. It might seem ridiculous, but he figures if he can polarize the world into Islam and the West, he's got a billion soldiers. If the west wreaks a holocaust in those lands, that's a billion people with nothing left to lose, that's even better from bin Laden's point of view. He's probably wrong, in the end the west would win, whatever that would mean, but the war would last for years and millions would die, not just theirs but ours. Who has the belly for that?

Bin Laden does. Anyone else?


This commentary was produced by Steven Rosenfeld."

[MavRick]

I have thought a great deal about how to respond, assuming, as we all do, bin Laden and the Taliban are behind this. As satisfying as it would briefly be to, say, nuke Kabul, I think it would eliminate any moral high ground we have. We need to kill (not "bring to justice") the perpetrators. We need to kill the people who made the attack possible. We need to kill people who are actively planning similar attacks. Nothing else will prevent the infinite cowardice of terrorism. While those categories have broad definitions, but not infinite definitions.

They do not include people who merely sympathize with the evildoers. America stands, among other things, for the proposition that you may not be punished for what you believe, no matter how repellent your beliefs may be. You may, however, be punished for what you do in a manner that fits the measure of your evil.

We ought not do more violence than is necessary to meet our ends. While nuking all of Afghanistan might (but probably wouldn't) accomplish what we need, we will kill far more than we have to. (By the same measure, I believe collateral damage -- truly incident to an attack on combatants -- is inevitable and unfortunate, but should not limit our attacks on combatants.)

We will sacrifice young people because we will not try to kill noncombatants. We will lose more lives than we have to because we are good people, and we will always be better than our attackers. But to flatten all that remains standing above ground in Kabul without regard to its relationship to terrorism is to descend to the level of the monsters. This is a fuzzy line, but it is all we have to go on.

[The Sicatoka]

Folks, what do you make of this?

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2001/09/12/MN229389.DTL

[RoyalTea]

bobo - thanks for proving my assumptions wrong. i wish this situation could be simplified, but it looks like there's no way in hell that could ever happen.




the last time we dealt with people who were willing to kill themselves in order to take out americans was when we fought japan in ww2.

we nuked them, twice. and those weren't the worst bombings. and after all of that, japan is now one of our closer allies.

hopefully, military historians from both sides (united states & japan) can look at what worked and what didn't work in that situation and see how it can be applied to the year 2001. unfortunately, i feel that no good comparisons will be made between the japanese of the 1940s and the islamic fundamentalists of today.

[Craig P.]

Very long: http://www.iranian.com/Opinion/2001/June/Afghan/index.html

I can't speak to the accuracy of it, but some of this stuff is fascinating. Particularly the part about one of the reasons for Pakistan's involvement in Afghan politics (i.e. Taliban):
In fact, contrary to Iran that never dealt with Afghan refugees in an organized manner, Pakistan promoted, organized and put into play the Taliban government for a variety of reasons. The first is the Durand line.

Before Pakistani independence from India, Afghanistan shared borders with India and serious disputes ensued between the two over the Pashtoonestan region. The British drew the Durand line and divided the region between the two countries, on the condition that after 100 years, Afghanistan regain control over the Indian part of Pashtoonestan as well. Later on, when Pakistan declared independence from India that Indian half of Pashtoonestan became half of Pakistan. Since some six years ago, Pakistan, according to international law was supposed to cede Pashtoonestan back to Afghanistan. How would Pakistan that still has claims over Kashmir agree to give half of its land area to Afghanistan?

The best solution was to raise hungry Afghan mujaheds to control Afghanistan. The Pakistan trained Taliban would naturally no longer harbor ambitions of recovering Pashtoonestan from their patron. No wonder the Taliban appeared just as the 100-year deadline drew to a close. From a distance, Taliban appear to be irrational and dangerous fundamentalists. When you look at them closely, you see hungry Pashtoon orphans whose occupation is that of a theology student and whose impetus for attending school is hunger. When you review the appearance of the Taliban you see the national political interests of Pakistan.Yikes! Methinks Pakistan is extremely grateful that this (if accurate) has slipped under the radar of the rest of the world.

In the overall picture, the tribalism raises interesting questions, among them, what would happen if the U.S. attempted to deal directly with the tribes, bypassing the Taliban?