Table On-Topic Summary - 17-Sep-2002
A compilation of this board's financial/economic posts From 42051 to 42124

Post  42051  by  jeffbas       Reply
Franklin Resources already does agree with you, having worked their position up to 17% ownership of XICO. That is remarkable in my opinion because in this market it couldn't possibly be sold, meaning that in their opinion XICO is a "one decision" stock.

Post  42052  by  Decomposed       OT: Table ON TOPIC SUMMARY Sep 13, 2002
Post  42053  by  Decomposed       OT: Table ON TOPIC SUMMARY Sep 14, 2002
Post  42054  by  Decomposed       OT: Table ON TOPIC SUMMARY Sep 15, 2002
Post  42055  by  Decomposed       ot: And finally, Sep 16, 2002

Post  42056  by  artsuh_taraz       Reply
Fast Times at Ridgemont High . . .

Over the past year I’ve had several discussions with design engineers at various high tech companies. The details here aren’t so relevant as the theme . . .

Now, it COULD be that somehow I’ve come across a peculiar (or special) sampling of design engineers, but the overarching impression that I’ve gotten from each one is that each is one the verge of something huge . . . something revolutionary. They sometimes look at each other before answering my questions, as if all might be lost by the mention of the big secret. (Then, of course, they start asking me for investing advice . . . what’s going to happen with the economy . . . how come I don’t think their company’s stock is a buy now, &c. And then, almost on cue, they start chiming in about the enormous future impact of their current design projects.)

I don’t mean to downplay the work of design engineers in general. I’ll be one of the first to admit that (as a group) they’ve accomplished great feats. But, I just have this nagging feeling that the very “micro” aspect of their work might lead them (collectively) to overestimate the grandeur of their individual projects (and how they will add to the bottom line).

Again, this is just my gut feel . . . anyone out there is free to beat me up on this. A simple AT is too ignorant to know the difference, &c., &c.. But, in a similar fashion that I indeed find more economists who DON’T provide good analysis (in my estimation) than those who do, I also think that it is prudent to discount the claims that I’m hearing from the design engineers that I’m coming across.

You see, I am simply one man and there is a limit to the breadth and depth of my knowledge in certain areas (we’ve gotten that out of the way, right?) But, one thing has become apparent . . . like in Fast Times at Ridgemont High, sometimes the secret sauce is just ketchup and mayonnaise mixed together.


Post  42057  by  artsuh_taraz       Reply
I find it all rather sad really . . .

This quarrel at the Table . . . coming up with a disparaging nickname for a long-time poster. . . come on . . . what has become of this . . .

Well, this all reminds me of why I stopped posting here.

First, I do indeed have projects at hand that are extremely demanding on my time. But second, it can become an extremely hostile environment here unless you happen to agree with PMCW on all issues, or keep your little mouth shut when you don’t. Long-time posters might agree that this wasn’t always the case. PMCW, sir, if I may be so bold, your behavior on Table changed.

I know that you are the owner of Table (by Briguy’s decree), and I by no means wish to challenge that authority. I also know that since Table is linked to your newsletter venture that you have much more time to devote to hammering home your views than a part-time poster would.

PMCW, in the past you and I (and many others) freely exchanged opinions here in a friendly manner and with a common goal. It is one thing to use this open exchange as a launching pad for your newsletter (you may recall me wishing you well), but it is quite another thing to attempt to kick others down so that you will seem (relatively) elevated. You can look inside your heart and decide for yourself if the development of your newsletter is at all linked with the pronouncement of this behavior.

Your attitude, sir, more than anything else drove me away from Table. When the overbearing and condescending nature of your posts became intolerable to me, rather allow issues to explode, I simply departed. Perhaps Culmus will be the next to take his talents elsewhere. After looking deeper into the posts of the exchange between you two, yes, Culmus, questioned some of your past recommendations and challenged your performance. But, I dare say (and he can correct me if I’m wrong), it seemed more likely to me (from reading back over the posts) that it was your condescending attitude in prior posts that was most objectionable.

I don’t believe that repeated demands for some four-month contest would mean anything or settle anything. They would not change past recommendations (the purported issue), nor would they change past attitudes (perhaps the truer issue).

There are good people here - in days gone by, I would humbly hope to rank myself among them, and Culmus is (IMO) certainly one of them – and there is no need to behave in a supercilious fashion; newsletter or no newsletter.

This is not an attack. These are things that I believe needed to be said. And, in any case, my time at Table is coming to a close, so if you should decide to try and find a way to "copy and paste me to death" with the goal of making me look bad, so be it. I will not fight back. I am easy game.

Like I wrote here several days ago, "My record of posts and performance is both decent and unselfish, and I (and by extension my comments) will stand on it."

And, in the spirit of friendly exchange, I will answer the question you posed to me several days ago. You asked (your post pasted below):

"Hi AT, your name came up in a post just the other day. Fond memories - your inputs are missed. How about your take on the macro-picture and what you see as the undetermined variables that could alter the course you to as most likely? Regards, pmcw"

My first response is to link my post at Table from Feb. 13th, 2002 (link below). A few adjustments are first in order:
1) Up the inflation numbers by about 0.5% across the board.
2) Completely eliminate the 20% "strong recovery" possibility and spread that evenly across the other two scenarios.
3) In the "Double-dip scenario" bring 2003 GDP down to -1% to 1% and the baseline down to 1% to 3%.

For the rest of the answer . . . housing and refis have managed to keep the economy afloat for the time being. I agree with Roach on the risks that the economy faces. The action in the dollar should be a good barometer for many of those.

As far as which is more likely to come about, the “Baseline” or the “Strong Recovery,” disregard most of the mumbo jumbo coming from the TV economists. Two simple numbers Initial Claims and the Help Wanted Index should give us a good idea (given the present set of circumstances) what is in the cards. Right now they do not look good.

And, BTW, the post linked above was one day after my "buy bonds on the dips" post . . . a simple strategy that would have been more profitable than I originally imagined.


Post  42058  by  artsuh_taraz       Reply
To all those who sent me well wishes (both through Table posts AND privately in thought) . . . here’s some positive energy comin’ right back at you . . .

. . . .and a thought for the road . . .

"In the twilight of life, God will not judge us on our earthly possessions and human successes, but on how well we have loved."
--Saint John of the Cross

Best regards,

Post  42059  by  Culmus       Reply

you called it a bargain at a market cap of $ 4bn, now the cap is $ 135 million.

I do not have plenty of time to post, I cut the time out just until this discourse is concluded.

Post  42060  by  Culmus       Reply
If every single stock on that list went up after that date it was because the entire Naz was up about 20% in January last year. You didn't ask people to take these profits as they were quickly gone again the next month in one of the worst months of the Naz of all time (-22% during February).

I'm working on an important project right now, no time to play with oyu.

Post  42061  by  Culmus       Reply

yes, you have been right. You also have been wrong on other occasions, as have I and as has pmcw.

All I asked is to back an opinion with the facts that led to a given conclusion and to engage in a civilized dialogue, as opposed to offensive shouting.

It was his increasing lack of a civilized dialogue that led me to call on pmcw lately. I felt to get this guy at least within sight of reality again (as opposed to his dreamworld of being the only know-it-all on earth) I had to show him that he has been wrong before just as anyone else. But he is still in denial, and nothing will change that (an outsized ego of that magnitude is impossible to heal).
I'll be finished with my rant in a minute.



Post  42062  by  kantbleveit       Reply
artsuh taraz, I am certain
has much higher intellectual capabilities than I. In fact, probably most of the "published" authors here at the Table fit that shoe.

I by know means understand all the dynamics of who, what, when here at the Table. I do know there is an incredible amount of brain power here. If it can participate in "harmony", as Napoleon Hill ascribes in his mastermind principle, then unbelievable results could emanate. But I do have a suggestion :

Sweep it under the Table and MOVE ON.

Tony Robbins suggests that "The past does not equal the future." I KNOW that we can't change the past, only learn from it.

I was first attracted to the Table at its inception when I was trading pretty much full time and found it a great learning experience; full of tips, and ideas to further investigate. Some of our clever posters (Arkural for example) amazed me with their incredible ideas and creative use of our language. It provoked thoughtfulness, and many times made me laugh out was FUN.

The market and my "mistakes" (ie; not using stops!) kikked my arse and led me back into the non-digital world of business. I was on a forced sabbatical from the everyday reading, lurking, trading.

Now that I have returned to part time-lurking status, and dabbling back into the market, I naturally came to the Table.

I'll continue to lurk for now.

Thanks to ALL our posters for sharing their thoughts and ideas.

best wishes to all.


Post  42063  by  pdowd       Reply
True freinds are those who. when you have made a fool out of yourself, don't think you have done a permanent job !!!!!!! PD.

Post  42064  by  pdowd       Reply
or don't misspell friends ! EOM.

Post  42065  by  pmcw       Reply
AT, You are unfamiliar with the history of this matter. Culmus has lied and tried to defame my character. That I don't take to kindly. I ignored three name calling and lying posts from him in a row before responding. All I seek now, since he has repeatedly (now and in the past) bragged about his results without mentioning trades or discussing virtues of companies, is a real time challenge.

This should be easy for him; it's what he does for a living. Motivation for posting here, I know of several on this board and others to whom he has promoted his services. My venture into the newsletter business was actually based on an RB suggestion when they were considering the model. I did a phase one trial to see if I liked it and gauge the response. To date, I've not received a single derogatory email.

So, AT, if you check back a bit more carefully and, dare I say, objectively, I think you will find truth. If you care to discuss this off-line, you have my email address. I can assure that F2F I'm unchanged and that here, when boxed into a corner (particularly when lies are used) I will fight. Regards, pmcw

Post  42066  by  jcl22192       Reply
Oil Tumbles After Iraq Announcement
Oil prices tumbled more than four percent on Tuesday after the United Nations announced that Iraq had agreed to allow the return of weapons inspectors without conditions after a gap of almost four years.

And here I was feeling smug, hiding in those wonderful Can RT's. Oh well! And I do feel that this set of inspections will prove to be another fiasco-the nature of the beast hasn't changed. If you want to feel like 2 beers before breakfast(or 3 in the hot sun of a beach), listen to the ambassadors from Iraq-reminds me of an eight year old covering his tracks.

Post  42067  by  Culmus       Reply

it was not to interrupt the free flow of idea exchanges on this former superior message board that I have started this less pleasant intercourse with the host.

I apologize for the disruption. My single aim was to forward a wake-up call to anyone who might have overestimated the capabilities of a person that thinks higher of himself than reality warrants. In doing so I let myself sink to a level that was low enough to face the opponent eye in eye. It was not meant as an affront against any other participant here and I again apologize for the inconvenience.

For the past weeks I have been working on an important research project that I hope will deliver some insight into the longer term future of the equity markets. This project has been going slow recently and I can't allow it to get to a standstill by engaging in further "discussions" that I know will find no end. I'm sure it is in the interest of the board if I conclude this now, after all there are many a people here that I have come to respect tremendously.

While it would be fun and maybe beneficial to accept a challenge I have been thrown, even after completing mentioned research project I have other time consuming work awaiting me.

If time should allow and temptation get too big there surely are other, more friendly, corners in parts of cyberpace where nobody has traveled before. It is always the people that make a certain place a worthwhile one or not and wherever these people are there is the place.

Oops, before I posted this there comes another lie from the other side:

Motivation for posting here, I know of several on this board and others to whom he (that's me, Culmus) has promoted his services.

I have never ever promoted my services to anyone, either here on this board or in private to anyone whom I met here. Whoever claimed that is a liar and the one who has the stomach to post such an unashamed lie is even lower than I thought so far.

I was about to leave this place peacefully. I would ask anyone claiming that I approached him or her and promoted my services for money to substantiate such a claim with showing the evidence. To the address of the many lurkers I point out that pmcw - from friendly private exchange long gone - does know my identity and my private email address. I would not be surprised if he now, with the help of people siding with him in this attempt to damage my integrity and who are knowledgeable about computer work, came up with a fake email by me to somebody or even a number of persons to "prove" this ridiculous lie.

I now officially call this guy a criminal. Beware!!


Post  42068  by  pmcw       Reply
Culmus, It's this easy. Just post what you're buying now or when you make your next buy. I answered ws' challenge to a portfolio contest within minutes of when I read his post. The contest involved investing $100K - all at once. We can bail at any time between now and the last Q4 report from the stocks on my list. If we bail, we have to sit in cash until the contest terminates or the last stock is sold (covered).

I've invited you to name the terms and time frame (minimum 4 months). As far as I'm concerned, you can trade every day. The only requirement is you post your trades with limit orders at least 10 minutes before the trade. This takes minutes which you clearly have to spread lies about me.

My numbers are on the line as are those from ws. We aren't scared of operating in the open or of even being wrong. I have to respect him for following through on his challenge. You, on the other hand, have issued challenges and then backed down. I showed this respect by researching some fundamentals and posting my opinions in my response to his post to me about a couple of stocks I don't follow. It's clear to me you simply don't want to be measured real time and with all your cards on the Table so, create an excuse and crawl away.

Link to post:

pmcw long:
9,803.922 shares of XICO at $4.08
12,987.013 shares of HLIT at $2.31
1,823.708 shares of ISIL at $16.45

ws short:
1,230.012 shares of NVLS at $24.39
3,645.200 shares of NXTL at $8.23
7,272.727 shares of XMSR at $5.50

Post  42069  by  jcl22192       Reply
"if you sit by the river long enough the bodies of all your enemies float by". A Chinese proverb and variation on the theme of 'everything comes to him who waits'.

Post  42070  by  Culmus       Reply
How far do you want to go?

I was about to leave you alone so you can continue what you do and I can continue with my work.

pmcw, it is one thing if a misstatement is interpreted as a lie or if citing a fact wrongly is called a lie. But the post claiming that I promoted my services is the biggest of all lies I have ever seen.

You should be ashamed, I know you can't because quite obviously you have no moral at all. Schmuck.


Post  42071  by  clo       Reply
AT, I'm afraid I will miss you more this year ... clo

Post  42072  by  pmcw       Reply
Culmus, You promoted your business to me. Of course, you would call the email a phony if I posted it and as I promised, I wouldn't reveal your email address. Why do you change the subject again? As a matter of a fact, you initiated this attack and nasty discourse. I didn't even respond to your first three messages. Just post a portfolio and go about your business. You're the one that wanted to draft comparisons so, let's do it real time where it can be measured by all.

Post  42073  by  Culmus       Reply

we were talking about a joint venture because I felt it would be in the interest of investors if there were somebody involved that had an eye for the "big picture" as opposed to getting lost in details. Frankly, I can't remember who's idea it was, but it would have been a mutual project, not me promoting my services.

In that post you were talking plural ("several on this board and others") and since that is not true I can say for sure that this is a lie. This behavior, pmcw, you should be aware, calls into question everything else you do. As Warren Buffett said: "It takes twenty years to build a reputation and five minutes to destroy it."

"Several on this board and others", unless you count yourself among the split personalities and add yourself as a third person that is a lie.


Post  42074  by  Arkural       Reply
0t-kant-I can't believe it, you showed up too. :-) eom

Post  42075  by  pmcw       Reply
I'll reveal the details after you step up to the challenge and not before. One issue at a time Culmus, you're not changing the topic yet again.

For the record, I never suggested a joint venture of any kind. You did because you wanted me to help you get clients and I declined.

Post  42076  by  jeffbas       Reply
AT, I believe you have it ass-backwards!

A competent company gets its marketing/sales folks to find out what a customer wants or needs FIRST and then sees if it can be designed (with some differentiated features or price advantage). At that point you sure do want a design team to believe that what it is doing is great. That is called commitment (to a project that was decided as valuable by others).

Of course, there are plenty of companies that have done poorly by designing what they liked, and finding out there was no market to speak of.

Post  42077  by  Arkural       Reply
OT-The farmer and his donkey

One day a farmer's donkey fell down into a well. The animal cried piteously for hours as the farmer tried to figure out what to do.

Finally he decided the animal was old, and the well needed to be
covered up anyway; it just wasn't worth it to retrieve the donkey.
He invited all his neighbors to come over and help him. They all
grabbed a shovel and began to shovel dirt into the well.

At first, the donkey realized what was happening and cried
horribly. Then, to everyone's amazement, he quieted down.

A few shovel loads later, the farmer finally looked down the well,
and was astonished at what he saw. With every shovel of dirt that
hit his back, the donkey was doing something amazing. He would
shake it off and take a step up. As the farmer's neighbors continued
to shovel dirt on top of the animal, he would shake it off and take a step up.

Pretty soon, everyone was amazed as the donkey stepped up over
the edge of the well and trotted off!

Life is going to shovel dirt on you, all kinds of dirt. The trick
to getting out of the well is to shake it off and take a step up.

Each of our troubles is a stepping stone. We can get out of the
deepest wells just by not stopping, never giving up! Shake it off
and take a step up!

Remember the five simple rules to be happy:

1. Free your heart from hatred.

2. Free your mind from worries.

3. Live simply.

4. Give more.

5. Expect less.

The donkey later came back and kicked THE S_ _ _ out
of the farmer that tried to bury him.


Post  42078  by  Culmus       Reply

I see no benefit to anyone here if I continue to try fighting your lies.

Bye, bye Table.

Post  42079  by  kduff       OT: Every so often, someone is looking for an onli
Post  42080  by  Tampathom       OT: Indications of War Preparations

Post  42081  by  Arkural       Reply

via Datek's release:

"...Low-cost commissions
Beginning October 19, 2002 , the commission for online equity trades will be a flat $10.99, for both market and limit orders, regardless of the number of shares you buy or sell 1 . And, unlike some brokers, there are no "order handling fees."2 This schedule enables us to simplify and standardize commissions across the company – while continuing to provide exceptional value..."

1)Orders executed in multiple lots on the same trading day will be charged a single commission. When an order is partially executed over multiple trading days, the order is subject to a separate commission charge for each trading day.

Post  42082  by  pmcw       Reply
AT, It sounds as though the situation you "designed" is hypothetical.

In the world of high tech, all too frequently companies are run by design engineers and, yes, they almost always give far too much value to the discovery of a tree.

I learned long ago to quickly access as to what group runs a company and, if run by any group, what are they doing to diversify their weaknesses. Each faction (marketing, bean counting and engineering) have clear weaknesses.

You clearly pointed out the weakness of engineering. When combined with what I consider to be outright misplaced greed, you can see the COMS model. I'm not sure they ever spoke with customers before introducing a product. However, such obvious ignorance of marketing is far from unique.

I've said for years, if there were marketing police most of silicon valley would be in jail. They have learned over the last couple of decades, but they are still far from home. On balance, they are still far too focused on how a widget wiggles that how many can be sold at what price.

I started with a marketing mind set and learned engineering. Since your hints lead me to think you're talking about XICO, I'll assume you wonder about their new leader. He started as an engineer and worked his entire professional life in sales and marketing. I can assure you his only focus is quantity and price (if you will, the present value of all future profits). I can also assure that the special analog memory sauce (SAM Sauce if you will) is much more involved that the combination of two common ingredients.

Regards, pmcw

Post  42083  by  pmcw       Reply
10:07AM Pfizer reaffirms 2002 forecast (PFE) 30.60 +0.40: Reaffirms 2002 forecast for EPS of $1.58 and double-digit rev growth; from 2002 to 2004 on a stand-alone basis, PFE expects compounded annual rev growth of 11%, net income growth of 14%, and growth in diluted EPS of 16%.

It appears to me that PFE intends to buy a fairly significant quantity of their own stock since diluted earnings are forecasted to grow faster than net income. However, even in light of this good news, I'll bet my Sept35's retire worthless.

Regards, pmcw

Post  42084  by  wilful10       Reply
This makes sense:

Can the Terrorists Win?

How Extreme Islam has already lost the clash of civilizations

By Ronald Bailey

Three thousand Americans dead. New York and Washington wounded. One terrorist regime overthrown by U.S. military might and another about to be.

What more evidence do we need for historian Samuel P. Huntington's Clash of Civilizations thesis? In his 1996 book, Huntington argued that the old Cold War fault lines between democratic capitalism and totalitarian socialism were giving way to a new global struggle between civilizations. "The fundamental source of conflict in this new world will not be primarily ideological or primarily economic," he asserted. "The great divisions among humankind and the dominating source of conflict will be cultural." More specifically, Huntington predicted that the main civilizational conflict in the 2lst century would be between the West and Islam.

Assuming that Huntington is correct, the ultimate result of the clash is a foregone conclusion: Reactionary Islam will lose. This point was forcefully made by Nobel Prize-winning writer V.S. Naipaul in his masterful 1981 tour of radical Islam, Among the Believers. In that book, Naipaul described his meetings with prominent Islamic intellectuals and ordinary citizens in Iran, Pakistan, Malaysia, and Indonesia. He found they were bewildered by what he called the "encircling universal civilization." They were deeply ashamed of the comparative poverty and incapacity of Islamic societies. If Allah is on our side, they wondered, why does the West have jetliners, antibiotics, computers, hospitals, automobiles, and honest bureaucracies, not to mention tanks, aircraft carriers, and laser-guided missiles? Worse, the Islamic societies were completely dependent on that universal civilization to produce all these goods for them.

To the Islamist intellectuals and demagogues interviewed by Naipaul two decades ago, their dependence on the "great new encircling civilization" outside Islam was galling and demoralizing. In the face of the West's challenge, they retreated to the fantasy that Islamic societies are "spiritually superior" to a decadent West. It is this dynamic of cultural inferiority that ultimately produced Osama bin Laden and his ilk.

Yet even Osama bin Laden realized he could not fight the West with swords and his twisted version of Islamic piety. He needed the Land Rovers, the cell phones, the radios, the videotapes, the computer networks, and, yes, even the guns that only the universal civilization he loathed could produce. Those goods are produced not merely by factories but by social and political customs--customs such as democracy, private property, a free press, free markets, an independent judiciary, academic freedom, limited liability corporations, the rule of law, women's suffrage, and universal literacy. Reactionary Islam, like Soviet and Chinese communism before it, is being undermined from within by the natural yearnings of all people for the good things of life, including the freedoms that make them possible. It turns out that social and political freedom is inextricably attached to imported computers and jeans.

The atrocities of September 11 showed that we in the West can be harmed by the raging death throes of a resentful, expiring culture. Whether or not direct military interventions will hasten the coming victory over reactionary Islam is arguable, but the ultimate victory is not in doubt.

As Karl Marx presciently declared in The Communist Manifesto: "The bourgeoisie [ i.e., us], by the rapid improvement of all instruments of production, by the immensely facilitated means of communication, draws all, even the most barbarian, nations into civilization. The cheap prices of its commodities are the heavy artillery with which it batters down all Chinese walls, with which it forces the barbarians' intensely obstinate hatred of foreigners to capitulate. It compels all nations, on pain of extinction, to adopt the bourgeois mode of production; it compels them to introduce what it calls civilization into their midst, i.e., to become bourgeois themselves. In one word, it creates a world after its own image."

That's what Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda cannot stand, but also what they cannot stand against. It is only a matter of time before the "intensely obstinate hatred of foreigners" represented by bin Laden and his followers will capitulate. Modernization, which is to say westernization, will inevitably smash all cultures that don't accommodate themselves to it. They will be smashed chiefly not by bombs and military force but by the choices of their own peoples, who will turn their backs on the traditions and institutions that have kept them so long ignorant and poor.

"When people see a strong horse and a weak horse, by nature they will like the strong horse," Osama bin Laden famously observed. He was right; he just backed the wrong horse.

Ronald Bailey, Reason's science correspondent, is the editor of Global Warming and Other Eco Myths (Prima Publishing) and Earth Report 2000: Revisiting the True State of the Planet(McGraw-Hill).

Post  42085  by  uponroof       Reply


MEM GETS 3%, CVG GETS 1% TO 3% KRY GETS 96% TO 94%!

This looks very, very good.
Let's see what the market thinks over the next few weeks.

Post  42086  by  maniati       Reply
jeff: Good point. About 16 years ago, I did some consulting work at GE's aircraft engine division, and we met with the top management there. I don't know what it's like there now, since it's been a while, but, back then, that place was run by engineers, and they took great pride in over-designing everything. It sure made me feel a lot better knowing that.

Post  42087  by  pacemakernj       Reply
Roof, this is great news. Go KRY GO. Did you also see my XOMA they got approval from phase 3 trials on Raptiva. Wow this could be a great day. Pace.

Post  42088  by  jeffbas       Reply
wilful, very interesting post. The USSR led the way, but as they showed it could take 50 years more (or longer). After all, the fortunes of those folks have been declining relative to the West since the Crusades.

Post  42089  by  StockmanI7       OT: AT,
Post  42090  by  wilful10       OT: Thanks for the observation Jeff,, and btw -

Post  42091  by  wilful10       Reply
If the wonderful AT should happen to take one last

glance at the Table - I would add my heartfelt sentiments and fond farewells to those from the StockMan and others who have stepped forward to offer him a warm hug (despite his not knowing me)as he slowly merges off stage into the shadows.


Post  42092  by  goboyone60       Reply
''WOW'' Did I pick a good time to pop in on table''
Very discouraging to read the bickering going on hear.

Post  42093  by  spirare       Reply
GOLD Last trade $317.3/oz Change +$3.10 (+0.99%

***Yet precious metals prices are still a bargain considering the fear of the unknown as far as
world events and extremely volatile equities markets are concerned.***


TA LT higher highs and higher lows
4 Strong Bull waves to go*^*^*^*^

TA ST the last 5th small correction bearwave
soon complete.

Bull Wave Breakout to follow*^*^*^*^*^

Dollar Index Cash (NYBOT:DXY0)
TA LT lower highs and lower lows...
3 bear waves left...

TA ST small 5th bull wave correction
soon complete, followed by
continuation of the LT bear waves...

Current Price of Gold
(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long; ST Rating- Strong Buy; LT Rating- Strong Buy)

Post  42094  by  clo       OT: Oh goboyone60! that's because of

Post  42095  by  Warstud       Reply

I am currently short a few stocks, but may look to go long on some oil drillers, soon. Been hanging on the CY board, so if your looking for a board that deals strictly with stocks, feel free to join us.


Post  42096  by  maniati       OT: A.T.:

Post  42097  by  goboyone60       Reply
Hi Clo''
All is very well in my little corner of the world.
We have six thousand people a month moving hear.
Clo come to vegas and let your hair down''
'just' for a week or two,we don't need anymore new yorkers hear,hee hee'.
SDLI.......ware daily money makers ,,,you remember that.
Have a great day. goboy

Post  42098  by  clo       OT: Oh goboy!

Post  42099  by  beusa_1       Reply


A nuke scandal is gathering steam

Pyotr Simonenko, the leader of the Ukrainian Communist Party released a sensational statement on
Wednesday. In his
words, there were 2400 nuclear warheads in Ukraine, although the export of only 2200 of them was
documented. Simonenko claimed that nobody knows where 200 Soviet-era nukes in Ukraine are.

The official reaction followed the next day, but it was a rather weak one. Deputy chief of the Ukrainian
Headquarters, Nikolay Goncharenko, declared that Simonenko?s statement regarding the
disappearance of the nuclear
weapons from the territory of Ukraine was absolutely groundless. The high-ranking military official
stated that all
weapons of the trilateral agreement concerning the execution of the contract for strategic offensive
arms had been
handed over to Russia. Ok, but how come the leader of Ukrainian communists counted 200 nukes? It
seems that the nuke
scandal will continue.

Andrey Lubensky

Post  42100  by  JAZZMAN       Reply
Tampathom: Had the opportunity to watch "Meet the Press" yesterday when they interviewed Colin Powell about the present situation in Iraq. I came away [this is only my opinion]that we would be involved by Thanksgiving over there. Good time to be buying military defense stocks. The smart guys on this board probably already have them! Best to yah! Jazzy.

Post  42101  by  pacemakernj       OT: Anyone remember this? It was 1987! Truly scary
Post  42102  by  pmcw       OT: Pace, That an old urban legend. The name was

Post  42103  by  pmcw       Reply
ORCL, There is little good news in their report and the balance sheet doesn't reflect "real" earnings that support their income statement. The only positive bit of data is the expanding market in data base business. Regards, pmcw

Post  42104  by  pacemakernj       Reply
Roof, RE: KRY. Disappointing action given the news. What do you think? I thought we should of hit $2.50 at least. Why are we getting crushed at that level? Pace.

Post  42105  by  tinljhtkh       Reply
Culmus and AT!

Give it a week and see if we can't work a collective miracle here! Check back and see!




Post  42106  by  PinzaTodd       Reply
pacemakernj: Never happened

Interesting comment you made at the end, though:

Just typical of the liberal mind set. Let it not be said that one vote can't make a difference.

Truly scary indeed.

Post  42107  by  Czechsinthemail       Reply
"When people see a strong horse and a weak horse, by nature they will like the strong horse," Osama bin Laden famously observed. He was right; he just backed the wrong horse.

The kind of smug cultural chauvinism exhibited by Ronald Bailey is a good example of the cultural blindness Americans tend to have toward others. While I feel that a deliberate attack killing thousands of innocent people tends to undermine claims of spiritual superiority, I would not say that criticizing or opposing such attacks necessarily confers spiritual superiority. Are we spiritually superior for embarking upon planned attacks that will kill thousands of innocent people in Iraq? Of course, in justifying it our leader refers to the "barbaric regime" in Iraq, and because we embrace the ideals and the spiritual values of our culture, we naturally assume we are culturally superior to the easily criticized practices of another culture.

But what about our own barbaric regime? Personally, I'm not convinced that the President of the United States makes a good case for cultural superiority (though perhaps dramatically proving the need for better education) when he forgets how to pronounce the name of the country he is preparing to attack and apparently never learned how to pronounce the word "nuclear". But much worse is his flawed world vision -- his inability to see the world as a shared community.

Attacking Islamic fundamentalists is a straw man issue, because you can find a long and unfortunately abundant history of ignorant reactionaries within any religious tradition. In each case, they lay claim to cultural or spiritual superiority to justify terrible things that they do. In this regard, our dinosaurs are no better than theirs.

The problem is the gap between cultural ideals, which may be noble or seriously misguided but still sincerely believed in, and cultural practices which ironically (or hypocritically) undermine those ideals. If we unwittingly betray our ideals in the name of defending them, we are somewhere on a spectrum between tragic and stupid. If we knowingly betray our ideals, we put ourselves in the territory of the phony and the criminal. And if we hadn't already reserved the term "evil" for the wrongdoing of others, we might consider applying it here except that it might tarnish the halo of "good" that we like to wear.

The history of American culture is littered with the bodies of innocent people who happened to be in the way. Despite our tradition as a melting pot, we have maintained another tradition of cultural nativism -- assuming that we and our culture are somehow superior because of some intrinsic virtue that we possess and others don't. We have seen that as sufficient cause to kill off those who don't stand with us and are therefore assumed to be against us. Consider our history with Native American Indians, with Black Africans, with Hawaiian Islanders. In each of these cases, we ignored the cultures of these people, ignored their very humanity, and embarked on a course of extermination and subjugation justified only by our own presumed superiority and the negative stereotypes we projected upon our victims.

The most brutal war in American history, our Civil War, was fought between people each claiming the same mantle of cultural and religious virtue. Each side fought maintaining it was defending American ideals -- freedom, the right of people to live their lives as they choose without interference from others -- and each side invoked the same God as an ally in defending their ideals and pursuing the destruction of the enemy. Each side, convinced of the rightness of their ideals and the virtue of their good intentions, became equally convinced of the wrongness of the enemy if for no other reason than they were seen as the enemy of the ideals and good intentions they were committed to defending.

On a smaller scale but closer to home, I think the recent exchanges between Culmus and pmcw fit a similar pattern. Since I have valued their intelligence and the contributions each has shared, it is disappointing to see the dialogue between them devolve into polarization. At a certain point, being in conflict lends itself to seeing one another in terms of that conflict and particularly to seeing an external cause for the conflict. If the paradigm were dance instead of war, perhaps it would be easier to acknowledge missteps without stigmatizing the other and perhaps easier to return to a harmonious collaboration.

To return to horses, if you are obsessed with proving you have the stronger horse, you are likely to be blind to the weakness of your horse or the quality of another horse. And you are more likely to think of a competitive contest than a shared journey which you might travel together.

Here are two more items of horse sense:

"You can lead a dead horse to water, but you won't get him to share a drink with you even if you offer to buy."

"Though you can beat a dead horse to water, when it comes to drinking you can't beat a live horse."

Post  42108  by  Arkural       Reply
Est. Tgt adjust-Dow 8700, S&P 920, Naz 1340. If I keep this up I'll have to be right some day, eh.

If you haven't guessed by now this is for the reversal tgt-that's yet to happen.....dang mkt keeps visiting the south, I can't keep track, and I'm too busy with other stuff, so ya'll take this garbage, if you do,,,,,,,, as fwiw.

Post  42109  by  Arkural       Reply
Jpm will probably get cut nearly in half. eom

Post  42110  by  pacemakernj       OT: Pinza, it was fun while it lasted. Thanks for

Post  42111  by  motordavid       Reply
Maybe we could rename
this bored to the "Arm Wrestling TABLE", or the "Jr High Lunch Table", or....

On Topic, OT, whatever, this used to be a lot more interesting read than of late,imo.

Maybe it's jes' me, but the who struck John, who's on first,who's is bigger and who did what to whom is of Zero concern, or consequence, to this reader and most readers, I suspect. Maybe time to put A Bored on Iggy?! Get real, folks, or take it outside.

Post  42112  by  Tampathom       OT: A thoughful post, Czech..
Post  42113  by  Tampathom       OT: Perhaps JAZZMAN, but that is the middle of Ram

Post  42114  by  uponroof       Reply
JPMC: We will soon find out if...

JPMC shares below 20 bucks dictates the need for scuba gear thanks to their derivatives.

Three things to watch for...

1. An amazing recovery tommorrow...which would be evidence of the above.

2. A systemic collapse of the banking sector...more evidence

3. Unexplained collapses of seemingly unconnected global financial entities...more evidence

4. JPMC shares fall to the high teens but nothing drastic happens...evidence that all the talk about derivatives risk is hogwash.

Meanwhile in Japan tonight, Nikkei down 200 points:^N225&d=1b

pace...holding tight. The psychology involved in this stock defies description but here's something that comes close:

renahaji 5667. "Re: Re:Raver..."
In response to message #5661

I think the slow share price response can be explained
by two aphorisms, the first of which has become
paradoxical for KRY in this case. "buy on rumour,
sell on news" KRY had pretty much become
rumour/hype-proof; anybody following this thing
for more than a year needed more to make them want
to buy (I'm not saying it was buying-opportunity-proof;
those who believed bought when they could.) Then the
news came and the voices of darkness -"remember, sell
on news". Some of those listening may have hesitated
and the great unwashed, by default respond with -"...sell
on news." Thus, the paradox which proves the truth of
the other aphorism: "justice delayed is justice denied"

KRY may become rumour/hype-able again once the deal
is accepted as real. Then you'll see the kind of action
we expected/deserved once it is time to speculate on
real reserves, takeover, etc...

uponroof: another explanation was that PDG/VVV was selling into the rally. I don't know what's going on, but I am certainly not selling this stock here.

Good Luck


Post  42115  by  maximus295       Reply
pmcw - any thoughts on LU? Do you see any virtue to booking the loss and swapping LU for ADCT? tia

Post  42116  by  Arkural       Reply
OT-If interested, 9/11 Sequence of events follows. However many links, e.g. newspapers [...], will not work as well as many pics, obviously will not post. This is an excerpt from an overview from 1997 to Jan 2002 (107 pgs.) via a source.
(pardon any gramatical errors)


Points to keep in mind when you read the below:

The scrambling of fighter aircraft at the first sign of trouble is a routine phenomenon. Between 9/11 and June, 2002, jets were scrambled after aircraft 462 times. Obviously there was great nervousness after 9/11, but in the same time period the year before, fighters were still scrambled 67 times. [AP, 8/13/02]"Consider that an aircraft emergency exists... when: ... There is unexpected loss of radar contact and radio communications with any... aircraft." [FAA regulations]"If... you are in doubt that a situation constitutes an emergency or potential emergency, handle it as though it were an emergency." [FAA regulations]"Pilots are supposed to hit each fix with pinpoint accuracy. If a plane deviates by 15 degrees, or two miles from that course, the flight controllers will hit the panic button. They’ll call the plane, saying "American 11, you’re deviating from course." It’s considered a real emergency, like a police car screeching down a highway at 100 miles an hour. When golfer Payne Stewart’s incapacitated Learjet missed a turn at a fix, heading north instead of west to Texas, F-16 interceptors were quickly dispatched." [MSNBC, 9/12/01]"A NORAD spokesman says its fighters routinely intercept aircraft. When planes are intercepted, they typically are handled with a graduated response. The approaching fighter may rock its wingtips to attract the pilot's attention, or make a pass in front of the aircraft. Eventually, it can fire tracer rounds in the airplane's path, or, under certain circumstances, down it with a missile." [Boston Globe, 9/15/01] "In October, Gen. Eberhart told Congress that 'now it takes about one minute' from the time that the FAA senses something is amiss before it notifies NORAD. And around the same time, a NORAD spokesofficer told the Associated Press that the military can now scramble fighters 'within a matter of minutes to anywhere in the United States.'" [Slate, 1/16/02]The commander-in-chief of the Russian Air Force, Anatoli Kornukov said the day after 9/11: "Generally it is impossible to carry out an act of terror on the scenario which was used in the USA yesterday... As soon as something like that happens here, I am reported about that right away and in a minute we are all up." [Pravda, 9/12/01]Supposedly, on 9/11, there are only 4 fighters on ready status in the Northeastern US, and only 14 fighters on ready status in the entire US. [BBC, 8/29/02]

September 11 sequence:

Abdulaziz Alomari and Atta go through security in Portland at 5:53. These are the only released images of any hijackers in airportson 9/11.
(5:53 A.M.) Atta and Abdulaziz Alomari board a Colgan Air flight from Portland, Maine to Boston. They are filmed going through security in Portland - this is the only footage of the hijackers in airports on 9/11, and its not even one of the suicide flights. [Time, 9/24/01] [5:45, New York Daily News, 5/22/02, 5:53, Miami Herald, 9/22/01, the timestamp on the released photos shows 5:53] Two passengers later say Atta and Alomari board separately from each other, keep quiet and don't draw attention to themselves. [Chicago Sun-Times, 9/16/01](6:00 A.M.) Bush is preparing for his morning jog at the Colony Beach & Tennis Resort on Longboat Key, Florida, where he is staying. A van occupied by men of Middle Eastern descent pull up to the Colony stating they have a “poolside” interview with the president. They are turned away for not having an appointment. [Longboat Observer, 9/26/01] Was this an assassination attempt on the model of the one used on Afghani leader Ahmed Massoud two days earlier? [Time, 8/4/02](6:30 A.M.) Bush goes for a four-mile jog around the golf course at the Colony Beach and Tennis Resort. [Washington Post, 1/27/02] (6:45 A.M.) "Approximately two hours prior to the first attack", at least two workers at the instant messaging company Odigo receive messages warning of the WTC attack. This Israeli owned company has its headquarters two blocks from the WTC. [Washington Post, 9/28/01, Ha'aretz, 9/26/01]6:50 A.M. Atta and Abdulaziz Alomari's flight from Portland arrives on time at Boston's Logan Airport. [The book Inside 9-11: What Really Happened, 2/02](Before 7:30 A.M.) A man has an argument with 5 Middle Eastern men over a parking space in the parking lot of Boston's Logan Airport. Later in the day he reports the event, and the car is discovered to have been rented by Atta. Inside, police find a ramp pass, allowing access to restricted airport areas. [Miami Herald, 9/22/01] Was the argument a staged event to make sure the car would be found? Why would they leave such a pass in their car instead of using it to board the airplanes?(7:45 A.M.) Atta and Abdulaziz Alomari board Flight 11. Atta's bags contain airline uniforms and many other remarkable things, but strangely are checked through to his final destination, making them unusable for the attacks. The bags are not loaded onto the plane in time, and are later found by investigators. [Boston Globe, 9/18/01] But at least two other hijackers on Flight 11 are able to use stolen uniforms and IDs to board the plane. [Sunday Herald, 9/16/01] There is speculation that the bags were meant to be left behind and found. [New Yorker, 10/1/01] That would imply a confederate working in the airport who makes sure the bags are not loaded. (Before 7:59 A.M.) Atta in Flight 11 calls Al-Shehhi in Flight 175 as both planes sit on the runway. They confirm the plot is on. ["just before 8:00," Time, 8/4/02] How do investigators know what was said in this call even after the fact, and what does that say about their data collection abilities? Flight 11's intended and actual routes. [USA Today] Why did the plane go so far northwest (before turning south), for seemingly no reason?
7:59 A.M. Flight 11 takes off from Boston's Logan Airport, 14 minutes after scheduled departure. [7:45 (actually the scheduled time), Los Angeles Times, 9/20/01, 7:59, ABC News, 7/18/02, 7:59, CNN, 9/17/01, 7:59, Washington Post, 9/12/01, 8:00, Guardian, 10/17/01](8:00 A.M.) Bush sits down for his daily intelligence briefing. "The President's briefing appears to have included some reference to the heightened terrorist risk reported throughout the summer" but contained nothing serious enough to call National Security Adviser Rice. The briefing ends at about 8:20. [Telegraph, 12/16/01] 8:01 A.M. Flight 93 is delayed for 40 minutes on the runway in Newark. The Boston Globe credits this delay as a major reason why this was the only one of the 4 flights not to succeed in its mission. [Boston Globe, 11/23/01] [Newsweek, 9/22/01, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 10/28/01]8:13 A.M. The last routine communication between ground control and the pilots of Flight 11. The pilot responds when told to turn right. But almost immediately afterwards he fails to respond to a command to climb. [Boston Globe, 11/23/01, 8:13:31, New York Times, 10/16/01](8:14 A.M.) Flight 11 is hijacked around this time. One flight controller says the plane is hijacked over Gardner, Massachusetts, which is less than 50 miles from Boston. [Nashua Telegraph, 9/13/01] But does the hijacking involve all of the hijackers from the beginning, or only one hijacker who is already in the cockpit when the hijacking begins, with the rest joining in later? This explanation seems to fit the facts best, since the storming of the cockpit doesn't appear to happen until after 8:21, yet communication with ground control stops now. [Fifteen minutes after takeoff, Los Angeles Times, 9/20/01, "A few minutes into the flight," ABC News, 7/18/02] As the Boston Globe put it, "it appears that the hijackers' entry was surprising enough that the pilots did not have a chance to broadcast a traditional distress call," a button that could have taken seconds to press. [Boston Globe, 11/23/01] (After 8:14 A.M.) At some point after the hijacking begins, the pilot of Flight 11, John Ogonowski, activates the talk-back button, enabling Boston air traffic controllers to hear what is being said in the cockpit. A controller says, "The button was being pushed intermittently most of the way to New York." An article notes that "his ability to do so also indicates that he was in the driver's seat much of the way" to the WTC. Such transmissions continue until at least 8:38. [Christian Science Monitor, 9/13/01] Flight 175's intended and actual routes. [USA Today]
8:14 A.M. Flight 175 takes off from Boston's Logan Airport, 16 minutes after the scheduled departure time. [CNN, 9/17/01, Washington Post, 9/12/01, Guardian, 10/17/01](8:15 A.M.) Boston Air Traffic Control tries but fails to contact the pilots of Flight 11, even using emergency frequencies. [8:14, Guardian, 10/17/01] A Boston flight controller states of Flight 11, "He won't answer you. He's nordo roger thanks". Nordo means no radio. [8:15, New York Times, 10/16/01, "over the Hudson river", CNN, 9/17/01](8:20 A.M.) Flight 11 starts to veer dramatically off course around this time. [USA Today flight path image, on this page] Recall that if a plane goes two miles off course, that is an emergency situation. [MSNBC, 9/12/01] edited, from AP and Sydney Morning Herald
(8:20 A.M.) Boston flight control decides that Flight 11 has probably been hijacked, but they don't notify other air traffic control centers for another 5 minutes, and don't notify NORAD for about another 20 minutes. ["about 8:20," Newsday, 9/23/01, "about 8:20," New York Times, 9/15/01] ABC News will later say of this, "There doesn't seem to have been alarm bells going off, traffic controllers getting on with law enforcement or the military. There's a gap there that will have to be investigated." [ABC News, 9/14/01] Did the controllers really decide this now, or did they do it at 8:15, when they determined the flight was not responding and had turned off its transponder? Flight 77's intended and actual routes. [USA Today] Note the strange loop off course about halfway alongthe route to the west. This loop doesn't show onmost flight route maps.
8:20 A.M. Flight 77 departs Dulles International Airport near Washington, ten minutes after the scheduled departure time. [CNN, 9/17/01, Washington Post, 9/12/01, Guardian, 10/17/01](Before 8:21 A.M.) Four hijackers get up from their seats and stab or shoot passenger Daniel Lewin, who belongs to the Israel Defense Force Sayeret Matkal, a top-secret counter-terrorist unit. He was sitting in front of one of the three hijackers in business class. The could have happened even before 8:13, but logically seems to have come not much before 8:21. A very preliminary FAA memo says he was shot by Satam Al Suqami at 9:20 - clearly the time is a typo; perhaps 8:20 is meant? [ABC News, 7/18/02, UPI, 3/6/02, Washington Post, 3/2/02] Perhaps Lewin just happened to be there, and, with his past training, tried to be a hero and stop the hijack?(8:21 A.M.) Inside Flight 11, flight attendant Betty Ong calls Vanessa Minter at American Airlines reservations. Nydia Gonzales also listens in from 8:27. She talks for 25 minutes, until the plane crashes. The FBI says that only the first 4 minutes were recorded, but won't release the tape. Ong is apparently in the middle of the plane, but other flight attendants relay information about what is happening in the front. She says the hijackers had sprayed something in the first-class cabin to keep people out of the front of the plane. It burns her eyes and she is having trouble breathing. ["25 minute phone call until crash," ABC News, 7/18/02, Boston Globe, 11/23/01](8:21 A.M.) Flight attendant Amy Sweeney calls American Airlines ground manager Michael Woodward and speaks calmly to him for 25 minutes until the plane crashes. Supposedly the call was not recorded and Woodward took notes. Her first comment is "Listen, and listen to me very carefully. I'm on Flight 11. The airplane has been hijacked." She identifies 4 hijackers, and gives the seat numbers for them. Even before the plane crashes staff are able to determine the names, phone numbers, addresses, and credit card information for these 4 hijackers, including Atta and Abdulaziz Alomari. She reports that two flight attendants had been stabbed and a passenger had his throat slashed. She says the hijackers seem to be of Middle Eastern descent. ["over the next 25 minutes," ABC News, 7/18/02, AP, 10/5/01](After 8:21 A.M.) While flight attendant Amy Sweeney is relating details on the phone about the hijackers, the men are storming the front of the plane. She says they "just gained access to the cockpit." Its probable she called just after the storming begins, and it is during this struggle when they stab the two first-class flight attendants nearest to the cockpit, Barbara Arestegui and Karen Martin. Sweeney says they have a bomb with yellow wires attached. Meanwhile, the pilot apparently had been trying to alert authorities by surreptitiously clicking his radio transmission button. [ABC News, 7/18/02, Los Angeles Times, 9/20/01] Could it be that one of the hijackers was posing as a pilot passenger and thus had been able to in the cockpit as an observer, as happened on some of the hijacker's test run flights? If so, he would have begun the hijack around 8:13, but only received reinforcements and had Atta take over the flying of the plane around now. [Los Angeles Times, 9/20/01, AP, 10/5/01, ABC News, 7/18/02] This would explain why Sweeney reported four hijackers, not five. People on Flight 11. From left to right: flight attendants Amy Sweeney and Betty Ong, murdered passenger Daniel Lewin, and pilot John Ogonowski.
8:24 A.M. The pilot of Flight 11, John Ogonowski, activates the talk-back button, enabling Boston air traffic controllers hear a hijacker on Flight 11 say to the passengers: "We have some planes. Just stay quiet and you will be OK. We are returning to the airport." A controller responds, ''Who's trying to call me?'' The hijacker continues, "Everything will be OK. If you try to make any moves you'll endanger yourself and the airplane. Just stay quiet." [8:24:38, Guardian, 10/17/01, 8:24:38, New York Times, 10/16/01, 8:24, Boston Globe, 11/23/01, 8:28, New York Times, 9/12/01, before 8:28, Channel 4 News, 9/13/01] Immediately after hearing this voice, the controller "knew right then that he was working a hijack." [Village Voice, 9/13/01] The transponder beacon and radio have been off for 9 minutes, the flight has been off course for about 4 minutes and only now he knows its a hijack? Yet still, no one notifies NORAD for another 14 minutes?8:25 A.M. Boston air traffic controllers notify other air traffic control centers of the Flight 11 hijacking, but supposedly they don't notify the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) for another 13 minutes. [8:25:00, Guardian, 10/17/01] Doesn't it seem logical that NORAD was notified at this time along with everyone else, but they claim otherwise to cover up the lack of sending any fighters after the plane in response? Note that this means the controllers working Flights 77 and Flight 93 would have been aware of Flight 11's hijacking from this time. [Village Voice, 9/13/01] 8:28 A.M. Boston Air Traffic Control radar sees Flight 11 making an unplanned 100 degree turn to the south (they're already way off-course). Flight controllers say they never lost sight of the flight, though they could no longer determine altitude once the transponder was turned off. [Christian Science Monitor, 9/13/01] However, in other media reports, "Boston airport officials said they did not spot the plane's course until it had crashed, and said the control tower had no unusual communication with the pilots or any crew members." [Washington Post, 9/12/01] The lack of unusual communication is an incredible lie, as other prior entries show. Before this turn, the FAA had tagged Flight 11's radar dot for easy visibility, and at American Airlines headquarters at least, "All eyes watched as the plane headed south. On the screen, the plane showed a squiggly line after its turn near Albany, then it straightened." [Wall Street Journal, 10/15/01] Why such blatant lies? They expect people to believe they didn't know the flight was a hijacking until after it crashed? Why should the same people be expected to tell the truth on other incidents of the day?(Around 8:30 A.M.) Vice President Cheney and National Security Advisor Rice are at their offices in the White House. Defense Secretary Rumsfeld is at his office in the Pentagon, meeting with a delegation from Capitol Hill. Secretary of State Powell is eating breakfast with the new president of Peru, Alejandro Toledo, in Lima, Peru. CIA Director Tenet is at breakfast with his old friend and mentor, former senator David Boren (D), at the St. Regis Hotel, three blocks from the White House. Gen. Henry H. Shelton, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, is flying across the Atlantic on the way to Europe. Ashcroft is flying to Milwaukee. FBI Director Mueller is in his office at FBI headquarters on Pennsylvania Avenue. [Washington Post, 1/27/02](Between 8:30 - 8:48 A.M.) At some unknown point, Bush's motorcade leaves his hotel for Emma E. Booker Elementary School in Sarasota, Florida. [8:30, Washington Post, 1/27/02, 8:30, Telegraph, 12/16/01] Supposedly the trip takes 25 minutes, which seems slow for a 9 mile journey by a Presidential motorcade that usually travels fast and never stops at traffic lights. There was an early report that, as he is leaving his hotel, Bush is asked by a reporter "Do you know what's going on in New York?" He responds that he does, and he says he will have something about it later. [ABC News, 9/11/01] However, this report appears to be incorrect since Bush is unlikely to have left after 8:48 when news of the WTC attack first hit the news. Air National Guard troops at NORAD's Northeast Air Defense Sector try to locate hijacked aircraft. [Aviation Week and Space Technology, 6/3/02]
8.34 A.M. Air traffic controllers hear a hijacker on Flight 11 say to the passengers: "Nobody move, please, we are going back to the airport. Don't try to make any stupid moves." [8:33:59, Guardian, 10/17/01, 8:33:59, New York Times, 10/16/01](8:36 A.M.) Flight attendant Betty Ong on Flight 11 reports that the plane tilts all the way on one side and then becomes horizontal again. Flight attendant Amy Sweeney then reports on her phone that the plane has begun a rapid descent. ["About 15 minutes" after the calls began, ABC News, 7/18/02]8:37 A.M. Flight controllers ask the Flight 175 pilots to look for a lost American Airlines plane 10 miles to the south, they respond that they can see it. They are told to keep away from it. [8:37:08, Guardian, 10/17/01, 8:37, Boston Globe, 11/23/01, the incident is not included in New York Times flight controller transcript of New York Times, 10/16/01] (8:38 A.M.) Boston Air Traffic Control supposedly notifies NORAD that Flight 11 has been hijacked. This is 23 minutes after traffic control noticed the plane had its transponder beacon and radio turned off. [8:40, NORAD, 9/18/01, 8:38, CNN, 9/17/01, 8:38, Washington Post, 9/12/01] Such a delay in notification would be in strict violation of regulations. Doesn't it seem at least plausible that NORAD was notified long before this, but did absolutely nothing in response, and then fudged the official times to hide their criminal behavior?8:40 A.M. Maj. Daniel Nash (codenamed Nasty) and Lt. Col. Timothy Duffy (codenamed Duff) are the two F-15 pilots who would scramble after Flight 11 and then Flight 175. Nash says that at this time, a colleague at the Otis Air National Guard Base tells him that a flight out of Boston has been hijacked, and to be on alert. They put on their flight gear and get ready. [Cape Cod Times, 8/21/02] Duffy also says that they were told in advance about the hijacking by the FAA in Boston. They are already halfway to their jets when "battle stations" are sounded. Duffy briefs Nash on what he knows, and "About 4-5 minutes later, we got the scramble order and took off." [Aviation Week and Space Technology, 6/3/02] If this is true, why wasn't the order to scramble given now or even earlier, when the FAA called the pilots, instead of 6 minutes later? And even stranger, why did it take another 6 minutes (8:52) for the fighters to actually take off, if they had been given a heads up warning to get ready? Had the order to scramble been given now, there would have been plenty of time to reach New York before Flight 175. Flight 93's intended and actual routes. [USA Today]
8:42 A.M. Flight 93 takes off from Newark International Airport, bound for San Francisco. [8:41, Newsweek, 9/22/01, 8:42, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 10/28/01, 8:42, CNN, 9/17/01, 8:42, Guardian, 10/17/01]8:41 A.M. The pilots of Flight 175 tell ground control, "We figured we'd wait to go to your center. We heard a suspicious transmission on our departure out of Boston. Someone keyed the mike and said: 'Everyone stay in your seats.' It cut out." [Guardian, 10/17/01, 8:41:32, New York Times, 10/16/01] Alternate version, ''We heard a suspicious transmission on our departure from B-O-S [Boston's airport code]. Sounds like someone keyed the mike and said, 'Everyone, stay in your seats.''' [Boston Globe, 11/23/01]8:42 A.M. Flight 175 veers from its official course. ["Within 90 seconds" of the above item, Boston Globe, 11/23/01] (CNN had an early report that the deviation happened at 8:50, but that's probably when the plane, already off-course, made a complete u-turn north.) [CNN, 9/17/01]8:42 A.M. A flight controller says of Flight 175, "... looks like he's heading southbound but there's no transponder no nothing and no one's talking to him." [New York Times, 10/16/01] Brian Sweeney, right, and Peter Hanson, left, both called from Flight 175.
(Before 8:43 A.M.) At some unknown time period, businessman Peter Burton Hanson calls his father from the plane and says, "Oh, my God! They just stabbed the airline hostess. I think the airline is being hijacked." Despite being cut off twice, he managed to report how men armed with knives were stabbing flight attendants, apparently in an attempt to force crew to unlock the doors to the cockpit. He calls again and says good-bye just before the plane crashes. [Toronto Sun, 9/16/01, BBC, 9/13/01] This appears to have been one of only two passengers who called from this flight. He also had a lot of trouble staying connected - was this flight too high up to enable people to easily call out?8:43 A.M. NORAD is notified that Flight 175 has been hijacked. [8:43, NORAD, 9/18/01, 8:43, CNN, 9/17/01, 8:43, Washington Post, 9/12/01] Note that this means the controllers working Flights 77 and Flight 93 would have been aware of both Flight 175 and Flight 11's hijacking from this time.8:44 A.M. The pilot of US Airlines Flight 583 tells flight control, regarding Flight 175, "I just picked up an ELT [emergency locator transmitter] on 121.5 it was brief but it went off." The controller responds, "O.K. they said it's confirmed believe it or not as a thing were not sure yet..." [New York Times, 10/16/01] This appears to have been the only plane where the emergency signal was triggered by the pilot.8:44 A.M. Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld, is talking about terrorism in the Pentagon. "Let me tell ya," he says, "I've been around the block a few times. There will be another event." He then repeats it for emphasis, "There will be another event." [AP, 9/16/01, Rep. Cox Statement, 9/11/01] Note that supposedly he doesn't know of the hijackings in progress, and says this two minutes before the first WTC crash. F-15 pilot Maj. Daniel Nash. [Cape Cod Times, 8/21/02]
(8:45 A.M.) Just prior to the crash of Flight 11, flight attendant Amy Sweeney is asked on the phone if she can recognized where she is. "I see the water. I see the buildings. I see buildings," then after a pause, a quiet "Oh, my God!" Mere seconds later the line goes dead. Flight attendant Betty Ong ends her call repeating the phrase "Pray for us" over and over. Apparently there is quiet instead of screaming in the background. [ABC News, 7/18/02](8:46 A.M.) 2 F-15 fighters are ordered to scramble from Otis Air National Guard Base in Massachusetts to find Flight 11, approximately 190 miles from the known location of the plane and 188 miles from New York City. Fighters in nearer bases are not scrambled. This is 6-8 minutes after NORAD has been told the plane was hijacked, 29 minutes after losing contact with the plane. [8:39, Channel 4 News, 9/13/01, 8:46, NORAD, 9/18/01, 8:44, CNN, 9/17/01, 8:44, Washington Post, 9/15/01] Supposedly, the scramble order comes after only one phone call - the decision is made to act first and get clearances later. [Aviation Week and Space Technology, 6/3/02] So why did it take 6-8 minutes to issue the order? According to the two pilots, Maj. Daniel Nash and Lt. Col. Timothy Duffy, they are geared up and walking towards their planes when this alarm to scramble sounds. As soon as they strap in, the green light to launch goes on, and they're up even before their jets' radar kicks in. [Cape Cod Times, 8/21/02] Yet, supposedly, it takes 6 more minutes for them to launch.8:46 A.M. According to Robert Marr, commander of NORAD's Northeast Air Defense Sector (NEADS), NORAD is unable to find the location of Flight 11. Finally, someone sees a "green dot that's not identified. Almost as soon as it's discovered, it disappears. It's 8:46 a.m." At the time, "there are no other missing aircraft." But then, at 9:02, they see a second unidentified aircraft on a screen, which is Flight 175 crashing into the WTC. The whole time, NORAD staff "were constantly on the phone with the FAA, airlines and others, looking for clues. 'If we could get good last-known-positions and tail numbers, that would help the fighters pick out the right aircraft,'" says one staff member. [Aviation Week and Space Technology, 6/3/02] Recall this from a previous entry: Before a turn at 8:28, the FAA had tagged Flight 11's radar dot for easy visibility, and at American Airlines headquarters, "All eyes watched as the plane headed south. On the screen, the plane showed a squiggly line after its turn near Albany, then it straightened." [Wall Street Journal, 10/15/01] So American Airlines says Flight 11 was never lost, and this corresponds with other reports. For instance, "Controllers scrambled to direct other planes out of the way of both United 175 and American Airlines Flight 11", and several collisions were barely averted. [Washington Post, 9/17/01] The airlines would have no reason to lie about this, NORAD would have a very big reason to lie.(8:46 A.M.) Flight 77 from Washington goes severely off course. It heads due north for a while then flies due south and gets back on course. [see USA Today's Flight 77 flight path] It was off course by around 15 miles, and stayed off course for about 5 minutes. According to regulations a fighter should have scrambled to see what was going on, regardless of any excuses from the pilot.(After 8:46 A.M.) Shortly after hijacking Flight 77, the hijackers make an announcement to their captives, telling them to phone their families as they are "all going to die". They also told the passengers that they were going to hit the White House. [Sunday Herald, 9/16/01] Given this announcement, why are there almost no phone calls from this flight?(After 8:46 A.M.) "During the hour or so that American Airlines Flight 77 was under the control of hijackers, up to the moment it struck the west side of the Pentagon, military officials in a command center on the east side of the [Pentagon] were urgently talking to law enforcement and air traffic control officials about what to do." [New York Times, 9/15/01] Since the Pentagon was struck around 9:41, this means that shortly after the first signs of trouble, the military knew that Flight 77 was hijacked, even though, supposedly, NORAD is not notified until 9:24. Flight 11 hits the WTC North Towerat 8:46. [Gamma Press] Note thatfew images exist of this hit.
8:46 A.M. Flight 11 slams into the north tower, 1 World Trade Center. Approximately 2662 people are killed on the ground between this crash and the crash of Flight 175. [AP, 8/19/02] [ 8:45, CNN, 9/12/01, 8:45, New York Times, 9/12/01, 8:46, CNN, 9/17/01, 8:46, NORAD, 9/18/01, 8:46, Washington Post, 9/12/01, 8:47:00, Guardian, 10/17/01, 8:48, MSNBC, 9/22/01, 8:46:26, seismic records]8:46 A.M. Air Force General and

Post  42117  by  nvrgivup       Reply
uponroof: Re: JPMC
The part of the announcement that I find interesting is this:

Total trading revenues at the investment bank also were about $100 million for the first two months of the quarter, compared with $1.1 billion for the second quarter. Part of losses came from trades the bank does for its own books.

"We had wrong positions in difficult markets," J.P. Morgan Chase Chief Financial Officer Dina Dublon told analysts. "We lost money across our dealer book. We also had a loss in our proprietary trading desk."

Do you think JPMC took losses on gold that they shorted? Or are they still holding short positions in gold?

On another subject, I bought some KRY last week. I've been watching it a while and appreciate your excellent news about the company. I don't know if you read the KRY board on yahoo. Anyway, here is a bullish post that might make you smile:

Regards, nvrgivup

Post  42118  by  Arkural       Reply

(After 9:03 A.M.) Shortly after the second WTC crash, calls from fighter units start "pouring into NORAD and sector operations centers, asking, 'What can we do to help?' At Syracuse, New York, an ANG commander [tells Northeast Air Defense Sector (NEADS) commander Robert] Marr, 'Give me 10 min. and I can give you hot guns. Give me 30 min. and I'll have heat-seeker [missiles]. Give me an hour and I can give you slammers [Amraams].'" Marr replies, "I want it all." [Aviation Week and Space Technology, 6/3/02] Yet supposedly, the first fighters don't take off from Syracuse until 10:44 - over an hour and a half later. These are supposedly the first fighters scrambled from the ground aside from three at Langley, two at Otis, and two fighters that took off from Toledo at 10:16. [Toledo Blade, 12/9/01] What happened to all these volunteer fighters? Armed fighters could have been in the air from Syracuse by 9:20 or so, ye

Post  42119  by  Arkural       Reply
Cont'd (one more try)

(After 9:03 A.M.) Shortly after the second WTC crash, calls from fighter units start "pouring into NORAD and sector operations centers, asking, 'What can we do to help?' At Syracuse, New York, an ANG commander [tells Northeast Air Defense Sector (NEADS) commander Robert] Marr, 'Give me 10 min. and I can give you hot guns. Give me 30 min. and I'll have heat-seeker [missiles]. Give me an hour and I can give you slammers [Amraams].'" Marr replies, "I want it all." [Aviation Week and Space Technology, 6/3/02] Yet supposedly, the first fighters don't take off from Syracuse until 10:44 - over an hour and a half later. These are supposedly the first fighters scrambled from the ground aside from three at Langley, two at Otis, and two fighters that took off from Toledo at 10:16. [Toledo Blade, 12/9/01] What happened to all these volunteer fighters? Armed fighters could have been in the air from Syracuse by 9:20 or so, ye

Post  42120  by  Arkural       Reply
Ahem, very last attempt.

9:05 A.M. Bush is still reading to 18 Booker Elementary School second-graders a story about a girl's pet goat. His chief of staff Andrew Card, whispers into his ear, "A second plane has hit the World Trade Center. America is under attack." [Telegraph, 12/16/01] He says nothing in response, but continues reading the goat story after a brief pause. Then, in an event noticeable in its absence, as one newspaper put it, "for some reason, Secret Service agents [do] not bustle him away." [Globe and Mail, 9/12/01] At some point shortly after, reporters ask him if he is aware of the two crashes and explosions. He nods and says he will talk about the situation later. [CNN, 9/12/01] Bush continues to read about goats for the next 20 minutes or so. The reason given is that they didn't want to scare the children.9:06 A.M. All air traffic facilities nationwide are notified that the Flight 11 crash in the WTC was probably a hijacking. [Newsday, 9/23/01]9:09 A.M. Supposedly, NORAD orders F-16's at Langley Air Force Base, Virginia, on battle stations alert. Yet the order to scramble won't come till 9:27 or so, and they won't take off until 9:30. Around this time, the FAA command center reports 11 aircraft either not in communication with FAA facilities, or flying unexpected routes. [Aviation Week and Space Technology, 6/3/02] So why aren't planes scrambled immediately, at 9:09 or even before, to find out what's going on? One of the pilots who actually took off from Langley says the battle stations alert isn't sounded until 9:24. [The book Among the Heroes, 8/02, p. 64-65]9:15 A.M. American Airlines orders no new takeoffs in the US, United Airlines follows suit 5 minutes later.[Wall Street Journal, 10/15/01]9:16 A.M. The FAA informs NORAD that Flight 93 may have been hijacked. No fighters are scrambled in specific response, now or later (there is the possibility some fighters sent after Flight 77 later headed towards Flight 93). Although this is what CNN learned from NORAD, its not clear why NORAD claims it was hijacked at this time (NORAD's own timeline inexplicably fails to say when the FAA told them about the hijack, the only flight they fail to provide this data for). [CNN, 9/17/01 , NORAD, 9/18/01] However, there may be one explanation: Fox News TV reported that "Investigators believe that on at least one flight, one of the hijackers was already inside the cockpit before takeoff." Cockpit voice recordings indicate that Flight 93's pilots believed their guest was a colleague "and was thereby extended the typical airline courtesy of allowing any pilot from any airline to join a flight by sitting in the jumpseat, the folded over extra seat located inside the cockpit." [NewsMax, 9/25/01] Note that all witnesses later report seeing only 3 hijackers, not 4. So perhaps one hijacker tenuously held control of the cockpit as the original pilots still flew it, while waiting for reinforcements? Could this have happened before 9:01, when Flight 93 got a warning to beware of cockpit intrusions? Note that the crash of Flight 77 is still 25 minutes away. F-16 fighters from the far off Langley Air Force Base could have reached Washington in 6 minutes if they traveled at 1300 mph (maximum speed for an F-16 is 1500 mph). Even if the fighters were traveling slower and it took some minutes to get the plane off the ground, they still could easily have made it to Washington in those 25 minutes and prevented the Flight 77 crash.9:17 A.M. The FAA shuts down all New York City area airports. [CNN, 9/12/01, New York Times, 9/12/01]9:21 A.M. The New York City Port Authority closes all bridges and tunnels in New York City. [MSNBC, 9/22/01, CNN, 9/12/01, New York Times, 9/12/01] 9:24 A.M. The FAA notifies NORAD that Flight 77 "may" have been hijacked and appears to be headed towards Washington. [9:24, NORAD, 9/18/01, 9:25, CNN, 9/17/01, 9:25, Washington Post, 9/12/01, 9:25, Guardian, 10/17/01] This notification is 34 MINUTES after flight control lost contact with the plane and well after two planes have crashed, and even then the FAA only says "may"? Is such a long delay believable, or has that information been doctored to cover the lack of any scrambling of fighters? Additionally, with the exception of Vice President Cheney and possibility a few others, no one is evacuated in Washington until after the Pentagon crash. A Pentagon spokesman says, "The Pentagon was simply not aware that this aircraft was coming our way." Even Defense Secretary Rumsfeld and his top aides in the Pentagon remain unaware of any danger up to the moment of impact 17 minutes later. [Newsday, 9/23/01] Yet since at least the Flight 11 crash, "military officials in a command center [the National Military Command Center] on the east side of the [Pentagon] were urgently talking to law enforcement and air traffic control officials about what to do." [New York Times, 9/15/01] Is it believable that everyone in the Pentagon outside of that command center, even the Secretary of Defense, would remain uniformed?9:24 A.M. A fighter pilot codenamed Honey who flew one of the F-16's from Langley offers a different story than the official one. He claims that at 9:24 a battle stations alert sounds, and two other pilots are given the order to climb into their F-16's and await further instructions. Then, Honey, who is the supervisor, goes and talks to the two other pilots. Then, "five or ten minutes later," a person from NORAD calls, and Honey speaks to him at the nearby administrative office. He is told that all three of them are ordered to scramble. Then, Honey goes to his living quarters, grabs his flight gear, puts it on, runs to his plane and takes off. Its hard to know exactly how long all of this took, but clearly his recollection doesn't jibe with the official timeline, that NORAD ordered the fighters scrambled at 9:27 and they took off at 9:30. [The book Among the Heroes, 8/02, p. 64-65] Is NORAD fudging the numbers to hide their inexplicable behavior?(9:25 A.M.) The Flight 93 pilots check in with Cleveland air traffic control, uttering "good morning." [Newsweek, 11/25/01](9:26 A.M.) New takeoffs of airplanes in the US are banned. [9:26, Aviation Week and Space Technology, 6/3/02, 9:26, Newsday, 9/23/01, 9:49, Washington Post, 9/12/01](Before 9:27 A.M.) On Flight 93, at least three of the hijackers stand up and put red bandanas around their heads. Two of them force their way into the cockpit. One takes the loudspeaker microphone, apparently unaware it could also be heard by air traffic controllers, and announces that someone has a bomb onboard and the flight is returning to the airport. He tells them he is the pilot, but speaks with an accent. ["the best estimation is about 40 minutes into the flight" (9:22), Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 10/29/01, "about 40 minutes into its flight," Boston Globe, 11/23/01, "about 9:28," The book Among the Heroes, 8/02, p. 208](9:27 A.M.) Tom Burnett calls his wife Deena and says, "I'm on United Flight 93 from Newark to San Francisco. The plane has been hijacked. We are in the air. They've already knifed a guy. There is a bomb on board. Call the FBI." Deena connects to emergency 911. [9:27, "she scribbled down what Tom told her and noted the time," The book Among the Heroes, 8/02, p. 107, ABC News, 9/12/01, "within minutes" of 9:28, MSNBC, 7/30/02, "She recalls it was around 6:20 a.m. -- 9:20 Eastern time," Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 10/28/01, "shortly after" Jeremy Glick's call, Toronto Sun, 9/16/01] His wife Deena wonders if the call might have been before the cockpit was taken over, because he spoke quickly and quietly as if he was being watched. He also had a headset like phone operators use, so he could have made the call unnoticed. Note that original versions of this conversation appear to have been censored. The most recent account has the phone call ending with, "We are in the air. The plane has been hijacked. They already knifed a guy. One of them has a gun. They're saying there is a bomb onboard. Please call the authorities." [The book Among the Heroes, 8/02, p. 107] The major difference from earlier accounts of course is the mention of a gun. The call wasn't recorded, but Deena's call immediately afterwards to 911 was, and she states on that, "They just knifed a passenger and there are guns on the plane." [The book Among the Heroes, 8/02, p. 108] This is the first of over 30 additional phone calls by passengers inside the plane. [MSNBC, 7/30/02](9:27 A.M.) NORAD orders 3 F-16 fighters scrambled from Langley Air Force Base in Virginia to intercept Flight 77. Langley is 129 miles from Washington. Ready aircraft at Andrews Air Force Base, 15 miles away, are not scrambled. [Newsday, 9/23/01] [9:24, NORAD, 9/18/01, 9:27, CNN, 9/17/01, 9:25, Washington Post, 9/12/01, 9:35, CNN, 9/17/01, 9:35, Washington Post, 9/15/01] Note that according to the official NORAD timeline, they ordered the F-16's scrambled the same minute they were told about the hijacking. A rare example of competence. But earlier, according to their own timeline, they waited 6 minutes before scrambling fighters after Flight 11. Why? Flight 77 had supposedly been missing from the radar screen since 8:56. Why wait 31 minutes to send a plane and find out where it is?(9:28 A.M.) On Flight 93, "there are the first audible signs of problems, in background cockpit noise." Air traffic controllers hear the sound of screaming and scuffling over an open mike. They then hear hijackers speaking in Arabic to each other. Yet this is at least 12 minutes after at least one the hijacker has taken over the cockpit and done something to cause the FAA to notify NORAD of a hijacking. [9:28, Guardian, 10/17/01, after 9:25, Newsweek, 11/25/01](9:28 A.M.??) On Flight 93, air traffic controllers hear someone say, "Get out of here," through an open microphone in the cockpit. The mike goes off and comes back on. Scuffling is heard in the background. Somebody again yells, "Get out of here!" Eventually there are a total of 4 murky radio transmissions, which include lots of non-English phrases, ''bomb on board' twice, ''our demands'' and ''keep quiet.'' ["probably around the time the plane was taken over," Boston Globe, 11/23/01, 9:28, MSNBC, 7/30/02, 9:30, Observer, 12/2/01, 9:32: "90 minutes into the flight," Toronto Sun, 9/16/01] Newsweek repeats possibly the same story, but suggests it happened at 9:58: "The last transmission from the cockpit records someone, probably a hijacker, screaming 'Get out of here. Get out of here.' Then grunting, screaming and scuffling. Then silence." [Newsweek, 9/22/01](9:27 A.M.) Just prior to his first public comments at about 9:29, Bush speaks with Vice President Cheney and watches a recording of events at the WTC. [Telegraph, 12/16/01] This would have been a good time to discuss if hijacked planes should be shot down or not, but apparently that conversation doesn't happen until after 9:55. Presumably this is after Bush's importantgoat story and before his speech at 9:30.
(9:29 A.M.) Bush leaves the elementary school classroom, and as he leaves, makes a few brief comments to reporters, calling the crashes "an apparent terrorist attack on our country." The talk occurs at exactly the time and place his publicly announced advance schedule planned they would - making Bush a possible terrorist target. [9:24, MSNBC, 9/22/01, 9:28, Washington Post, 9/12/01, 9:30, CNN, 9/12/01, 9:30, New York Times, 9/12/01, speech begins at 9:29:55 according to an ABC timing device, advanced schedule 9:30 in Federal News Service, 9/10/01](9:30 A.M.) Bush speaks privately with National Security Adviser Rice, who briefs him. Its unclear if this was just before or just after his first public comments. [September 11 News timeline] Why does Bush not okay the shooting down of passenger aircraft at this time? Even had fighters caught up to Flight 77 when it hit the Pentagon 11 minutes later, they still wouldn't have had permission to shoot it down. Its known he didn't okay any shooting down until after 9:55.9:30 A.M. United begins landing all of its flights inside the US. American Airlines follows suit 5 minutes later. [Wall Street Journal, 10/15/01] An F-16
9:30 A.M. The F-16's scrambled towards Flight 77 get airborne. [9:30, NORAD, 9/18/01, 9:35, Washington Post, 9/12/01] If the NORAD departure time is correct, the F-16's would have to travel slightly over 700 mph to reach Washington before Flight 77 does. The maximum speed of an F-16 is 1500 mph. [AP, 6/16/00] Even at traveling 1300 mph, these planes could have reached Washington in 6 minutes - well before any claim of when Flight 77 crashed. Yet they obviously don't.(9:30 A.M.) Around this general time, the hijackers on Flight 77 tell the passengers that the plane is going to hit the White House in a few minutes. [Sunday Herald, 9/16/01](After 9:31 A.M.) A few minutes after 9:31, a hijacker on board Flight 93 can be heard on the cockpit voice recording ordering a woman to sit down. A woman, presumably a flight attendant, implores, "Don't, don't." She pleads, "Please, I don't want to die." Patrick Welsh, the husband of flight attendant Debby Welsh, is later told that a flight attendant was stabbed early in the takeover, and it is strongly implied it was her wife. She was a first class attendant, and he says, "knowing Debby," she would have resisted. [The book Among the Heroes, 8/02, p. 207]9:32 A.M. The New York Stock Exchange closed. [MSNBC, 9/22/01](9:32 A.M.) Secret Service agents burst into Vice President Cheney's White House office. They carry him under his arms - nearly lifting him off the ground - and propel him down the steps into the White House basement and through a long tunnel towards an underground bunker. [Washington Post, 1/27/02] Why didn't this happen to Bush? Was he meant to remain visibly out of the loop? Another article claims this happened to Cheney at 9:05, exactly when Bush was being told of the second WTC hit. [Telegraph, 12/16/01] If that's true, the fact that Cheney gets moved to safety and Bush doesn't is even stranger. 9:32 A.M. Flight 77 crosses over the Capital Beltway at least 7000 feet up, and starts making a sharp turn, rapidly dropping towards the Pentagon. It drops down nearly to surface level and so is lost to radar. [Guardian, 10/17/01, no time marker, Boston Globe, 11/23/01]9:33 A.M. According to the New York Times, Flight 77 was lost at 8:56 when it turned off its transponder, and stayed lost until now. Washington air traffic control sees a fast moving blip on their radar at this time and sends a warning to Dulles Airport in Washington. [New York Times, 10/16/01] Is it conceivable that an airplane could be lost inside US air space for 37 minutes? One doesn't need a transponder signal to get a radar signal! If this is true, that why did the FAA warn that the plane was headed towards Washington at 9:24? (9:34 A.M.) The Cleveland air traffic control listening to the pilot on Flight 93 hear screams for about a minute, then a voice say "bomb on board." A hijacker says in broken English that they are returning to the airport. [9:34, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 10/28/01, 9:35, Newsweek, 9/22/01] 9:34 A.M. Tom Burnett calls his wife Deena a second time. He says "They're in the cockpit." He has checked the pulse of the man who was knifed (later identified as Mark Rothenberg sitting next to him in seat 5B) and determined he is dead. She tells him about the hits on the WTC. He responds, "Oh my God, its a suicide mission." As they continue to talk, he tells her the plane has turned back. By this time, Deena is in constant communication with the FBI and others, and a policeman is at her house. ["again, Deena noted the time," The book Among the Heroes, 8/02, p. 110]9:35 A.M. Flight 93 climbs without authorization. [Guardian, 10/17/01](9:36 A.M.) Flight 93 files a new flight plan with a final destination of Washington, reverses course and heads towards Washington. [9:35, "turned around near Cleveland," Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 10/28/01, "turns off course," 9:36:01, Guardian, 10/17/01, 9:36, "made an ominous turn," The book Among the Heroes, 8/02, p. 219] The new flight plan schedules the plane to arrive in Washington at 10:28. [The book Among the Heroes, 8/02, p. 78]9.36 A.M. The national airport instructs a military C-130 (Golfer 06) that has just departed Andrews air force base to intercept Flight 77 and identify it. [Guardian, 10/17/01, New York Times, 10/16/01](9:37 A.M.) Jeremy Glick calls his wife Lyz from Flight 93. He describes the hijackers as Middle Eastern, Iranian looking. They put on red headbands and the three of them stood up and yelled and ran into the cockpit. He was sitting in the front of the coach section, but was sent to the back with most of the passengers. They claimed to have a bomb, which looked like a box with something red around it. He says the plane has turned around. Family members immediately call emergency 911 on another line. New York state police get patched in midway through the call. Glick finds out about the WTC towers. Two others onboard also learn about the WTC at about this time. Glick's phone remains connected until the very end of the flight. [9:37, the book Among the Heroes, 8/02, p. 143, MSNBC, 7/30/02, "just before 9:30," Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 10/28/01, no time explanation, Toronto Sun, 9/16/01]9:39 A.M. The Boston Globe reports the following inadvertent radio transmission which probably happened now: ''Hi, this is the captain. We'd like you all to remain seated. There is a bomb on board. And we are going to turn back to the airport. And they had our demands, so please remain quiet.''[9:39, The book Among the Heroes, 8/02, p. 209, no time marker, Boston Globe, 11/23/01]9:40 A.M. The FAA orders the entire nationwide air traffic system shut down. All flights at US airports are stopped. [9:40, MSNBC, 9/22/01, 9:40, CNN, 9/12/01, 9:40, New York Times, 9/12/01, 9:49, Washington Post, 9/12/01]9:40 A.M. The transponder signal from Flight 93 ceases and radar contact is lost. [CNN, 9/17/01] However, the plane could still be tracked, and was tracked at least at United headquarters right until shortly before final crash (the exact time is not mentioned). However, altitude could no longer be determined. The plane's speed begins to vary wildly, moving between 600 and 400 mph before eventually settling around 400 mph. [The book Among the Heroes, 8/02, p. 77, 214]9:41 A.M. From Flight 93, Marion Birtton calls a friend. She tells him two people have been killed and the plane has been turned around. [Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 10/28/01](9:41 A.M.) Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld is sitting in the Pentagon, but supposedly completely oblivious of the approaching Flight 77. As he watches TV coverage of WTC, he says, "Believe me, this isn't over yet. There's going to be another attack, and it could be us." Supposedly, "moments later, the plane hit." [Telegraph, 12/16/01] Rumsfeld is apparently psychic, because two minutes before the first WTC crash and supposedly completely ignorant of the hijackings, he predicted a terrorist attack upon the US (see 8:44 A.M.). Which is more believable - that Rumsfeld twice has uncanny predictive luck or ability on this day, or that he knew what was going to happen?(9:41 A.M.) As fireman Alan Wallace is walking in front of the Pentagon, he looks up and sees a jet coming straight at him. It is about 25 feet off the ground, no landing wheels visible, a few hundred yards away and closing fast. He runs about 30 feet and dives under a nearby van. ["about 9:40," Washington Post, 9/21/01] The Pentagon explosion.
9:41 A.M. Flight 77 crashes into the Pentagon. The section of the Pentagon hit consists mainly of newly renovated, unoccupied offices. Approximately 125 are later determined killed or missing. The surface to air missiles presumably surrounding the Pentagon are not fired in defense. Fighters are supposedly still 105 miles or 12 minutes away. [Newsday, 9/23/01, NORAD, 9/18/01] [9:37, NORAD, 9/18/01, 9:37, Washington Post, 9/12/01, 9:38, CNN, 9/17/01, 9:38, Guardian, 10/17/01, 9:39, Washington Post, 1/27/02, 9:43, CNN, 9/12/01, 9:43, MSNBC, 9/22/01, 9:43, New York Times, 9/12/01, 9:45, Boston Globe, 11/23/01, 9:41:30 according to timing devices on ABC, CBS and CNN TV news footage] NORAD states the fighters took off from Langley at 9:30, 129 miles away, yet when Flight 77 crashes they are still 105 miles away. [NORAD, 9/18/01] So that means they must have been flying at an average of about 130 mph! Even if one uses the NORAD crash time of 9:37 (which we know is untrue), that still averages to only about 205 mph! This photo was taken mere moments after the Pentagon crash. [SIPA]
9:41 A.M. The F-16 pilot codenamed Honey later offers a different explanation of where the F-16's are when Flight 77 crashes into the Pentagon. He says they are flying towards New York, when they see a black column of smoke coming from Washington, about 30 or 40 miles to the west. He is then asked over the radio by the North East Air Defense Sector of NORAD if he can confirm the Pentagon is burning. He confirms it. The F-16's are then ordered to set up a defensive perimeter above Washington. [The book Among the Heroes, 8/02, p. 76] This contradicts the official NORAD claim that the F-16's were still 105 miles away when the Pentagon was hit. [NORAD, 9/18/01] If his account is true, it shows that the F-16's would have been over Washington in time to shoot down Flight 77 if they had been given orders to fly to Washington, and not to New York, which was already defended by 2 F-15's! (additionally, subtract 8-10 miles (Sidewinder missile) or 12-20 miles (Sparrow missile) from the flight distance required for the fighters [Slate, 1/16/02]) Well before these F-16's took off, NORAD already knew there was a threat to Washington and that New York was being defended by F-15's, and yet they were ordered to New York and Washington was left undefended? At 9:36, a C-130, a slow and large transport plane, was ordered to intercept and identify Flight 77, and these F-16's were not? If Honey's account is true, and the F-16's took off at, say, 9:34, they would have been averaging a speed of about 1100 mph up to the Pentagon crash, much more reasonable than the crazy speeds of 200 mph and the like if one follows the NORAD story. It would also explain eyewitness claims of fighters over Washington only a couple of minutes after the Pentagon crash, not at 9:56 when they supposedly arrived. At 1100 mph, it would have taken about 3 minutes for Honey to reach Washington from where he says he was.(9:41 A.M.) As Flight 93 crashes into the Pentagon, Bush and his entourage are at the Sarasota airport, getting ready to board Air Force One. [Telegraph, 12/16/01]9:42 A.M. From Flight 93 Mark Bingham calls his mother and says, "I'm on a flight from Newark to San Francisco and there are three guys who have taken over the plane and they say they have a bomb." [9:42, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 10/28/01] In an alternate version, he says, "I'm in the air, I'm calling you on the Airphone. I'm calling you from the plane. We've been taken over. There are three men that say they have a bomb." ["just before dawn in San Francisco," Toronto Sun, 9/16/01, 9:42, Boston Globe, 11/23/01](After 9:44 A.M.) According to F-16 pilot Honey's account, at some point after the F-16's had set up a defensive perimeter over Washington, the lead pilot received a garbled message about Flight 93 that wasn't heard by the other two pilots. "The message seemed to convey that the White House was an important assent to protect." Honey said he was later told the message was "Something like, 'Be aware of where it is, and it could be a target.''' The other pilot, codenamed Lou, says the unnamed lead pilot told him "I think the Secret Service told me this." [The book Among the Heroes, 8/02, p. 76] Both Lou and Honey state they were never given orders to shoot down any plane. [The book Among the Heroes, 8/02, p. 222] How could these pilots not be sure of their instructions to protect the White House? Wouldn't the order have been confirmed and shared with the two other pilots? What happened to the dramatic "I want you to protect the White House at all costs" order supposedly given to all the pilots? Why weren't any of them actually ordered to fly towards this mysterious target?9:45 A.M. Tom Burnett calls his wife Deena for the third time. She tells him about the crash into the Pentagon. Tom speaks about the bomb he'd mentioned earlier, saying, "I don't think they have one. I think they're just telling us that." He says the hijackers are talking about crashing the plane into the ground. "We have to do something." He says that he and others are making a plan. "A group of us." [The book Among the Heroes, 8/02, p. 111] So there would have been at least 19 minutes advance warning that a passenger takeover was likely, if the contents of these phone calls were being passed on to the right authorities. Even by his second call, the FBI was listening in. [Toronto Sun, 9/16/01] Since Burnett was sitting in the first class section in the front and Todd Beamer was sitting in the coach section in the back and the two sections were separated by a curtain, could there have been two independent plans by the passengers to take over the plane?9:45 A.M. After having some trouble with his phone, passenger Todd Beamer is able to speak to Verzion phone representative Lisa Jefferson, with the FBI listening in. He talks for about 15 minutes. Beamer says he has been herded to the back of the plane along with 9 other passengers and 5 flight attendants. A hijacker who says he has a bomb strapped to his body is guarding them. 27 passengers are being guarded by a hijacker in first class. One hijacker has gone into the cockpit. One passenger is dead (that leaves one passenger unaccounted for - presumably the man who made a call from the bathroom). The two pilots are apparently dead. [Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 9/16/01, Newsweek, 9/22/01, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 10/28/01] (A conflicting version [Boston Globe, 11/23/01] states that 27 were in the back, and that he saw 4 hijackers) 9:45 A.M. The White House begins evacuation. This is 21 minutes after the FAA has warned a hijacked plane appears to be headed towards Washington. [9:43, New York Times, 9/12/01, 9:45, MSNBC, 9/22/01, 9:45, Washington Post, 1/27/02, 9:45, Telegraph, 12/16/01, 9:45, CNN, 9/12/01, 9:48, Washington Post, 9/12/01](9:46 A.M.) According to the Flight 93 voice recording, around this this one hijacker in the cockpit says to another, "Let the guys in now." A vague instruction is given to bring the pilot back in. Its not clear if this is a reference to an original pilot or a hijacker pilot. Investigators aren't sure if the original pilots were killed or allowed to live. ["about midway", through a 31 minute recording that starts at 9:31, The book Among the Heroes, 8/02, p. 208] Also by this time, "everyone" in the United Airlines crisis center "now knew that a flight attendant on board had called the mechanics desk to report that one hijacker had a bomb strapped on and another was holding a knife on the crew." [Wall Street Journal, 10/15/01] Perhaps the pilots were being kept alive, in case the hijackers faced a problem they couldn't handle? The presence of two hijackers in the cockpit talking to each other suggest that there were in fact 4 hijackers, and one was in the cockpit from before the hijacking began, since passengers only saw three, and two are known to have been guarding the passengers.(9:47 A.M.) On Flight 93, Jeremy Glick is still on the phone with his wife Lyz. He tells her that the passengers are taking a vote if they should try to take over the plane or not. [about the same time as a different phone call, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 10/28/01] He later says that all the men on the plane have voted to attack the hijackers. [no time marker, Toronto Sun, 9/16/01] When asked about weapons, he says they don't have guns, just knives. This appears to contradict an earlier mention of guns, but this may be the true account since no other calls mention guns, and the voice recorder doesn't record any gunshots. His wife Lyz got the impression from him that the hijacker standing nearby claiming to hold the bomb would be easy to overwhelm. [The book Among the Heroes, 8/02, p. 153-154] If the authorities hadn't learned they shouldn't shoot down the plane from Tom Burnett's call two minutes earlier, they should have learned it from this one.(9:56 A.M.) 3 F-16's scrambled from Langley at 9:30 reach the Pentagon. The planes, armed with heat-seeking, Sidewinde

Post  42121  by  uponroof       Reply
Anyone seen those 200 missing nukes?

How does one misplace 200 nukes? Should we accept this report as real?...or just a little something designed to spread invasionitis. more thing to watch for tommorrow if JPMC is indeed derivative deadly...POG will be hammered.

Post  42122  by  uponroof       Reply

Thanks for getting back to me.

JPMC: You are right, very interesting comments which I believe were carefully measured for public consumption. With all the rectal examinations going on these days this actually has a hint of the truth to it. Perhaps this is a set up for more carefully constructed disclosures in the coming days? Hummmm.

They're holding massive interest rate derivatives which were 'helped' to safe harbor through shorting gold. Buying all that 'safety' over the years has become extremely dangerous of late. What specifically is going on there beyond that is anyone's guess my friend.

KRY: Thanks for that post link. I certainly hope he's right but I must say KRY is not yet "one of the largest gold companies in the world". They went from 55th in global reserve holdings to 11th overnight. That is enough for now!

How they cultivate this groundbreaking partnership and meet production expectations will determine share value. All indications are they have a very nice arangement with VZ which should bring rising shares as time goes on.

The takeover possibility is very real as LC comes with PDG's drill results and a plan in place for immediate exploitation...just what the majors are looking for.

All in all I'd be very happy with 4-5 bucks by Christmas and 8-10 sometime late next year.

Good Luck


Post  42123  by  tinljhtkh       OT: Ark!
Post  42124  by  Decomposed       ot: In defense of Culmus...