Gould 0738 wrote:


We got Udai and Kusai ratted out for $30mm. A few days' expense, even at a
reducd rate of a billion every 90 days.

Would $100 million rat out OBL? $200 million? $300 million, a US green card,
and a total plastic surgery makeover for the informant and his family? There's
a price that would buy OBL, and it's probably a lot cheaper than the course
we're on.....*if* our intention is to catch the criminal ******* at the head of
the organization that blew down the WTC etc.


Chuck, you assume that the people with the information, are as consumer,
and materially oriented as an American. Many of those people loath what
the american dollar stands for, and offering it as an incentive to "give
up" their comrades, will not have the same appeal. Offer them the 70
virgins and the all night party at Allah's, and then they might think
about it......

Dave

On 27 Aug 2003 01:12:19 GMT, (Gould 0738) wrote:

Gould - How long did it take to track down the Atlanta Olympics bomber? Even
then, we caught him by accident! Do you honestly think we were not looking?

John
On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD


Not the same thing at all, John. There was
a task force of probably a couple dozen guys trying to find the Atlanta
Olympics bomber. Yeah, they probably looked for him some everyday.

The difference here is that we don't have to first wonder who the culprit is.
We know who he is. We've narrowly missed him a couple of times. If we spent
half the manpower, money, and technology we dedicated to invading Iraq to
finding OBL, there isn't a rock on the planet where the guy could hide.

It's a question of priorities. What are we spending in Iraq, to protect
American citizens from terrorism? I've heard figures of about a billion a week-
but let's fudge the numbers all the way down to a billion a quarter and even
the most ardent Bush supporter would reluctantly admit that's way low.

We got Udai and Kusai ratted out for $30mm. A few days' expense, even at a
reducd rate of a billion every 90 days.

Would $100 million rat out OBL? $200 million? $300 million, a US green card,
and a total plastic surgery makeover for the informant and his family? There's
a price that would buy OBL, and it's probably a lot cheaper than the course
we're on.....*if* our intention is to catch the criminal ******* at the head of
the organization that blew down the WTC etc.

We knew for years who we were hunting in the Atlanta bombings. Your argument
lost again. I think you're wrong about the price that would buy Osama. How much
would it take for you to plant a nuclear device under the Space Needle?

John
On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD

Doug Kanter wrote:

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...


BTW, there have been "news" articles, from the typical propagandists,
who try to spin this blackout as yet another failure of the Bush
administration.

I'd love to see those articles. Got any?

You know how to use google, look them up. I'm not doing your homework
for you. Try using "Bush administration" "blackout" and "failure" as
keywords.

Dave

"Joe" wrote in message
news
Really? What exactly did she say?

http://www.thejewishpress.com/news_a...p?article=2751



" Limbacher notes that a year ago, “Clinton slammed a Bush administration
proposal to
allow utilities to upgrade their plants by relaxing a few of the more
punishing environmental
regulations. She warned of ‘dirtier air and rising temperatures’ that would
expose citizens ‘to
increased childhood asthma rates, higher sea levels and more acid rain and
mercury-tainted
fish.’”

Must be painful when a politician says something which is true, something
which makes it even more obvious that your president has a huge supply of
kneepads which he uses when servicing his campaign contributors. Your boy is
currently doing exactly what Ms. Clinton mentioned: dismantling clean air
regulations. The results are obvious. Example: Tupper Lake, in the
Adirondacks, where I vacation each year, now has mercury warnings for most
of its fish. President Nookular Boy couldn't give a damn.

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...
Doug Kanter wrote:

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...
Doug Kanter wrote:

Perhaps you missed the excellent Frontline (PBS) show about 8 months
ago, in
which they discussed how vulnerable our infrastructure is to
computer
attacks.

The same people who told us that the whole thing would shut down on
Jan
1st 2000 at 12:00 Am.


Same people? Which ones, Dave? Names, please. If a person says "I was
hired
to hack into Niagara Mohawk's system and I did it in 8 hours,
undetected",
and he says this while in front of a TV camera, sitting in a NYMO
facility
with the CEO next to him, please give us a Dave Hall reason to doubt
what
the guy is saying.

Talk is cheap. Besides, you do realize that that frontline show is
almost 10 years old now? I remember seeing something like that about
that far back. The guy siting there and saying that he came one
keystroke away from shutting the whole thing down. In those 10 years
since, don't you think the power companies have had time to boost their
defenses?

Sorry, Dave, but the Frontline show which was aired this past spring
mentioned events which occurred during the past couple of years, some after
9/11. Try again.



Please cleanse your response of any nonsense related to the "millennium
bug".

The point is that there are doomsayers all over the place, who feed on
the gullible and the naive. Just because someone says that they can do
something, does not mean that they actually can.

Our DOD (Dep't of Defense) is like the old Soviet regime in one way: It's
loathe to admit when something's gone wrong. In this case, they put a
spokesperson on TV to discuss the breach of security.



For viewers who just don't get it, they emphasized that there are
quite a few utilities whose products (water, electricity, gas) can
no
longer
be controlled quickly by manually turning valves or throwing
switches.
They
interviewed people whose job it was to purposely attack computer
systems.
They succeeded more often than they would've liked.

I've been hearing this for many years. I can't believe that these
utility companies have not invested in security systems (firewalls,
encryption, virus scanning etc.), to make the possibility less likely.
Also, some former "hackers" are now making tons of money consulting
security solutions to protect companies from other hackers.

"I can't believe..." - that's the key phrase in your response.

Based on a logical assumption that when presented with the facts, that
the companies responsible would not just ignore them, and would do
something about it

Anti-virus software publishers "do something" about every virus that comes
along. A week later, another one comes along. "Doing something" about other
types of security breaches does not necessarily prevent the next one,
something which is obvious to anyone who follows the news.




I am realistic in my opinion that in the years since this vulnerability
was initially exposed, that security has been increased, rendering the
likelihood all the more remote.


God will take care of it.

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...
Gould 0738 wrote:


We got Udai and Kusai ratted out for $30mm. A few days' expense, even at
a
reducd rate of a billion every 90 days.

Would $100 million rat out OBL? $200 million? $300 million, a US green
card,
and a total plastic surgery makeover for the informant and his family?
There's
a price that would buy OBL, and it's probably a lot cheaper than the
course
we're on.....*if* our intention is to catch the criminal ******* at the
head of
the organization that blew down the WTC etc.


Chuck, you assume that the people with the information, are as consumer,
and materially oriented as an American. Many of those people loath what
the american dollar stands for, and offering it as an incentive to "give
up" their comrades, will not have the same appeal. Offer them the 70
virgins and the all night party at Allah's, and then they might think
about it......

Dave

The burgeoning black market in the Middle East for Western goods suggests
that people over there are as materialistic as anyone else.

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...
Doug Kanter wrote:

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...


BTW, there have been "news" articles, from the typical propagandists,
who try to spin this blackout as yet another failure of the Bush
administration.

I'd love to see those articles. Got any?

You know how to use google, look them up. I'm not doing your homework
for you. Try using "Bush administration" "blackout" and "failure" as
keywords.

Dave


OK...I see the problem here. In between "blackout" and "Bush", there is path
which winds too much for you to understand. Fortunately, we can straighten
the path so you won't hyperventilate:

1) Proven fact: Pollution from coal-burning electric generating plants in
the Midwest blows East, and ends up in NY, PA and New England. Chemists know
this because they've inserted tracers into fuel supplies and found those
same tracers downwind.

2) Proven fact: Among other things, the particulates include things like
mercury, which ends up in our water.

3) Politicians and electric companies from states like Ohio have STOPPED
claiming that #1 and #2 are untrue, and have switched to saying that it's
prohibitively expensive to install equipment which would drastically reduce
emissions.

4) Bush and his EPA are bending to the wishes of the parties mentioned in
#3, and allowing them to expand generating capacity without using technology
which would minimize the problems mentioned in #1 and #2.

5) Elliot Spitzer, NY's attorney general, is preparing to take the offending
parties to court before more damage is done.

I say Bush is hindering the production of sufficient electricity. You will
say Spitzer is the problem. Take your pick.

Chuck, you assume that the people with the information, are as consumer,
and materially oriented as an American. Many of those people loath what
the american dollar stands for, and offering it as an incentive to "give
up" their comrades, will not have the same appeal. Offer them the 70
virgins and the all night party at Allah's, and then they might think
about it......

Dave

Well let's do the math he

$200 million. Subtact 25 million to purchase a "palace" in most any state in
the union. $175 million left. Pay 100 guys
$100k a year each to guard your sorry butt for 50 years, $125 million left.
Hire 70 women to service your every desire. You should probably find women
willing to live in a palace and put on an act once ever so often for what,
$200k a year apiece? I guess it would take about ten years to screw through the
rest of the money- at which time even Allah would have to admit the gals were
no longer virgins.

Gould 0738 wrote:

Even take 9-11 for example: the govt could have portrayed
those tragic events as the deranged act of a group of
criminal extremists,

So you are advocating that the government mislead us then? Hmm, imagine
what would happen if the left got wind that the Bush administration held
out "the truth" from us.

??????????????????????????????

It *WAS* the deranged act of a group of criminal ******* extremists, Dave. Not
an excuse to invade two countries (so far), and openly state that there are
more members of the "axis of evil" at risk from our actions in the "war on
terror".

But there ARE other members of whatever name you wish to apply to the
terrorists groups. The perps on 911 were not acting alone. While you can
cut off a plant by the branches, and it keeps growing back, until you
hit the roots of the evil, it will also keep coming back.




The ringleaders should be brought to justice covertly.

For what purpose other than "feel good" pride? You think the group will
fall apart when the leader is caught? As far as we know OBL is already
dead, and the group is still functioning.

So far, our overt acts
have failed to eliminate the top layer of the terrorist network that attacked
us in the US.

We have captured several of the "top dogs" in Al Qaeda. How many more do
we need to catch? And even when we do, there are still junior members
ready to step in. We have to stamp out the environment which creates
these people.

What's just a bit scary about your guy and his crew is the
espoused philosophy that we should now attack everybody who
might, in the future, do some harm to the United States (maybe). There's no
100% reliable way to know who these people are, but if we wipe out enough
people in various areas of the world maybe we can get them all. Maybe.

That's one hell of an exaggeration. It's not the way you portrayed it.
We have intelligence that tells our government (But not the propaganda
speculators) exactly who and where terrorists are likely to be hiding
out, and which governments either overtly or covertly support them. We
have a responsibility to stamp out the whole plant, or it will just grow
back.


We know this: we better not miss as many as 19.

I'm not sure what you mean by the "19" reference.


You can't have it both ways. If you believe that it's in the best
interest of this country to NOT know all the gory details, then you
can't complain when they do it.

Your logic just collapsed on itself.

No, it hasn't. You just misunderstood. I stated that If you believe that
it's in the best
interest of this country to NOT know all the gory details, then you
can't complain when they do hold back the information. And we know
that's the typical MO of the left, when they are constantly on the
attack, criticising the administration for not being "straight up" with
the people.



I have some very terrible news for you. The odds that you actually have any
clue about the actual "gory details" are close to zero.


The same goes for you, but that hasn't stopped you from speculating all
sorts of theories (not so coincidently critical of our administration's
motives) as to what has been happening and why. The whole "war for oil"
mindset.


All you or I know is what we read in the papers or (in your case) hear on talk
radio.

And you too evidently. You seem to know far too much about what is being
spewed out by the latest Limbaugh clone.

Every government, including this one, keeps important secrets from the press.

You are correct, and for good reason. Yet why do your bretheran on the
left constantly criticize our administration for this practice? Why do
these people feel that the public has the right to know everything? And
when they find hints of certain classified material, they right away
jump to the conclusion that the government is "up to no good"? (Of
course this depends on whether there's a republican in office)

International diplomacy is like a poker game- you might be likely to bluff but
it's unlikely you'll show your actual cards around the table while the bets are
going into the pot.

Except that we hold the winning hand.

Dave

Doug Kanter wrote:

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...


Which brings us back to the original statement, how would you "hunt"
down a criminal such as OBL or SH, when we have no legal right to enter
the country which harbors him? If the host country refuses to help us,
do we just turn around, or do we comitt an act of war by defying the
wishes of the host country? That was the whole premise for the campaign
against Afghanistan and Iraq. Remember, that aiding the terrorists was
akin to being an accessory to the "crime", and are therefore equally
culpable.


I just figured it out, Dave. I can't believe it took so long. You are
actually a skel who lives on the streets, and stumbles into an internet cafe
with panhandled coins to use their computer a couple of times a day. How
else could we explain what you just said, other than to blame intravenous
narcotics use and a diet of Thunderbird?

"no legal right to enter the country which harbors him" ?????

So: If we sent spies to hunt down and kill OBL, that would be wrong because
we might not have the legal right to enter countries without their
permission. But, if we send enough people in military uniforms, it's a
different story? A patriotic endeavor?


Sigh. It figures that you just don't get it. Try reading it again a
little slower this time.

The point, if you still don't get it, is that if we want to play the
good guy, and respect the sovereignty of all nations, then we have no
right to cross the borders of any country which hides terrorist camps,
without their cooperation. Last time I looked, most are not
cooperating. So what's the difference if we send in covert assasins or a
full blown military garrison?

Dave