well its called the "war on terror thread" epic V ...but its just a forum to racailly abuze muslims imho

What's this doing here? I'm all for open discussions but to single out one religion is going too far. How about adding Jews, Hindus ,Sikhs,Mormons,Presbyterians? While we're at it, what about homosexuals,ginger haired people,people who wear glasses?

I suggest we use this thread to get rid of our pent up discriminations, not tolerated by our politically correct society.

EDITED: By MoneyAM

We like to encourage freedom of speech here, but you must remember that this is primarily a financial bulletin board.

profitmaker - some of your comments could be taken as bad taste and I have edited the post accordingly.

Ian Taylor

Ian T
I was responding to the bad taste nature of the thread. My comments were addressed to Patel to show what could be the conclusion of any discussion under such a topic.

I agree this is a financial bulletin board. A pity you didn't edit(remove) the thread at the outset.

have you read the advfn war on terror thread?..if not read it then tell me i rong

Profitmaker:

Agree entirely with your comments, Patel appears to have got hold of the wrong end of the stick, so just remove the thread, it's got sod all to do with investing in any event.

Ian:

Pity you are not so prompt at answering emails as you are editing threads. Perhaps you may wish to answer my question vis-a-vis internal mailing?

Regards

PTH

has the war in iraq got anything to do with investing pth?

Yes, Patel, it certainly has. But I'm afraid that is not how you represented this thread when you started it. My comments were biased towards AM not you. End of story.

Regards

PTH

well i think advfn allowing the racial abuse of muslims on their bb has a lot to do with investing,,their shares will go down a lot if it gets out in the press

ptholden,

Please accept my apologies if I have missed your E mail - please can you forward it onto me as soon as possible and I will look into it right away.

Regards

Ian

Patel,

Apologies to you. I wasn't aware of 'War on terror' thread. I thought you were advocating abuse of Muslims on this thread. I know now thias was not your intention. Sorry.

Any thoughts on Islamic Bank of Britain? I hear it's coming to market soon.

Any thoughts on an Islamic state of Britain? lol.

the power of nightmares on bbc 2 is very good imo...the governmant induced state of fear is more relevant imo..apologee acepted profitmaker i proble didnt make the point clear..i was banned from advfn for posting pictures from the iraq prison abuse

ibb will do well imo

The Power of Nightmares
Wed 27 Oct, 9:00 pm - 10:00 pm 60mins

The Phantom Victory

Series exploring the idea that the threat of a terror network is a myth.

American Neoconservatives and radical Islamists come together to fight the Soviet Union in Afghanistan, and both believe that it is they who have defeated the Evil Empire and now have the power to transform the world. But both fail in their revolutions.

In response, the Neoconservatives invent a new fantasy enemy, Bill Clinton the depraved moral monster, to try and regain their power, while the Islamists descend into a desperate cycle of violence and terror to try and persuade the people to follow them.

Out of all this comes the seeds of the strange world of fantasy, deception, violence and fear in which we now live.

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article3308.htm

http://www.evolutionclan.com/pictures/pentagon.htm#Main


what really happenned at the pentagon

Ian T - I note that you're quick to condemn one poster, yet allow the pro-muslim/conspiracy theorists free speech.

Perhaps you could arbitrate all posters by the same rules.

Ian,

I have sent you an email reference this thread, I agree with FV.

Regards

PTH

President Bush has said that he would "accept" an "Islamic Iraq," according to AP.




If free and open Iraqi elections lead to the seating of a fundamentalist Islamic government, "I will be disappointed. But democracy is democracy," Bush said. "If thats what the people choose, thats what the people choose."


Given that Bush has ensconced the Christian right in many of his administration's policies, I suppose we should just check with Iyad Allawi as to whether "if free and open American elections lead to the seating of a fundamentalist Christian government," he would be willing to "accept" that.

Really, the president cannot help patronizing the Iraqis. A while ago he talked about them taking off their "training wheels," as though high-powered Iraqi physicists, lawyers and physicians were somehow reduced to little children just because the US has 138,000 troops in their country.

I think it can be fairly argued that the Bush "war on terror" has actually spread Islamic fundamentalism. (Bush coddling of Ariel Sharon's harsh policies in Palestine has also contributed).

Since Bush began acting aggressively in the region, the United Action Council of (often pro-Bin Laden!) fundamentalist parties in Pakistan has come to power by itself in the Northwest Frontier Province, in coalition in Baluchistan, and has 17% of the seats in parliament! Despite Pakistan's unwarranted reputation for "fundamentalism," in fact most Pakistanis are Sufis or traditionalists who dislike fundamentalism, and the latter parties seldom got more than 2-3% of seats in any election in which they ran. Until Bush came along.

In Iraq, a whole series of Muslim fundamentalist parties-- al-Da`wa, the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq, the Sadrists, the Salafis, and now al-Qaeda, have been unleashed by Bush. They seem likely to win any election held in Iraq, since the secularists remain disorganized.

In the parliamentary elections in Afghanistan now slated for spring 2005, the Taliban or the cousins of the Taliban are likely to be a major party, benefiting from the Pushtun vote.

We could go on (a similar story of new-found fundamentalist strength could be told for Indonesia, e.g.) The real legacy of Bush to the Muslim world will likely not be secular democracy, but the provocation of Muslim publics into voting for the Muslim fundamentalists on a scale never before seen in the region.

But then since Bush wants to subvert the separation of religion and state in the United States, with his theologically (!) driven stem cell policy and his hand-outs to cults like the Moonies, at least he is being consistent when it comes to his Middle East policy.

patel investor: re post #17

What really happened at the Pentagon was that American Airlines flight 77 from Boston, a Boeing 757, was crashed into it by hijackers.

This is a repost of mine from a similar thread in the Traders' Room. It's first hand.

OK, I have some information. I wouldn't normally post a piece of information like this, as it came in a personal email very recently from a long term (25 years) American friend who was involved in the immediate aftermath of 9/11.

This person I know visited both the crash site of Flight 93 and the WTC and was involved in documenting the grim recovery process.

I asked about the Pentagon "conspiracy". This was the response. Note NTSB= National Transportation Safety Board.

"This was strictly a military project. But the people I talked with that provided cell service to on-sight emergency workers, saw the carnage. The pictures I saw showed that landing was indeed not the main interest of these pilots. They bounced the airplane off the parking lot before hitting the Pentagon. We were originally slated to go to the Pentagon, but were cancelled while sitting on the C-130 in Dallas because there were only a few hundred reported fatalities instead of the 800 originally reported. I do have some pictures, but remember the only thing recoverd from the WTC were a few engines found in other buildings next to the WTC. When you burn at 2000+ degrees there is not much left to discover. Since this was restricted access the military did not allow any persons to access the sight for a longer period of time. But the NTSB people from our teams never questioned the fact that an Airplane was the cause. The Pentagon was not their initial target & there are documented cell phone conversations from passengers to family members on the ground. As I recall most of the plane was buried in the Pentagon, I don't think any of the plane was visible from the outside. The video NTSB showed us in NYC clearly showed parts of the plane imbedded in the Pentagon. I know at one point the News Media was fostering the idea that our military shot down Flight 93 & the Pentagon Flight, however, there was not enough time to scramble the military aircraft required to do this type of attack.

Do I think there is a conspiracy NO; but then again I think Timothy McVeigh was a domestic terrorist with no ties to Conspirator #3, who looked Middle Eastern.

By the way, almost everyone that was killed in WTC, had a Blackberry & Tag Hauer watch. Those were the most common items identified as being carried by the victims. At the WTC the largest item that was recovered was a face plate of a telephone. Everything else disintegrated. The largest body part on United Flight 93 was 3/4 of a foot. Aircraft full of fuel going 500+ mph do not leave much debris.

[When I get back from Florida. I'll see if I can find the photos of the Pentagon.]

One local military boy died in the Pentagon & I know the family has never questioned his death.

Article from Sept 12----
Law enforcement officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the plane that struck the Pentagon was an American Airlines jetliner that had taken off from Dulles International Airport on a scheduled flight to Los Angeles.

Witnesses described a commercial airplane crashing into the Pentagon, the world's largest office building.

"I saw the tail of a large airliner. ... It plowed right into the Pentagon," said an Associated Press Radio reporter. "There is billowing black smoke."

Gray smoke billowed from the five-sided structure as more than 20,000 civilians and military men and women who work in the building streamed into the surrounding car parks. They fled behind blue-and-white strobe lights and wailing sirens.