This is nothing new, and dates back to about the 1940s when we left the gold standard. Read up on Greenberg, he is a firm Objectivist. He wanted to bring us back to the gold standard, however the false economic growth of the 90s made it impossible.

I would venture to say the case cited in the article is missing a few facts and giving a false pretense that it is simply nullifying all bank loans. I am sure there is more to that story otherwise every would have already gotten their homes free.

anoasis, bingo you hit it on the head. Peace is relative.

There is not a single peaceful society on this planet, nor has there ever been. Man has always fought over something.

Davinci, all wars, violence throughout history has been over money, not in the dollar bill, but property, power over others, etc.

Building schools will not bring about peace. That is a naive notion. I point out the doctors in the UK that were arrested for the recent attacks.

It is like the concept of removing upper class, as soon as you do the middle class becomes the upper class and the lower class become the middle class and a new lower class will develop.
It is a matter of balance.
War will continue unabated, the difference will be what degree of war we tolerate.

Imagine a country with no crime, how many people would become criminals because now they have no job because crime was eliminated.

Again unless everyone is the same, not equal the same, then a perfect peace is impossible.

World peace or even total peace in a single country is an illusion. Unless everyone is the same and thinks exactly the same and respondes exactly the same etc...

As long as there are difference there will be war, crime etc.

Davinci, you did not suggest anything on how to accomplish world peace, you just put forth yet another political agenda and nothing more.

Belushi,
Amazing how many on here are against war, yet non post ideas of how to establish peace. More ironic, or should it be moronic?

The main command center was located there, the backup command center was at JFK or LaGardia. It just happens that the World Trade Centers was the target, had it been any other target the command center would not be an issue. Additionally NYC has mobile comm centers as well.
As for the problem with radios, there are two main issues, the first being frequency used. This is correct operatating proceedure for most agencies that would be involved in this type of thing. That is why a central command is created and interagency communication is handled through command not the individuals. There are several reasons for this. Mainly chatter. If everyone is using the same frequency then the lines of communication within each agency deminishs. Two orders passed through an agency need to be managed and controlled. Three if multiple agencies are using the same frequency commands could be mistakenly interpretted by the wrong agency. Forth, it creates a situation where more words have to be spoken so everyone on listen understands what is being said and by whom, identification of individual speaking as well as department specific lingo has to be spelled out. Forth some agencies do not want open two way access and they should not be setup that ways for security purposes.
The second situation is functionality of the radios. Two main situations occured here, the first was transmission/reception. With all of the equipment in the area that utlizes the airways there was a breakdown in functionality. This includes equipment being used by ERs, military comm equipment and consumer electronics in the area, mainly cell phones. Now all operate at different frequencies however there is interference between frequencies especially with the vast about of electronics operating at the time. The second part of this is failed/outdated equipment, I cannot speak for NYC but the munipalities that I have worked in, the individual agencies are responsible for the equipment they have. Thus as far as I know the NYPD is responsible for their equipment, acquisition, maintenance and repair of said equipment, as is the NYFD., etc
The second problem with the radios as availability. Typically a of those entering an area of operation, there is a designated communications person, the rest of the people may not have radio equipment, this is typical of most EMS agencies.
The last issue of concern is Rudy's leadership abilities during and after the crisis. I think he did a great job managing the different agencies and keeping things level headed. I also commend him for going to into the danger zone to manage it. You look at other mayors, the jackass from New Orleans, and you distinctly see what a great job Rudy did.
As for the rapid cleanup, it had to be done, plenty of time was put into the rescue/recovery effort. At some point it has to stop. The continued cost, exposure to the debris, the "growth" in the debris etc... are all reasons to clean that up quickly.
On top of that, the majority of the rescue/recovery workers were at the fatigue level at that point, both physically as well as emotionally. Most of the debris ended up in NJ to be examined again for identification of missing persons, it did not just stop dead in NY. Much effort went into finding and identifying the people lost in this tragedy.

Garden, great post however I think that the concept of democracy in this country is misunderstood to begin with.
The potentional for our form of democracy to continue to strive exists, however people have to go back to the constitution and learn about what rights they really have. This requires people to learn about the Federalist Papers, which unfortunetly is not taught in most school systems.
After fully understanding what our Forefathers designed then we can move on and develope our democracy and keep it alive.
The problem with most democracies of the past is that the common person was uneducated, not by choice, and when they did begin to gain "wealth" they did not know how to maintain themselves. We live in a democracy where anyone that wants to learn can. That is the key difference between past failures of the democratic rule and todays.

Attacks or not, Michael Tanji of ThreatsWatch.org lays it out...

http://commentary.threatswatch.org/2007/07/summer-of-terror/

"Our actions during a summer of terror will send a loud and unambiguous message to the freedom-loving peoples around the world who wonder if the United States is still the nation to turn to in order to help defeat hatred, oppression and totalitarianism. Do we understand the nature of that message, or will we continue to think that our rhetoric will be taken more seriously than our actions?"

Boyle is a terrorist sympathizer. Funny he should be the one claiming this. I would hardly consider him an expert on the different grades/classifications of Anthrax and who has the capability of developing it. Remember he is a lawyer. Just because he helped draft legislation does not make him an expert on said subject.
Additionally the source is not in question in most cirles, it is a matter of who. Those that were investigating did not rule out the source as US labs, as a matter of fact, there were investigating people within the US that would have had access to the source.
This is a spin on unknown facts trying to, and quite sucessfully, misinform the uninformed.

Hardly a big mistake smo. There is a reason Iran and Syrian have not directly attacked Israel in quite a while. They are afraid of Israel and rightly so, as Israel has handed Egypt, Jordan and Syria a beating several times.
The US will not stop supporting Israel, because it is a strategic location for us and we have too much stored there for a rainy day.
Russia is struggling to flex its muscles these days, but has enough internal strife and trouble with their own radical muslims, they cannot afford to get involved.

Now back to topic, notice how the liberal left, smo, simply ignores when terrorist kill UN workers?

Davinci,
Nice propoganda. So I will as you the same thing as smo, you do not believe that the Bush Administration ignored warning from the Clinton Administration regarding al Qaeda?

As for the reality of Al Qaeda, I have read enough and seen enough to be confident of their existance. The illusion is the one the liberals are trying to blast upon the masses. Thanks for not providing any more evidence than smo.

Smo,
Then you do not believe that the Bush administration ignored warnings of Al Qaeda from the Clinton Administration?
Additionally I asked for proof, evidence, something substantional. All you can post is an alleged article, that at best is an opinion piece, at worst a whine.
Please provide proof that Al Qaeda does not exist and is a propoganda piece. Something concrete will suffice.

smo,
Do you have anything to backup your accusations or or they just baseless unwarranted accusations?

On the heels of the brutal murdering of children by Al Queda ...

http://www.nicedoggie.net/2007/?p=827

'Don’t expect any of this to appear in the MSM either.

After all, it doesn’t serve their agenda very well to remind their readers of the kind of animals that their friends, the Dem Cong, are quite happy to leave the Iraqi people at the mercy of"


"The official reported that on a couple of occasions in Baqubah, al Qaeda invited to lunch families they wanted to convert to their way of thinking. In each instance, the family had a boy, he said, who was about 11 years old. As LT David Wallach interpreted the man’s words, I saw Wallach go blank and silent. He stopped interpreting for a moment. I asked Wallach, “What did he say?” Wallach said that at these luncheons, the families were sat down to eat. And then their boy was brought in with his mouth stuffed. The boy had been baked. Al Qaeda served the boy to his family. [Emphasis mine — Emp.M.]"

Garden,
It think there is a distinct difference, Clinton under oath in court to protect himself.
Libby misled prosecutors that were investigating a possible crime.
As for punishment, I think both deserve jail time. But that is neither here nor there as Clinton's impeachment never made it all the way through congress.
You are right in the moral application of law and punishment. Unfortunely the liberals amongst us only want the full extent of the law applied when it goes against conservatives.

Now to add insult to injury, and more pertanant that Clinton's perjury, is his pardoning of Mark Rich.

Remeber him, the guy that never even stood trial for the crimes he was being charged with. Remember how is wife donated lots of money to the Clinton Presidental Libary fund.

Now what should be interest are some little facts most do not know.
1. Libby represent Rich and was one of the people pushing for his pardon.
2. Hillaries wife pardoned Rich.
3. Guilliani was the prosecutor that original charge Rich
4. Rich was breaking trade embargos to do buisiness with IRAN.

Some interesting facts if you look at the key players in current events.

This article is another shining example of the liberal spin doctors. Lets re-define War Crimes so that our other claims become true. For the past 4 years the liberals have been screaming the US has been commiting mass war crimes, yet have been unable to prove it. Some soldiers have been tried and convicted of the isolated crimes that they committed, however the liberals cannot tie them to the orders specifically provided by the administration. Thus the need to change the definition of words.
This is way there are laws in writting. Just because you do not like what the administration has done, does not necessarily make it illegal, nor does it make them directly responsible for the actions of individuals.
Now to take rockwells one words and apply them to any goverment, terrorist organization, political group etc and you now have just about everyone on the planet guilty of war crimes.
Why not look at the ones that have actually commited war crimes and nothing was done about it.

The title of post this shows very much how the spin works.
According to this title, there are no other reasons for the Australian presence. However if you actually listen to what the man said, he said energy security is one of the reasons. Key here is that this is one of many reasons. The original post tried to paint it as if this man said the reason for going to war in Iraq was for this reason, where again if you listen to what the man said, it is a reason for the continued Australian presence, thus a reason that has come up after the initial incursion. Just as with anything, once something is in motion, new reasons come up to keep them in motion.
Complete spin doctor work by the liberal media.
This reminds me of those that claim that Saddam did not have a NBC program, because the inspectors said that they could not prove that he did or did not. Yet the liberal media spun that as a definitive he did not.

adj4u, that is the key of terrorism, it is mainly psychological warfare. The death and maiming is a means to an ends. 4G warfare is based on "spectacular" effects rather that military might in defeating the enemy.

knoxman, the problem is this is not Current News or a Current Event, it is at best an attempt at humor based on ones opinion.

Bl8ant - Intellect does not determine the type of attack.
These nail bombs are very effective at their objective. Terror. Yes other more sophisticated methods could be used, however much harder to implement.
A simple attack give them more freedom to operate undetected or with minimal possibility of discovery.
Once they go into NBC warfare they have more possibility of being discovered as well as methods of introduction to the source become harder.
Anyone can think of more damaging attacks, but carrying them out are much more difficult.
In a fashion the 9/11 attack was similar in nature only a larger bomb was used with more fuel.

Additionally if you remember the original attacks in London last year, the "bomb with nails" effect was quite effective. As was the bombing of the commuter train in Spain.

I would give these guys more credit in the intelligence department for this type of strike as it is almost impossible to stop prior if they keep their heads during the planning stages.

Bl8ant - I would not go as far as to call the two terrorist that attacted Glasgow airport dumb. I would consider them to be desperate and acting in a reactionary fashion because their bretheren had failed in the two London bombings and they needed to do something.

This was the work of a group of doctors, so there has to be some level of intelect to have gotten them that far.

This article discussed the level of knowledge the group has as a whole: http://rapidrecon.threatswatch.org/2007/07/confirmation-why-uk-bomb-trigg/