I just found out they are selling pieces of the Towers on eBay.

"I would love to have that twisted girder for my living room, thank you...how much?"

"Or perhaps a chunk of that pink marble with the singed edges."

God.

That is *so* 3T.

_________________
Insanity is the only sane way to cope with an insane world.--RD LANGE

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Susan Brombacher on 2001-09-16 17:26 ]</font>

Susan, that was reported on Thursday and Ebay promptly yanked all of those offers. If someone's doing it again, I'm sure they'll can them as soon as they are alerted to it.

Monty1003, I know that I said that we love to bash Boomers on this board. But I think you are taking things a little too personal. Sure, they do insult the Boomers a little, but they do that with every generation. Lighten up a little.

Lis wrote : I stand by the statement that ALL extremists and radicals will be less tolerated, regardless of their political stripe. And yes, Virgil, I imagine that includes tolerance of the business dealings of many people.

As regards this statement and the exchange with Marc, I was thinking of some examples in which this would be played out, ie, details, and it made me wonder how it will be determined who will be considered extremists and radicals, and which words will incur the intolerance.

For example, will the news of someone's extremism behavior or words only be believed if reported by a favored or believed news organization or website, or will it not be believed if only reported by a few, or one? And, could the reporter(s) be accused of the extremism instead of the wrongdoer(s)?

Journalism is so spinned and canned nowadays, and there's that corporate issue. There have been alternative news sources, but partisanism or disbelief often discredits that which is not favorable to that side, and news is buried. Add to that the enormous amount of news (important or not) and the sped-up news cycle, which already censures what we've been getting for some time now.

During WWII it was much the same way, but it was 'easier' to trust and believe then, in that we were not yet in the Information Age, we got more war news at the movies in the news reels than in the papers, and we were more trusting on the whole, we didn't know the difference.

I still believe the internet and 'feedback tv' will keep things more tolerant, but well, I'll just say it, we have given a President who is not famous as a Communicator almost unlimited tax money and time to fight this war, and now we'll have our freedom of speech curtailed.

I wonder what the definition of extremism 'is'. [Silent attempt at gallows humor].

I am wondering if three prior events have not given speed to the Fourth Turning. These events are the Clinton impeachment process, the March,2000 Nasdaq collapse, and the 2000 Presidential election debacle.

Neil and Bill,
Your timing calculations about this being the equivalent of 1920 contradict your theory on when you think the fourth turning should arrive. Your predictions call for the change to occur around 2005 give or take four years or so. This event is within the "error range" of a turning change albeit on the early side. My thought is that this fourth turning may not have just one trigger. The Glorious rev. and American Rev. turnings had multiple triggers as well. This may be the first or second domino to fall, but not the last. Let's see how the 2002 and 2004 elections turn out. I think then we will know for sure.

Definitely we are on the cusp of 3T and 4T. This may be a "trigger event;" it may be one of MANY trigger events. There will likely be more 4T sentiment around for awhile which may drift back into 3T and vice-versa in the coming years.

The most germane question is how the crisis gets resolved.

Seasons are never completely quantized events; there may be times of "indian summer" even in the dead of winter for example. A harsh wind or noreaster can blow off all the leaves of the trees earlier in autumn.

At the risk of sounding like Chance Gardener of Being There, I think that the garden has just experienced the first frosty snows; these will melt soon and give way to spells of sunshine and rain. But most of what could have been harvested from it is already stowed away.

Call it winter? I donno. The darkness is not fully upon us. And the descent could be long and treacherous. Does it matter what we call it? Whatever it is, it's coming, and most people on the street now recognize it unconsciously if not consiously.

T4T is not winter, it is spring, "when everything is green and there is nothing to eat." We have just come through the sterile period of winter, the time of mortification, now it's springtime, the moment of purgation, the time of dying lambs and scapegoats. DMMcG

On 2001-09-16 11:13, Marc Lamb wrote:
So do you consider Fawell and Robertson "extremist," Ms. Lis?

If so are they, and those who like them, to considered in the same league as Usama bin Laden?

And if so, should all these American citizens be arrested and jailed if they cease not to say things others disaprove of?

And if they resist such arrest, should they be hunted down and shot?

Do advise.

There needs to be public censure for spreading fear and terror to all groups of people. As it is against the law to create a hostile work environment, it shouldn't be okay to do this to ANY group.

The idea isn't to be inoffensive. The idea is to not PURPOSEFULLY try to intimidate people. It's all about intent.

The intent to hurt people is the intent to hurt people. Saying that one person's behavior inspired god's wrath on us all so that we socially should excommunicate those people is destructive.

I remember back to a time ten years ago when I was coming home from work, I turned on the TV, and the Nightly News was on. It talked about how we were in recession, there were problems going on in the Middle East, some congressman was having an affair and tried to duck questions about it, the stock market had dropped precipitously over the last year, and financial experts were wondering when Alan Greenspan would cut interest rates so a recovery could begin. This was the same day that the MTV Video Music Awards was on, so I changed the channel to MTV. I was watching the VMA's, and I saw a great performance by U2, and Janet Jackson looked great, Michael Jackson came on stage, but he looked like a freak, people were wondering whether Mariah Carey would get well enough in time to promote her new album, Britney Spears performed some new song wearing next to nothing...

Wait a minute, that all happened ten days ago. It just feels like it was ten years ago.

Here's at least one Representative (Bono of California) calling for long-term sacrifice. Her late husband may have been a Silent, but I certain expect her to be a Boomer:

Pull Quote:

"Rep. Mary Bono, R-Palm Springs, on Friday warned that the country should prepare for a fight against international terrorists that will likely include personal sacrifice, the use of ground troops overseas and the risk of retaliation against civilians by the enemy."

http://www.thedesertsun.com/news/sto...00611418.shtml

Privacy Trade-offs assessed in the Washington Post:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2001Sep12.html

Here is a question:

America is in 4T, while everyone else is still in 3T. What does this mean for America and the world?

Well, Robert, we weren't in the last 4T alone, and I don't think we'll be in this 4T alone, although we might get a head start on it. I'm not sure what that could mean for the rest of the world, but I hope it will mean that we'll be ready for whatever external challenges come by the time they get here.

Dan '73

Everyone else will eventually join us. But that will probably be in a few years at the least. Canada should enter the 4T between now and 2004. The UK, Australia, China, and Russia should enter between 2004 and 2007. The rest of Europe will probably enter between 2007 and 2011.

Is America in the 4T? I say YES. This is more proof. Here is what a DIA officer says in the Washington Times.

<font color="blue">
Time to use the nuclear option


Thomas Woodrow

The time has come for the United States to make good on its past pledges that it will use all military capabilities at its disposal to defend U.S. soil by delivering nuclear strikes against the instigators and perpetrators of the attacks against the nation's political capital and the nation's financial capital.
At a bare minimum, tactical nuclear capabilites should be used against the bin Laden camps in the desert of Afghanistan. To do less would be rightly seen by the poisoned minds that orchestrated these attacks as cowardice on the part of the United States and the current administration.
To consider use of the nation's nuclear forces, in the present circumstances, cannot be brushed aside as an overly emotional response to the unknown face of terrorism. To begin with, we know who that face belongs to, and we know where a goodly portion of his logistical and training capabilities are located. A series of low-level, tactical nuclear strikes in the Afghanistan desert would pose no risk to large population centers and would carry little risk of fallout spreading to populated areas.
Also, our nuclear capabilities were designed to include just such a mission, and they are capable of fulfilling such a mission.
Lastly, the use of nuclear weapons against the bin Laden groups and his supporters will rightly shock the world, but it will also shock those nations that have been disposed for a variety of reasons to back the terrorist groups with economic and political support. The United States will, in effect, have raised the bar against future such acts from occurring. If we, as a nation, show the willingness to use the ultimate weapon in the current situation, there can be no doubt anywhere in the globe that the United States will make good on its past pledges to defend its sovereign territory with such weapons.
The attacks that occurred this week have been classified both as acts of war and as a second Pearl Harbor, but these designations ennoble the acts in Washington and New York. An act of war is constituted when one nation-state uses military force against another. Pearl Harbor was used by Japan to attack U.S. military targets to begin such an act of war. The bin Laden groups are not nations or states, and they have primarily targeted civilian populations. In fact, the use of so-called Islamic fundamentalist terrorism on a global scale is a new phenomena, a product of the modern age. In centuries past, civilized nations would conduct "punitive" expeditions against pirate regimes, but those actions were strictly local in scope and the protagonists could not approach the sophistication shown by the bin Laden groups. As we have seen from such "punitive" actions by the previous administration, those actions achieved next to nothing.
The fight against the bin Laden groups will be a fight to the death, and this is another valid reason to make use of our nation's nuclear forces. Unlike the more limited goals of wars between nations -- territory, formal surrender, etc. -- bin Laden's goals are the elimination of the United States as the global leader for progressive political, economic and cultural change. Should, God forbid, the United States withdraw from the Middle East and Persian Gulf, the terrorists will raise their sights to eliminate our influence elswhere in the world. For a vision of what these groups see as their ultimate objective, we need look no further than the Taliban regime in Afghanistan, where women are beaten in the street for walking in public, owners of television sets are sent to prison or shot and ancient Buddhist monuments to universal peace and understanding are reduced to rubble.
No, the bin Laden groups must be exterminated completely before they become more powerful in their efforts to exterminate us. We should use our nuclear capabilities to help achieve this. We must, as a nation, take the firmest action possible against this growing evil in the world, before its poison spreads even further. If not the United States, who? If not now, under these circumstances, when?


Thomas Woodrow, a 22-year veteran intelligence officer, resigned from the Defense Intelligence Agency in May.
</font>


_________________
Robert Reed III (1982)
---------------------------------------------
"Life is not a cancer of matter; it is matter's transcendence of itself." -- John S. Lewis
"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen." -- Albert

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: madscientist on 2001-09-17 07:23 ]</font>

And also, none of our national leaders are ruling out the use of nuclear weapons in the war against Afghanistan.

How else do we know that America is in 4T? The President has authorized the military to shoot down any threatening plane.

"The last few weeks before this attack, we have been listening to Boomers argue over a social security "lock box". How do you think that this sounds to people my age who will never have or really care about (I'll take care of myself) social security?"

Said Tom 1971.

Tom, it's time you and other Xers start realizing that social security is but the minimum of a competent social policy, and not falling over backwards to embrace 1920s Republican rhetoric. Grow up and smell the soup kitchens, and stop bashing older people who happened to have lived before Reagan and thus find it easier to have some sense of reality.

Eric

And it just gets better (notice: this was meant to be sarcastic)!

There are now rising fears of a chemical, biological, or nuclear attack against the US. Not only that, but there are rising fears that the US government staged the attack itself to bring on the New World Order.

http://www.worldscientist.com/?actio...t&index=recent
http://www.bostonherald.com/news/nat...em09162001.htm
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/arti...4/100711.shtml
http://www.skolnicksreport.com/pkem.html
http://www.centrexnews.com/columnist.../2001/0914.htm
http://www.tetrahedron.org/news/attack_on_america.html

The nation is not as united as it seems. Expect people to raise fears that this was done by the US government itself. And expect for this to fuel globalization and NWO fears. Sure, many are flying American flags, but many Americans still do not trust the government. In the 3T, there were many groups out to challenge the authority of the US government. Expect for those who are convinced with "evidence" that the US government is behind the attacks to attempt insurrections down the line. The declaration of national emergency will eventually be questioned by many people. Many people are just not convinced that the US couldn't have known about the attacks in advance. In addition to war in Afghanistan, is it possible that we might have skirmishes here, as well as a war?

The way things are going, this 4T will be severe.

Concerning head starts, Tristan Jones has posted that the West in general is closer to 4T than the Middle East, which is in early Unraveling. (I had figured that if any country was going to go into 4T first, it was going to be Russia). If 911 is the start of the 4T then the U.S.A. has a big head start over the generation of the Islamic Resurgence, and even a head start compared to the Red Guard generation. I don't know how this will appear in countries that haven't begun the transition yet-perhaps Mathew Elmslie and Tristan Jones can decribe the Canadian and Australian points of view.

Here is a 4T poem:
http://www.declaration.net/z-warpoem.asp

Now, there are heightened fears of members of bin Laden's network seeking WMD:

http://www.washtimes.com/national/20010915-470683.htm

Also, there are rising calls for us to use the nuclear option:

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/ar...TICLE_ID=24525

On 2001-09-16 23:12, Tim Walker wrote:
Concerning head starts, Tristan Jones has posted that the West in general is closer to 4T than the Middle East, which is in early Unraveling. (I had figured that if any country was going to go into 4T first, it was going to be Russia). If 911 is the start of the 4T then the U.S.A. has a big head start over the generation of the Islamic Resurgence, and even a head start compared to the Red Guard generation. I don't know how this will appear in countries that haven't begun the transition yet-perhaps Mathew Elmslie and Tristan Jones can decribe the Canadian and Australian points of view.

Tim,
Well I know now, we are still in a unravelling here in Australia and in western europe. I know that India, South East Asia, Western Europe and Australia/NZ are part of the same saeculum. Canada's saeculum is linked to the USA for far as I know. This mega saeculum is current 3 years behind North Americia, means we should be entering the crisis soon. China and Russia are pretty much the same point in the saeculum with North Americia, means take a good look at events in those countries in the months to come. The west has a 15-18 year window over the Middle East (including Afghanistan) because they will still be in their unravelling, while the most of rest of the world will be deep into the Crisis.

On 2001-09-16 23:34, madscientist wrote:
Now, there are heightened fears of members of bin Laden's network seeking WMD:

Chemical and biological weapons are very easy to make, you not need much fancy technology for it. Bin Laden is a ruthless person (even for a Prophert which is say something) and a very smart tactian. He planned the murder of Afghanistan's oppostion leader before the Attack. I think he planned the attack or knew about it, he is planning for an Americian attack on Afghanistan.

I would be concerned about Pakistan, although the government seems to support us. A lot of people (also a large section of their military) in Pakistan are friendly to the Talbian and could cause trouble for the USA and the Pakistani government, if Americia goes ahead with a attack of Afghanistan. I heard the Talbian are preparing for a Jihad to the death.