<center>
Bunny Tales: Sexy Playmate wannabes battle to pose naked. Fox's 'Girl Next Door: The Search For A Playboy Centerfold' turns aspiring centerfolds into reality TV contestants. EW.com takes a peek at the their behind-the-scene battle to take it all... off. Is it too hot for TV?</center>

I'd say if those were sweet little Millennial babes, yeah, we're probably in a fourth turn (wouldn't it be great!). But since these gals are probably just Gen Xers (with their favorite Silent hero, Daddy Bunnybucks) then, sigh, alas we still be 3T. :grin:

On 2002-05-11 16:52, Marc Lamb wrote:
<center>
Bunny Tales: Sexy Playmate wannabes battle to pose naked. Fox's 'Girl Next Door: The Search For A Playboy Centerfold' turns aspiring centerfolds into reality TV contestants. EW.com takes a peek at the their behind-the-scene battle to take it all... off. Is it too hot for TV?</center>

I'd say if those were sweet little Millennial babes, yeah, we're probably in a fourth turn (wouldn't it be great!). But since these gals are probably just Gen Xers (with their favorite Silent hero, Daddy Bunnybucks) then, sigh, alas we still be 3T. :grin:

By birthyear or by temperament?

Wow!

Millies and a Silent old man!

I heard a couple of years ago about Woody Allen (Silent) and his 13er wife with a Millenial kid.

But this would take the cake.

An old fart Silent with a first wave Millenial would give birth to a New Silent.

So would you have a New Silent being raised like a Nomad?

:lol:

On 2002-05-11 21:11, JayN wrote:
Wow!

Millies and a Silent old man!

I heard a couple of years ago about Woody Allen (Silent) and his 13er wife with a Millenial kid.

But this would take the cake.

An old fart Silent with a first wave Millenial would give birth to a New Silent.

So would you have a New Silent being raised like a Nomad?

:lol:

I'd say that the fact that they are willing to compete on TV to pose for Playboy means that even if they were born between 1982-1984 they would not be representative S&H Millennials

Who says S&H's Millenials are representative? You guys will decide how you will turn out. Your Boomer parents let you have some free will, right? The thing about your gen is that you're good at teamwork. But, what you do with that trait is up to you.

As to whether the bunnies are "representative" in the S&H sense, weren't most WWII pin-up girls GIs?

On 2002-05-12 13:50, Neisha '67 wrote:
Who says S&H's Millenials are representative? You guys will decide how you will turn out. Your Boomer parents let you have some free will, right? The thing about your gen is that you're good at teamwork. But, what you do with that trait is up to you.

As to whether the bunnies are "representative" in the S&H sense, weren't most WWII pin-up girls GIs?

If THAT is the defining trait of the Millennial than I don't have that one either: I'm merely good at dividing the work into separate units in about 1 minute so that we can then work individually after that :smile:

And going back to that definition, if the bunnies are competitive they're more likely to be Xish but if they are more into forming Survivor-style alliances and cooperating, they're more Millie-like

_________________
William '84

Not only was I born in 1984, but I even live in Room 101!

[ This Message was edited by: mmailliw on 2002-05-12 14:04 ]

Heres a good article on how the Culture Wars are still raging...

http://www.usatoday.com/usatonline/2...3/4105529s.htm

As for this playmate business I bet there will be plenty of Millie playmates. One trip to my friends dorm where freshman live and you will see plenty of young women abusing their bodies for the sake of society.
I think the differences is Gen X women are far more independent and liberated then these girls will ever be.
I predict the gender divide will come back especially strong...its pretty pathetic.

Not all of them, but alot of them..

Ty.

I expect the Millennials to be the dumbest blondest generation yet.
As for your qualms with the theory, I remember babysitting a troop of Millies, born in 1988,1990, and 1994 a few times.
These kids were angels when Mom and Dad when around, then turned into deviant perverts as soon as they disappeared.
I had to convinve the 1990 born girl that no I didn't want to see her naked, and convince the 1994 boy to stop running around the house while he shouted "fuck".
What a great baby sitting experience.
This was in 1996, so we were dealing with really young kids.
Then the 1988 kids friend tried to convince me to let them go and do really dangerous things, for exchange for a date with his sister who was "really easy."

This corresponds well to my friends 1985 cousin who disappeared on several family vacations, only to be discovered partying with men alot older than her, or her 1988 cousin who recently was caught smoking pot.

Shit, those kids are aged 17-8 now.
Far out.

Yeah, a lot of this "good scout" business is a way for Boomers to pat themselves on the back for their great parenting skills. Whatever. We won't know how Millies will really turn out for another 20 years or so.

Yeah, a lot of this "good scout" business is a way for Boomers to pat themselves on the back for their great parenting skills. Whatever. We won't know how Millies will really turn out for another 20 years or so.
<center>
The Osbournes gives us everything we want from reality programming while fully acknowledging the extraordinary nature of the family?s situation </center>

Yeah, I fairly optimistic about the future of western civilization. :smile:

On 2002-05-13 08:57, Ty Webb wrote:
I expect the Millennials to be the dumbest blondest generation yet.
As for your qualms with the theory, I remember babysitting a troop of Millies, born in 1988,1990, and 1994 a few times.
These kids were angels when Mom and Dad when around, then turned into deviant perverts as soon as they disappeared.
I had to convinve the 1990 born girl that no I didn't want to see her naked, and convince the 1994 boy to stop running around the house while he shouted "fuck".
What a great baby sitting experience.
This was in 1996, so we were dealing with really young kids.
Then the 1988 kids friend tried to convince me to let them go and do really dangerous things, for exchange for a date with his sister who was "really easy."

This corresponds well to my friends 1985 cousin who disappeared on several family vacations, only to be discovered partying with men alot older than her, or her 1988 cousin who recently was caught smoking pot.

Yeah... I see a nice divide between 84/85; the reason I don't include 85 or 86 completely in the Millennial class is because the 85 cohort (e.g. my gov class) and even the 86 cohort (e.g. my bro's friends) contain enough people that are closer to the bridge type than to the true Millie type that those years can be considered as hanging onto the edge (like early 60, 59 or 58 from the other direction)

Sign of Third Turning or Fourth?

Russian bomb tears through military parade

32 killed, including 11 children

No, I'm not trying to draw a line between 1984 and 1985. I'm tring to show that the most "Millie" of them all are not as good as anybody thinks they are.

On 2002-05-13 22:39, Ty Webb wrote:
No, I'm not trying to draw a line between 1984 and 1985. I'm tring to show that the most "Millie" of them all are not as good as anybody thinks they are.

yeah... one wonders how those millies will ultimately turn out - will they follow in the footsteps of
A) late Xrs like yourself
B) conventional S&H Millies like Robert Reed '82
C) "unconventional Millies" such as Jesse Manoogian or myself or
D) no one at all from the late 70s or early 80s; making a completely different identity for themselves instead?

Only time will tell...

late Xers like myself are really following a trend that was set many moons ago in the mid-80s by first wave Xers.
My experience is that after 1974/75 my generations cynical destructive nastiness calms down, kind of like after 1954/55ish the preachy Boomer nature also dies down a bit.
Those dudes that were born in 1970,1971 etc. are intense. Even to people my age that were born in 1976, 77 etc.
God my friends boyfriends office is covered in drawings of skulls, and signs that say "Fuck Work."
My age group is much more lazy. We don't party as hard, live as hard, do as many dumb things (jump out of planes, run with bulls etc.)
Somewhere between 1978 and 1981 things changeover. 1978 was the last year I saw extremely Xerish behavior. Then 1979 watered that down. Then 1980 was even more watered down. 1981 (the HS class of 1999) was the first one wher I started noticing a new trend of youth that I was totally baffled by and that drew out my gen even more.
For example I went to a party where all they spoke of was religion, internships, politics...and I wound up talking to someones 35 year old uncle about the Friday the 13th movies because I just wasn't part of what was running through these kids' heads.
That's not all of them at all, just a minority, but a different enough minority to leave me with an impression.
In this way i feel we are perfectly complimented by early Xers, who had a touch of residual Boomer in them.

http://www.washtimes.com/national/20020514-68526328.htm

I dont know.
I HAVE been in a good mood more.
What does that mean?

http://www.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/...eut/index.html

I think the Boss would be a good representative of "The Garden state".

U.S. Fears Use of Belt Bombs
Mideast-Style Suicide Attacks Difficult to Counter

Find Post Stories by Topic:
InvestigationRetaliationWashingtonNew YorkBusinessHuman TollBioterrorismEditorialsColumnistsFull Archive___________________
--or--
Search Story Archive by Keyword:

Advanced Search

_____Top Stories_____

? Bush Was Told of Potential Hijacking (The Washington Post, May 16, 2002)
? Defiance Could Delay Terror Trial (The Washington Post, May 16, 2002)
? New Security Checks Swamp INS Offices (The Washington Post, May 16, 2002)
? Full Coverage

_____Q & A_____

? The Question of the Day on terrorism is answered by the Council on Foreign Relations.

_____Primers on the News_____

? Iraq and the War on Terrorism
? Iran and the War on Terrorism
? The Philippines and the War on Terrorism
? The Conflict in Kashmir
? Understanding Pakistan

_____Special Report_____

? War and Peace in the Mideast

_____Gallery_____

? From Bethlehem and Gaza, The End of the Siege

_____Latest News_____

? Arafat Calls for Elections, Reforms (The Washington Post, May 15, 2002)
? Sharon Says Reform Must Precede Talks (The Washington Post, May 15, 2002)
? Palestinians Raise the Pressure on Arafat (The Washington Post, May 14, 2002)
? Officials Affirm Support For Palestinian State (The Washington Post, May 14, 2002)
? Arafat Tours Cities For the First Time Since Confinement (The Washington Post, May 14, 2002)
? Arafat Tours West Bank (Reuters, May 13, 2002)

_____Ombudsman_____

? The Post's Ombudsman on the paper's Middle East coverage.

_____Timeline_____

? The Rise of Ariel Sharon

Keep up with 218 countries. Register to customize headlines.

E-Mail This Article

Printer-Friendly Version

Subscribe to The Post

By David Von Drehle
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, May 13, 2002; Page A01

The sheer number of suicide belt-bombers attacking Israel this spring, and the diversity of their backgrounds, has increased fear among terrorism experts that the tactic will be exported to the United States.

But the belt bomb is a maddeningly difficult weapon to counter. Concrete barriers might deter truck bombers. Heightened airport security can challenge hijackers. By comparison, however, stopping human bombs is "an incredibly difficult business," said Christopher Langton, an analyst of terrorist threats at the International Institute for Strategic Studies in London.

"It's cheap," Langton said. "It has the most accurate guidance system available to mankind. It is easily concealed. . . . The likelihood of it increasing rather than decreasing must be taken seriously."

Tuesday's suicide bomb blast in a pool hall near Tel Aviv, seemingly timed to interrupt Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's visit to Washington, demonstrated the resilience of this macabre weapon. Although the Israeli army had reoccupied six major West Bank cities in an effort to destroy what Sharon has called the Palestinians' "terrorist infrastructure," the suicide bombers have continued to find their way into Israel to attack civilian targets.

Analysts said the traditional profile of a suicide bomber has been shattered. Potential bombers are not as hard to find as some experts once believed. Under the right circumstances, bombers require little or no persuasion -- in fact, they volunteer. They don't necessarily need constant supervision.

The attacks of Sept. 11 illustrated the ability of terrorist groups to plant agents around the United States in cells needing scant support to keep them on track toward their fatal missions over months, even years. "Look at Mohamed Atta: his commitment did not degrade over time," Langton said. "Somebody set his fuse, and that was all it took -- he carried out his operation."

Seen in this light, what once was considered a rare, costly gesture -- involving the intensive recruitment and indoctrination of a human bomb, along with the careful selection of a target worthy of such a scarce resource -- now looks more like an easily replenished weapon.

" 'Successful' terror tactics normally spread when the tools are cheap and not complicated," said David C. Rapoport, editor of the Journal on Terrorism and Political Violence. Suicide bombers have used cars, trucks, ships and airplanes on missions against U.S. targets. "But the human missile is even simpler," Rapoport said. The United States "ought to be deeply concerned." Tom Ridge, the U.S. director of homeland security, has said more than once that he believes belt-bombers pose a threat on American soil, although experts doubt that the same Palestinian groups behind the bombings in Israel would attack the United States. More likely, homegrown terrorists, or bombers guided by al Qaeda, could find inspiration in the effectiveness of the Palestinian tactics.

Last week, while visiting Washington, the Israeli police commissioner, Shlomo Aharonishki, put shopping malls high on his list of likely American targets: "pizzerias, discotheques, restaurants and malls." U.S. government officials have warned vaguely of possible terrorist attacks on shopping malls.

Aharonishki believes the belt bomb is a response to Israel's improved defenses against hijacking, car bombs and other terror tactics. "They moved over to suicide bombing, which is a very difficult problem for law enforcement agencies to deal with," he said. "This is like a missile that's been launched. Once it's been launched, it's nearly impossible to stop."

The flood of willing bombers has completely undermined efforts to create a useful profile of potential bombers, according to experts. Initially, belt-bombers in Israel were young, single men with few ties and fewer prospects, "basically dummies," said police commissioner Aharonishki. But recent belt-bomb attacks have been carried out by young women, by well-educated men, by parents.

In the West Bank and Gaza Strip, "suicide terrorism has become a mass movement," said Bruce Hoffman, director of the RAND Corporation's Washington office and the author of "Inside Terrorism." This fact has grave implications for the United States -- "it is a watershed in the history of terrorism," he said -- because it shows that it is not as hard to make a suicide bomber as many people have wanted to believe.

This lesson was first demonstrated thousands of miles from Israel, on the island of Sri Lanka, off the coast of India. There, beginning in the late 1980s, Tamil nationalists adopted suicide bombing on a large scale, though they did not generally use it indiscriminately against civilians. From a Tamil population of roughly 2.5 million, the guerrillas mounted about 250 suicide missions, and some of their most audacious attacks were carried out by women, including the belt-bomb assassination of India's prime minister, Rajiv Gandhi, in 1991.

What this means, according to Hoffman and others, is that the conventional way of approaching the subject of human bombs is wrong. Too much attention is being focused on the psychology of individual belt-bombers, he said, when it would be more useful to study them as a major new style of weaponry -- a category alongside missiles and grenades and land mines.

Langton, a retired British military officer, agreed. "If you look at this as a weapons system, and see who has used it and when, its advantages and disadvantages, you can perhaps think about some countermeasures," he said.

A suicide bomber can make decisions that an unmanned weapon cannot. Not even the sharpest smart bomb in the Pentagon's catalogue can pretend to be a pregnant woman or pause at the target as more potential victims congregate, or choose a better target at the very last minute.

"It allows you to put a fairly low-signature weapon on a high-profile target," said Javed Ali, a private consultant to a U.S. defense strategists. The executive director of the Institute for Counter-Terrorism in Israel, Boaz Ganor, has also noted that suicide attacks tend to be highly lethal, "attract wide media coverage, require no escape plan," and prevent the capture of operatives who might reveal information about the terrorist group.

Indeed, the belt bomb may be the most difficult in a long line of suicide weapons to defend against.

American sailors faced kamikaze pilots in the last days of World War II. Anarchist bomb-throwers of a century ago frequently risked almost certain death in their attacks. But most experts date modern suicide tactics to Lebanon in 1982-83. Two militant groups backed by Iran, Al Dawa ("The Call") and Hezbollah ("Party of God"), attacked American, French and Iraqi targets using truck bombs steered by doomed drivers. After the bombing of a U.S. Marine Corps barracks near Beirut in 1983, in which 241 Americans died, the United States withdrew from Lebanon.

In later years, suicide bombing spread around the world, from Chechnya to Tanzania to Manhattan. The belt bomb has one other advantage: Because it can be guided so precisely, and detonated at a carefully chosen moment, it is a weapon with a message. In Israel, that message has been: No one is safe, anywhere.

From targeting buses and large markets, the belt-bombers "shifted to discos and restaurants -- places where attendance is optional," Hoffman said. "People began to think they could keep themselves safe by avoiding these optional places -- but then they hit a Passover seder, an Arab-owned restaurant, a corner grocery store, and so on. People became afraid even to go out and buy food."

Teenagers have been the targets of some attacks and grandparents the targets of others. "It is the terrorist equivalent of strategic bombing," Hoffman said.

Because the United States is 40 times the size of Israel, it might be impossible to achieve the same effect of "total terror everywhere," as the Israeli police commissioner describes it. But as the jet-bombs and anthrax spores of September and October showed, attacks on scattered but symbolically charged targets can be very powerful.

"The practitioners of suicide bombing realize they are onto something," Hoffman said. "Why should we think we would be immune?"

He thought a moment.

"In reality, the problem has already arrived here," he said. "We are just waking up to it." In 1997, Hoffman recalled, two men in Brooklyn -- one Palestinian and one Lebanese -- were arrested as they finalized a belt-bomb plot against the New York City subway system. In other words, "if" may be a less important question now than "when" and "where."

Staff writer Bill Miller contributed to this report.

? 2002 The Washington Post Company

What did the president know and when did he know it?

Okay. Is this just a tempest in a teapot? Or was there really anything that could have been done to prevent 9/11?

So deeply into 3T, would anyone have even listened to a warning?

On 2002-05-17 11:13, Kiff '61 wrote:

What did the president know and when did he know it?

Okay. Is this just a tempest in a teapot? Or was there really anything that could have been done to prevent 9/11?

So deeply into 3T, would anyone have even listened to a warning?

Here is one view:

http://www.fromthewilderness.com/fre...wontstand.html

(For info and discussion purposes only.)

THE LIE WON?T STAND

Bush Administration Explanations for Pre-9-11 Warnings Fail the Smell Test

Warnings Received From Heads of State, Allied Intelligence Services Specifically Warned of Suicide Attacks by Hijackers

Insider Trading Also Clearly Warned of Attacks

by Michael C. Ruppert

? Copyright 2002, From The Wilderness Publications, http://www.copvcia.com. All Rights Reserved. May be reprinted, distributed or posted on an Internet web site for non-profit purposes only.

May 16, 2002, 19:00 PDT (FTW) -- Never in the history of scandals involving the United States government has an attempt to conceal criminal conduct by an administration been more transparently dishonest or more easily exposed. On May 15 White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer -- while making the startling admission that President Bush received CIA and FBI intelligence briefings in August indicating Osama bin Laden might be planning hijackings -- told major news sources including CBS News, ?All appropriate action was taken based on the threat information we had,? Fleischer said. ?The president did not -- not -- receive information about the use of airplanes as missiles by suicide bombers.?

In other statements Fleischer told the press, ?The president was also provided information about bin Laden wanting to engage in hijacking in the traditional pre-9-11 sense, not for the use of suicide bombing, not for the use of an airplane as a missile.? According to a May 16 story by the New York Times, ?Mr. Fleischer said the information given to the president in Texas [last August], had prompted the administration to put law enforcement agencies on alert.?

Every major position taken by an administration in full retreat and on the defensive can be easily deconstructed and shown to be false.

For more than seven months FTW has been documenting specific warnings received by the U.S. government from both foreign intelligence services and, in one case, from Russian President Vladimir Putin, indicating commercial airliners were going to be used by terrorists to attack -- among other things -- the World Trade Center in the week of Sept. 9. In order for Fleischer?s statement to be credible he would have to assert then that George W. Bush either ignored or was not informed of a direct warning from a head of state and also from the German intelligence service, the BND.

As reported in the German daily Frankfurter Algemeine Zeitung (FAZ) http:// http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/ f_a_zeitung_story.html on Sept. 14, the BND warned both the CIA and Israel in June that Middle Eastern terrorists were ?planning to hijack commercial aircraft to use as weapons to attack important symbols of American and Israeli culture.? The story specifically referred to an electronic eavesdropping system known as Echelon, wherein a number of countries tap cell phone and electronic communications in partner countries and then pool the information. The BND warnings were also passed to the United Kingdom.

No known denial by the BND of the accuracy of this story exists, and the FAZ report indicates the information was received directly from BND sources.

According to a Sept. 14 report in the Internet newswire online.ie, http:// http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/ online_ie_story.html German police, monitoring the phone calls of a jailed Iranian man, learned the man was telephoning U.S. intelligence agencies last summer to warn of an imminent attack on the World Trade Center in the week of Sept. 9. German officials confirmed the calls to the U.S. government for the story but refused to discuss additional details.

According to a story in Izvestia on Sept. 12 http://izvestia.ru/rubr.cgi?id=5542&idr=523%20 , Russian intelligence warned the U.S. last summer that as many as 25 suicide pilots were training for suicide missions involving the crashing of airliners into important targets.

In an MSNBC interview on Sept. 15, Russian President Putin stated he had ordered Russian intelligence to warn the U.S. government ?in the strongest possible terms? of imminent assaults on airports and government buildings before the attacks on Sept. 11. No credible information has emerged from any source indicating that Putin omitted the above information when issuing the warning.

Many other direct warnings were received by the U.S. government and have been documented in FTW?s 9-11 timeline located at: http://www.fromthewilderness.com/fre...1_02_lucy.html.

These stories give the immediate lie to Fleischer?s statements that Bush had no inkling of airliners being used as weapons.

But there is more.

In 1996 -- as reported by the German paper Die Welt on Dec. 6, and by Agence France Presse on Dec. 7 -- Western intelligence services, including the CIA, learned after arrests in the Philippines that Al Qaeda operatives had planned to crash commercial airliners into the Twin Towers. Details of the plan, as reported by a number of American press outlets, were found on a computer seized during the arrests. The plan was called ?Operation Bojinka.? Details of the plot were disclosed publicly in 1997 in the New York trial of Ramsi Youssef for his involvement in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.

FBI MEMOS TRIGGER WHITE HOUSE BACKSTEPPING

In ?traditional? hijackings the hijackers have no need or desire to learn how to fly.

As reported by the New York Times, CNN and the Washington Post (among others) the events leading to Fleischer?s statements were the recent disclosure of FBI memoranda originated by field agents in Arizona and Minnesota that warned of a possible hijack attempt by bin Laden?s followers. In both cases the suspects were taking flight lessons.

According to Newsweek and the New York Times, FBI agents in Phoenix submitted a classified memorandum in July naming Osama bin Laden and tracking the activities of possible Middle Eastern terrorist suspects who had enrolled in local flight schools. The memo, according to the Times, stated bin Laden?s followers ?could use the schools to train for terror operations.? The information in the Phoenix memo was not shared with FBI field agents in Minnesota who had uncovered other startling evidence.

Just days before the attacks in early- September, FBI agents in Minnesota wrote notes that subsequently became included in an internal FBI document warning that accused terrorist Zacarias Moussaoui ?might be planning on flying something into the World Trade Center.? A story from the May 20 issue of Newsweek by Michael Isikoff described how a local flight instructor had reported Moussaoui had ?showed a suspicious interest in learning how to steer [and not land] large airliners?The [FBI] agents were ?in a frenzy, absolutely convinced he was planning to so something with a plane.??

A multitude of sources have reported the FBI agents requested a warrant to search Moussaoui?s personal computer but were denied by Attorney General John Ashcroft?s Justice Department. After the 9-11 attacks the computer was seized and found to contain information directly related to the World Trade Center attacks.

This apparent lack of support from within the administration is consistent with reports released last fall by the BBC?s Gregg Palast showing that in January 2001 the Bush Administration had issued direct orders to the FBI to curtail investigations of two of Osama bin Laden?s relatives, Omar and Abdullah bin Laden. The two bin Ladens had been connected to possible terrorist activities and were living in Falls Church, Va., near CIA headquarters.

APPROPRIATE WARNINGS?

Fleischer?s statement that adequate warnings had been given to appropriate federal agencies falls flat on its face. Two of the most ?appropriate? agencies would have been the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the U.S. Air Force and Air National Guard.

As documented by researchers like Jared Israel at http://www.tenc.net, it has been standard FAA procedure for more than 25 years to scramble U.S. fighters to intercept -- not shoot down -- any errant or non-responsive aircraft under FAA control. This protocol is even more stringent in the case of a hijacking. Yet, Vice President Dick Cheney and others have stated publicly there were no fighters available in some cases, and there was no heightened state of alert on Sept. 11. For 50 minutes on 9-11, in direct contravention of established policy, no fighters were scrambled to intercept two outstanding hijacked airliners even though it was known attacks were in progress.

Given the above information, it would have been an obvious move to have placed fighter aircraft on a heightened state of alert in this time period. This unresponsiveness stands in contrast to the fact that, in October 1999 at a time when there was no heightened alert, the ill-fated Lear Jet occupied by golfer Payne Stewart had an F-16 fighter and an A-10 attack aircraft flying beside it within minutes of losing radio contact and veering off course.

INSIDER TRADING

FTW has spent months on this important story that proves foreknowledge of the attacks by people who also profited from them. This was a glaring warning signal, since such trades ran the risk of being detected by intelligence agencies that routinely monitor all market activity in real time.

The insider trading involves the placement of large numbers of ?put? options on stocks of companies directly affected by the Sept. 11 attacks. They include United Air Lines, American Air Lines, Morgan Stanley, Merrill Lynch, AXA Reinsurance, Munich Reinsurance and Swiss Reinsurance. Put options are a leveraged bet that a stock?s price will fall dramatically.

As CBS news noted on Sept. 26, the peak of trading activity occurred just before the attacks. There was a jump in United Air Lines put options 90 times (not 90 percent) above normal between Sept. 6 and Sept.10, and 285 times higher than average on Sept. 6. Numbers for other affected stocks were equally alarming. It is uncontested that only United and American stocks had this level of put buying before the attacks. No other airlines were affected.

A May 13 story by the Washington Times? Insight Magazine attempted to explain the insider trading by stating higher numbers of put options had been placed on United and American stocks earlier in 2001. By relying only on the numbers of put options, Insight asserted that there was nothing unusual about the pre-9-11 trades.

However, FTW has contacted several experienced traders and reviewed existing documentation from financial experts, which indicate the alarm for insider trading is to look for any ?imbalance? between the level of put options (a bet that a stock?s price will fall) and the level of call options (a bet that a stock?s price will rise). It is a significant imbalance in puts vs. calls that indicates criminal insider trading. The Insight piece did not address this point.

Several traders have stated that in a fairly flat market with high trading volumes, it has been a routine procedure for experienced traders to place roughly equal numbers of puts and calls on various stocks in order to generate a paper cash flow. They were quick to point out that by September, the market had gone into sharp decline and trading volumes were way down. Thus, lower numbers of put options did not mean that everything was normal. They stressed it was the imbalance in put-to-call ratios that signaled the insider trading. [Ed. Note: FTW has undertaken a more detailed investigation of this trading activity and hopes to have a more comprehensive report within 4- 6 weeks].

Part of the problem in Insight?s research stems from the fact that since Sept. 11, there has been no transparency from either the government or the financial sector on how the trades worked or how the markets tracked them. Secrecy is everywhere. Telephone calls have not been returned, and the government refuses to divulge any information about probes it admits are still ongoing. But simplistic dismissals from sources quoted in the Insight story contradict not only other evidence, but statements made by financial experts and major news sources just after the attacks.

?This could very well be insider trading at the worst, most horrific, most evil use you?ve ever seen in your entire life?This would be one of the most extraordinary coincidences in the history of mankind if it was a coincidence,? said Dylan Ratigan of Bloomberg Business News, interviewed Sept. 20 on Good Morning Texas.

??I saw put-call numbers higher than I?ve ever seen in 10 years of following the markets, particularly the options markets,? said John Kinnucan, principal of Broadband Research, as quoted in the San Francisco Chronicle,? reported the Montreal Gazette on Sept. 19.

To quote 60 Minutes from Sept. 19, ?Sources tell CBS News that the afternoon before the attack, alarm bells were sounding over unusual trading in the U.S. stock options market.?

Assertions that the reported number of puts involved were not abnormal also failed to analyze highly intricate shell games that involve the movement of put options to markets outside the U.S. or hidden in what traders refer to as ?net positions.? Serious financial experts have indicated the profits from insider trading could have been in the billions. Andreas von Bulow, a former member of the German parliament responsible for oversight of Germany?s intelligence services, estimated the worldwide amount at $15 billion, according to Tagesspiegel on Jan. 13. Other experts have estimated the amount at $12 billion. CBS News gave a conservative estimate of $100 million.

A hasty conclusion reached by many is the insider trades were placed by bin Laden and his associates. Such a notion is flatly contradicted by the now absolute certainty that such insider trades would have -- and apparently did -- set off alarm bells. It makes little sense to argue bin Laden et al would have risked compromising at the last minute an operation planned in total secrecy for at least four years.

Also lacking credibility is the argument that many of the trades were what some brokers described as inconsequential amounts valued at $1 million or $2 million. This does not address the possibility that U.S. intelligence officials decided in a few cases to make a quick profit from attacks they knew were going to succeed. As distasteful as it may seem, this explanation is far more credible than an assumption that bin Laden made the trades himself and risked the exposure of what the world has been led to believe was his life?s ?masterpiece.?

For more information on 9-11 insider trading please visit http://www.copvcia.com.

The explanations offered by the Bush Administration over the last 48 hours will not withstand even the slightest scrutiny if a major press organization asks any question about the warnings received from credible foreign government sources and heads of state. Other questions must inevitably follow that will implode an oil dictatorship whose sins and crimes are exposed and just waiting for someone to pick them up and run with them.