Posted on 09/22/2004 7:45:10 AM PDT by jtesh
NEvermind...he's a troll.
This is akin to picking up some dog crap, bringing inside a building, and sharing it with everyone saying "See what I almost stepped in? Look at it!"
> ... why is everyone being so adversarial?
Because you signed up today
(1 troll point).
Posted a defamatory article without a warning in
the subject line like (Tinfoil Hat Alert) -
(1 troll point)
It's apparently not even a new tinfoil story
(1 troll point)
So, with 3 troll points, it's not surprising that some
readers have mistaken you for a troll.
On any forum/BBS, whatever its inclinations, it is always
a sound idea to register and lurk for a while before
making the first post. Even then, start by posting
responses, and not base articles. Trolls are a problem
on every forum I use. Some are quite clever, and the
user bases are growing weary of them, and often jump on
innocent newbies in error.
"The suppressed Al Qaida document tends to support recent claims of a cover-up"
If they're suppressed, how does he know what's in them??
That's revisionist history, everyone knows it was this guy.
Ack!
Welcome aboard! Don't mind us, we're a little twitchy these days with all the trolls and disruptors trying to infiltrate.
Yes, maybe you should.
A hint you may want to remember for future trolling: try not to say anything really goofy until at least the day after you sign up.
"The Iraqi regime possesses biological and chemical weapons." Source: President Bush Discusses Iraq with Congressional Leaders, White House (9/26/2002).
"The Iraqi regime possesses biological and chemical weapons." Source: George W. Bush Delivers Weekly Radio Address, White House (9/28/2002).
"We know the designs of the Iraqi regime. In defiance of pledges to the U.N., it has stockpiled biological and chemical weapons." Source: President, House Leadership Agree on Iraq Resolution, White House (10/2/2002).
"[Iraq] possesses and produces chemical and biological weapons." Source: President Bush Outlines Iraqi Threat; Remarks by the President on Iraq, White House (10/7/2002).
"He said he wouldn't have chemical weapons, he's got them." Source: Remarks by the President at Missouri Welcome, White House (11/4/2002).
all from (http://www.house.gov/reform/min/features/iraq_on_the_record/)
This map shows how Enron planned to connect its gas fields in Turkmenistan to its Dabhol power plant. The pipelines in blue are preexisting; the rest needed to be built.
Yep.
To be honest, I haven't read up on the Kyoto Treaty yet. I'm pulling more Enron stuff now. Do you have anything convenient to add about the Kyoto Treaty? I would welcome the background!
But his music made their heads explode.
So long, jtesh...
>> So, with 3 troll points, it's not surprising that
>> some readers have mistaken {jtesh} for a troll.
> Good post.
Misplaced though. jtesh is now revealed in another new
DNC talking-points post to actually be a troll.
Context of 'June 1998 (B)'
This page shows all events that either reference, or are referenced by, the event 'June 1998 (B)'.
November 1993 Complete 911 Timeline
The Indian government gives approval for Enron's Dabhol power plant, located near Bombay on the west coast of India. Enron has invested $3 billion, the largest single foreign investment in India's history. Enron owns 65 percent of Dabhol. This liquefied natural gas powered plant is supposed to provide one-fifth of India's energy needs by 1997 [Asia Times, 1/18/01, Indian Express, 2/27/00] It is the largest gas-fired power plant in the world. Earlier in the year, the World Bank concludes that the plant is not economically viable and refuses to invest in it. [New York Times, 3/20/01] Enron apparently tries to make the plant financially viable by investing in gas fields in nearby Uzbekistan (see June 24, 1996), but it cannot get that gas to Dabhol without a gas pipeline through Afghanistan (see June 24, 1996 and June 1998 (B)). Construction of the plant is abandoned just before completion (see June 2001 (J)).
June 24, 1996
Uzbekistan signs a deal with Enron that could lead to joint development of the Central Asian nation's potentially rich natural gas fields. [Houston Chronicle, 6/25/96] The $1.3 billion venture teams Enron with the state companies of Russian and Uzbekistan. [Houston Chronicle, 6/30/96] On July 8, 1996, the US government agrees to give $400 million to help Enron and an Uzbeki state company develop these natural gas fields. [Oil and Gas Journal, 7/8/96] However, the deal is later canceled when it becomes apparent a gas pipeline will not be built across Afghanistan, and there is no easy way to get the gas out of the region (see November 1993 and June 1998 (B)).
June 1998 (B) Complete 911 Timeline
Enron's agreement to develop natural gas with the government of Uzbekistan is not renewed (see June 24, 1996). Enron closes its office there. The reason for the failure of Enron's flagship project is an inability to get the natural gas out of the region. Uzbekistan's production is well below capacity and only 10 percent of its production is being exported, all to other countries in the region. The hope was to use a pipeline through Afghanistan, but Uzbekistan is extremely concerned at the growing strength of the Taliban and its potential impact on stability in Uzbekistan, making any future cooperation on a pipeline project which benefits the Taliban unlikely. A $12 billion pipeline through China is being considered as one solution, but that wouldn't be completed until the end of the next decade at the earliest. [Alexander's Gas and Oil Connections 10/12/98]
June 2001 (J) Complete 911 Timeline
Enron's power plant in Dabhol, India, is shut down. The failure of the $3 billion plant, Enron's largest investment, contributes to Enron's bankruptcy later in the year (see December 2, 2001). Earlier in the year, India stopped paying its bill for the energy from the plant, because energy from the plant cost three times the usual rates. [New York Times, 3/20/01] Enron had hoped to feed the plant with cheap Central Asian gas, but this hope was dashed when a gas pipeline through Afghanistan was not completed (see June 1998 (B). The larger part of the plant is still only 90 percent complete when construction stops at about this time. [New York Times, 3/20/01] It is known that Vice President Cheney lobbies the leader of India's main opposition party about the plant this month. [New York Times, 2/21/02] A lawsuit is in motion to get additional government documents released that could reveal what else the US did to support this plant (see October 17, 2002 and February 7, 2003 (B)). Enron may eventually restart the plant (see October 18, 2002
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/context.jsp?item=a0698enron
"We've got a big singer from the mainland here to entertain us today. She's a woman! - Nancy Sinatra? - No, Mrs. Miller..."
First all did Dan Rather produce the document, but seriously if it was true, how would them wanting to build a pipeline stop people from connecting the dots for 9-11. It doesn't make sense. Its not like the Taliban would have told them what was going to happen.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.