|
Participant: banquosghost
Date: 2003-04-01 21:07:15
"We" say this and "we" say that.
Virtually all of the links to stories relevant to these issues that I've posted have been links to US publications. The rest have been British. OK,one was I think a translation of a piece from Der Spiegel.
US citizens and US writers are saying these things themselves. *They're* scared of the New American Century Project implications. *They're* positing a link with oil and Euro-dollars. *They're* accusing their government of motives more vile than I could dream up. I don't disagree with them obviously but I didn't create the allegations or accusations. US citizens did. So trying to condemn me or condemn Canadians who agree with them is empty. Maybe you disagree with those US citizens and writers. Fine.
Elsewhere on this board I have repeatedly said that I would like to see Saddam gone even dead. I've also said I would rather see a more controlled and deliberate ground military operation with limited and local air support. I've said I had serious problems with the connections the Bush administration has tried to draw between Saddam and Al Qaeda. Bush himself has said there isn't one yet still over 50% of US citizens polled seem to think there is. I've said I have serious problems with the US presentations to the world community on why they felt this had to be done now and done this way. Without deflecting the conversation into why you have no faith in the UN can you tell me why you think repeated mistruths and distortions are legitimate grounds for a war? It makes no difference to me where the mistruths and distortions took place. Does it make a difference to you?
Are you familiar with the name John O'Neill? For six years he was the head of the FBI's counter-terrorism unit that was looking into Al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden. In 2001 he quit the FBI in complete frustration with the Bush administrations foot dragging and obstructionism. He took a job as Head of Security at the World Trade Center. His first day at his new job was Sept.11, 2001. Here. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/knew/ http://www.newyorkmetro.com/nymetro/news/sept11/features/5513/
Which fact do you refer to when you say I decided I didn't like this administration "before the fact"? The fact of the war? The fact of the repudiation of all multi-lateral treaties? The fact of the Supreme Court's awarding the Presidency to them? I don't like the Bush administration because of the way they're underfunding and undercutting the security of their cities. I don't like the Bush administration because of their education policies or lack thereof. I don't like the Bush administration for more reasons than this board will have room for me to list. Why do you like them?
And ANWAR isn't gone by the way.http://www.msnbc.com/news/884132.asp?0dm=C24DN&cp1=1
<Have I mentioned how much I hate it when the board times out when you try to write something long? :-)>
Répondre à ce message
|
