[lit-ideas] Re: Hersh's New Yorker article re Iran
- From: "Andreas Ramos" <andreas@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2006 15:27:29 -0700
All you have is...
Someone in al Qaeda talked to someone in Iraq in 1998 and nothing came of it. This is years
before al Qaeda even came up with the idea for 9.11.
Does it mean anything that they talked? al Qaeda talked to many people because they were
involved in the jihad against the USSR in Afghanistan. The relationship between al Qaeda and
the US are far deeper and substantial; Bush and the bin Laden families are interwoven in
business deals.
But what about Iraq? Saddam was a secular dictator. Precisely the kind of leader that al
Qaeda wants out of power. They both dislike each other deeply.
But you ignore all of that, and pin your hopes on a few conversations that went
nowhere.
As for the new translations: yeah, right. The US military itself concluded after a complete
investigation of Iraq that Iraq had no capability, no production, no infrastructure for
WMDs. We are supposed to now believe that a bunch of righwing bloggers have found proof? The
real proof is the fact that if there was anything to these documents, the White House and
the military would be the first to tell us in order to vindicate themselves. The fact that
they haven't is proof there is nothing to this.
But again, you ignore all of that, and pin your hopes on rightwing bloggers.
So, where's your proof for your war?
yrs,
andreas
www.andreas.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Eric Yost" <eyost1132@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Sunday, April 09, 2006 3:07 PM
Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Hersh's New Yorker article re Iran
>>Good, Eric, now... what did Iraq have to do
with terrorism?
If I list all the problems caused by Saddam, the terrorist connections in Iraq, as well as
the new material coming out in translations, you will say, "now... what did Iraq have to
do with 9/11?" And you'll keep asking questions until you get back to, "See? The war is a
fake used to enrich Halliburton!"
Then we'll lapse into grumbling silence, and maybe another attack will happen here or
abroad. Then you'll say, "See? This is what our involvement in Iraq caused!" or "It was
ONLY a _______ (a building, a train, a town, a subway)." And if it's a really really
really BIG attack, you'll say, "See? Bush wasn't really serious about the war on global
terrorism."
And if we're both still alive, we'll lapse into grumbling silence. Then David Ritchie or
Mike Geary will post a poem and things will be a little better for a little while.
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.4.0/305 - Release Date: 4/8/2006
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
