Tuesday, September 11, 2007

previous entry | main | next entry | TrackBack (0)

White House also intent on finding body of Jimmy Hoffa

AFP reports the following on the 6th anniversary of 9/11:

The White House vowed Tuesday the United States would capture elusive Al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden as it marked the sixth anniversary of the September 11 attacks.

US President George W. Bush has pledged "he'd like to find him. He said all along: we are going to find him," spokesman Tony Snow said, just hours after a new video of bin Laden praising one of the 9/11 hijackers was released.

But Snow added: "The fact is that the war against terror is not a war against one guy, Osama bin Laden. It is against a network that uses all sorts of ways of trying to recruit new terrorists."

Well, so long as President Bush is serious about this -- you can absolutely count on it happening.

posted by Dan on 09.11.07 at 03:37 PM


Today is about 9/11/2001.

There's only one important question concerning the attacks, did the US gov't allow/participate in 9/11?

The answer to that query would explain the illegal wire-taps, suspension of habeas corpus, banning of books like "America Deceived" from Amazon, detaining of dissenters in fences miles away from events, and multiple wars based on lies.

How can the gov't be innocent in 9/11 when we have caught it lying so many times (WACO, Ruby Ridge, no WMDs, USS Liberty, Operation Northwoods, Gulf of Tonkin, Pearl Harbor, ETC.)?

In law, if you determine a person lies ONCE during his testimony, it can be assumed that he lied in the remainder of his testimony. How come we do not hold the gov't to the same standard as it holds us to?

The gov't lied to us about Iraq and more Americans have died there than in 9/11. If the gov't lied about Iraq then why is everyone so reluctant to believe that the gov't lied about 9/11?

Final link (before Google Books bends to pressure and drops the title):
America Deceived (book)

posted by: Stan on 09.11.07 at 03:37 PM [permalink]

This post I don't get at all, except that Prof. Drezner wants to be snarky--but not substantive in any way--about President Bush. Is it wrong to say that the U.S. would like to capture bin Laden, but it isn't the centerpiece of our terrorism policy? Obama was making noises about war with Pakistan, but I don't think anyone takes that seriously. If Prof. Drezner thinks military operations in Pakistan would be a good idea, that would really be an interesting post.

And if the point is that Bush is unfocused or fickle, that seems like the exact opposite of the truth.

posted by: y81 on 09.11.07 at 03:37 PM [permalink]

Seems that the point of the post is that the Administration, which ties most of its foreign policy decisions (and many of its domestic policy decisions, too) to 9/11, is about as serious about finding the man actually most responsible for 9/11 as OJ Simpson is about finding the real killers. After having lead many (or is it still most?) Americans to believe that Saddam had a significant connection to 9/11.

posted by: zaleriana on 09.11.07 at 03:37 PM [permalink]

Post a Comment:


Email Address:



Remember your info?