<Consider, for example, any future dispute with (pick one) China, Russia, (fill in the blank). Are we not leaving the door wide open for others to justify their actions based on this same argument - that removal of (fill in the blank--U.S president, congressman, foreign head of state, ...) would solve the world's problem or current crisis?
Both China and Russia have historically already justified such tactics themselves, and then some.
And in any event, the available circumstantial evidence I've seen does not point toward Muslims, OBL, or any of the other usual suspects.
No, it points elsewhere.
Interesting choice of target. We’ll get right on it.
I think it’s kinda funny you'll accept eyewitness accounts to refute everyday physics as gospel, but no personal admissions of criminal guilt. Weird.
Maybe you missed these:
Sunday October 14, 2001
The new threats from al-Qaida came from spokesman Sulaiman Abu Ghaith, in a video-taped statement broadcast on Qatar's Al-Jazeera Arabic TV news network.
He said Muslims in the US and Britain "should avoid travelling by air or living in high buildings or towers".
http://www.guardian.co.uk/waronterror/story/0,1361,573936,00.html
Thursday, December 13, 2001
”We calculated in advance the number of casualties from the enemy, who would be killed based on the position of the tower. We calculated that the floors that would be hit would be three or four floors. I was the most optimistic of them all. (...Inaudible...) due to my experience in this field, I was thinking that the fire from the gas in the plane would melt the iron structure of the building and collapse the area where the plane hit and all the floors above it only. This is all that we had hoped for. We were at (...inaudible...) when the event took place. We had notification since the previous Thursday that the event would take place that day. We had finished our work that day and had the radio on. It was 5:30 p.m. our time. I was sitting with Dr. Ahmad Abu-al-((Khair)). Immediately, we heard the news that a plane had hit the World Trade Center. We turned the radio station to the news from Washington. The news continued and no mention of the attack until the end. At the end of the newscast, they reported that a plane just hit the World Trade Center. After a little while, they announced that another plane had hit the World Trade Center. The brothers who heard the news were overjoyed by it.”
-- Usama bin Laden
http://uspolitics.about.com/library/blconfession.htm
Saturday, December 15, 2001
Prime Minister Tony Blair has said the video released by the US which apparently shows Bin Laden gloating about the September 11 attacks, confirms his involvement in the atrocities.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/1712729.stm
...or maybe it’s true that none of the above means crap to you?
It’s a nice ploy, sp -- but I think it needs a lot of work,
Dan
Current Events » in reply to Yes, but...
Re: China and Russia . . .
The whole thread (29 posts)
- "The basic flaw is military power does not stop terrorism."
- If military power could stop terrorism, it would have stopped terrorism.
- As a matter of interest...
- So let us all lay down our weapons and sing cumbiaya!
- I disagree with the two premises completely
- Neither does appeasement nor diplomacy
- Terrorism fails
- Re: "The basic flaw is military power does not stop terrorism."
- No, but the private interests in the defense department sure look good
- Bingo!
- Bzzzzt. Wrong-o. WWII. § (n/t)
