Re: RE: NATO gets proof
Michael Zara <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.politics.leftists.monkeyfist |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
I do understand the notion that revelation of some of the evidence might expose critical intelligence assets that we wish to keep exploiting in the future. I'll buy that. Its a trade off, though, between protecting assets and keeping the boss (the people, goddamnit!) in the loop. What I don't buy is the notion, derived from "unity" and "standing behind the president" (Al Haig actually *said* "lockstep"!), that I have to trust the government to tell the truth about it all, and thus not criticize. That's another trade off that the government could make. If you want real support, and an end to carping -- make your case, Jack! -- "It is a tribute to the American people that our leaders perceived that they had to lie to us. It is not a tribute to us that we were so easily misled." -- Daniel Ellsberg On Tuesday, October 2, 2001, at 03:09 PM, Kendall Clark wrote: > On Tue, Oct 02, 2001 at 02:57:58PM -0700, Michael Zara wrote: >> Tony Blair gets proof that Sammy bin Laden was to blame. NATO gets >> proof. >> >> Everyone gets proof except me... and the rest of the American people. >> >> Maybe it is classified, eh? Well, I don't consider myself under any >> obligation to stop dissenting from US policy until *I* am briefed >> fully. > > Heh. I won't consider myself under any obligation to stop dissenting > from > it until it's *just*! > > If the proof is so compelling, why not make it public? Especially since > Washington hasn't given the slightest indication it has any intent of > actually pursuing a legal case against anyone involved. > > I suspect if there were such compelling evidence, we'd have seen it by > now. > > Kendall > _______________________________________________ > Bonobos maillist - Bonobos-4GNy1lrxftmrG/[email protected] > http://monkeyfist.com/mailman/listinfo/bonobos >