Bollettino
The Bush administration’s spin on the absence of any evidence of alliance between Al Qaeda and Iraq has been covered by the word “relationship” in the normal, deceitful way in which the Bush administration has chosen to talk about all foreign policy matters in the last three years. A point amply made by Fred Kaplan in Slate, who is repenting for his support for the war not by engaging in the Newspeak of such as the New York Times, retreating glacially from their record of misreporting while supporting ardently their misreporters, but by acts of real contrition. Making him almost unique in the press.
Why, however, don’t reporters uncover the meaning of the word “relationship” by asking simple comparative questions? As for instance – who was closer to al qaeda in 2001 – the government of Pakistan or the government of Iraq?
Who supplied al qaeda with more money – Saudi Arabia or Iraq?
Who supplied al qaeda with more weapons – the Pakistan Secret Service or Iraq?
Simple questions. Which, of course, will never be asked.
“I’m so bored. I hate my life.” - Britney Spears
Das Langweilige ist interessant geworden, weil das Interessante angefangen hat langweilig zu werden. – Thomas Mann
"Never for money/always for love" - The Talking Heads
Monday, June 21, 2004
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Trump's Gleichschaltung
The NYT gave us a splash of its usual ideology-washing prose yesterday regarding the resignation of the UVA president, which came about as...
-
You can skip this boring part ... LI has not been able to keep up with Chabert in her multi-entry assault on Derrida. As in a proper duel, t...
-
LI feels like a little note on politics is called for. The comments thread following the dialectics of diddling post made me realize that, ...
-
Ladies and Gentlemen... the moment you have all been waiting for! An adventure beyond your wildest dreams! An adrenaline rush from start to...
No comments:
Post a Comment