[kj] interview

[pr 001]

>From: "fluw" <fluwdot@earthlink.net>
>
>oh i wouldn't say it is offensive to suggest,

i do. and there are people on this list who lost close relatives on 9-11 i 
wonder how they feel about it. also, he wasn't suggesting it, he was stating 
it as fact. (well, i haven't heard the interview actually, but that's the 
impression i got from the quote.)

>history tells us the likelihood that it WASN'T staged is rare.

how does history tell us this? you're going to have to elaborate on this 
claim, todd. and don't just say JFK.

>but i think the term he used, 'staged', is what is incorrect...more like 
>the hijackers where accommodated, their plans harbored, and covertly 
>accompliced.

yes, but he DID use the term "staged" and so did you. he is claiming that 
the powers that be convinced a bunch of arab zealots to give up their own 
lives so that the USA may invade two arab nations.

like i said, it would be reasonable to suggest that it is possible the 
americans allowed it to happen, but to even state that as hard fact betrays 
a hopelessly deluded mind. to flat out claim that is was perpetrated by the 
USA is nothing short of mental illness. that's how consipiracy theorists 
give themselves away, they don't suggest things as possible but state them 
as unquestionable.

someone really needs to give jaz a slap in the face and tell him to stop 
pretending he's noam chomsky because he isn't. i prefer his more personal 
lyrics, his geopolitics bore me. and he's doing the anti-war movement harm 
by making them look stupid. for example, i agree that technically blair is a 
war criminal by the definition, but when you make that powerful accusation 
alongside such ridiculous claptrap you weaken its effect.

_________________________________________________________________
MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*.  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus