Suspects' Flight Trainer Casts Doubt on Official Story
dwalters at igc.org
Thu Sep 13 16:47:57 MDT 2001
Well, I'll add my affirmation to Louis' point.
I think everyone on this list is "open" to the idea that the US *could* of
done it. But for this question, posed as a thesis to be true, then you have
to supply the hard evidence, a la "Pentagon Papers." Why? Because it's one
thing for a bunch of Marxists corresponding on the Internet to make any
charge we want, it's convincing the masses out there that in fact this
thesis is true, for that you need hard evidence or *really, really good*
circumstantial evidence. None of that exists yet and it will be some time
before it does, I suspect.
In the meantime, the attack did take place, and there is far more we can do
to place this in the *political* context than conspiracy theories. Even
though I disagreed with the particulars of Jared's focus on this question
yesterday, the context is something I would agree with...it's not the Eiffel
tower or the Tower of London that got hit, it was a symbol(s) of US
Imperialism and regardless of who carried out the assault, it was done so
within the context...100%...of US foreign policy (even if, as some may
argue, the US did do it)...this is where we need to discuss things and how
to mitigate the political damage.
PLEASE clip all extraneous text before replying to a message
More information about the Marxism