Warning: include(/home/annezook/public_html/sidebar.php) [function.include]: failed to open stream: Permission denied in /home/annezook/public_html/archives/000183.php on line 106

Warning: include() [function.include]: Failed opening '/home/annezook/public_html/sidebar.php' for inclusion (include_path='.:/usr/lib/php:/usr/local/lib/php') in /home/annezook/public_html/archives/000183.php on line 106
May 08, 2003
Quick Notes

Before I get back to work....

Okay, I can't agree with this one. I don't think you can award a $104M judgement in a cased based on "classic hearsay." Especially when that hearsay is based largely on the lies our government told us. I have a lot of sympathy for the families of those who died on 9/11, and certainly I understand their determination to "make someone pay" in some way for what they've suffered, but nicking Iraq for $104M based on nothing more than the Administration's unsubstantiated claims of a link smells bad. If the judge isn't aware of the dozens of published reports from this country and all over the world refuting the Iraq-bin Laden connection, then he didn't have any business ruling in the case.

That whole jet landing on the carrier thing was unnecessary and they've admitted it.

In the "lies, damned lies, and statistics" category, Arianna Huffington takes on debunking the numbers the White House would like us to believe when it comes to Bush's job approval ratings. And the media's complicity in the disinformation campaign before the war comes under scrutiny by Mark Weisbrot.

I have an opinion, okay? The State Department is right, the Department of Defense is hugely, incredibly wrong and should keep their fingers out of someone else's business.

And what is it with this? Are we announcing, in defiance of the opinion of the rest of the world, that terrorists have never been so scarce just to make it look as though Bush's war accomplished something? If there's a major terrorist attack anywhere in the world soon, will the USofA obediently ignore it so as not to upset Rove's plans to shore up Bush's image for 2004?

Let's not forget, among today's hullabaloo about finding another truck we can test for WMD evidence, that the Administration doesn’t expect to find WMD evidence and doesn't really care.

International Herald Tribune

Financial Times (requires subscription or sign-up for free trial period)


Common Dreams

Floyd Report

UK Guardian

Posted by AnneZook at 09:16 AM