Quantcast

Web Letters | The Nation

9/11 Plus Seven > Letters

Web Letter

In re "the strategy that the Bush Administration conceived in the wake of 9/11 to wage its so-called "Global War on Terror": Come on. It is indisputable that the strategy was conceived well before 9/11. And there is plenty of evidence as well that 9/11 was either allowed to happen or made to happen to enable the strategy.

Study 9/11. Don't get bogged down in the "conspiracy" dispute details, just follow the cover-up. Why did evidence need to be destroyed? Why did the investigation need to be controlled? Why was the Minnesota field office not allowed to investigate Moussaoui? Why has it taken NIST seven years to issue an explanation for the collapse of Building 7, only to invoke an unheard-of new effect of fire in a steel building that completely changes all previous understandings of the effects of office fires? Why is the link between Ali Mohamed and the hijackers never discussed?

The questions go on and on. Look at them. Try to answer them. Stop parroting Chomsky and other leftist gatekeepers and think for yourselves.

John Omniade

San Francisco, CA

Sep 11 2008 - 10:03pm

Web Letter

With no investigation of the crime or the crime scene or any of the billions of suspects, nobody is able, justly and rightly, to describe anyone else's strategy as being only "post 9/11."

If, aware of the above, one still chooses to proceed, then surely--at least when the question of the whereabouts of all of our money arises--he cannot say that Bush's strategy "has failed." (Bush himself can't say that, and he's probably the last person on earth who'd want to.)

Cameron Jones

Indiana, PA

Sep 11 2008 - 9:03am

Web Letter

In history class in Virginia as an Auditor Student, 1965: I cannot forget that session: "Oone, what is your opinion on the Vietnam War?" Taking as reference the recent invasion of Guatemala to preserve the supposedly threatened interests of the United Fruit Co., the straight answer from this young foreigner was, "Eet's a big trusts business there."

"All right, Oone tell us what business is there?" "Eet ees rubber business!" "No, Oone, that is not enough for such a heavy war, it is a strategical war. It means a valuable positioning for the confrontation with the Soviet Union." (Hell, mister, Vietnam is a crowded place!) I would have preferred an explanation in terms of honor, like the one that "someone" started by sinking a barge to thrash bankrupt Spain... But between the Soviet Union and Vietnam is the Himalayas--in that case Alaska is a better position.

Forty-three years later what do we mostly find , Bush cliques damaged us worse than a (forgotten) bin Laden.

About the monthly thousands murdered by direct USA military operations, scant words and certainly less reflection.

How many people in the USA still feel the right to experiment like an Empire?

What is the difference, in that respect, between Obama and McCain?

Juan Bosco Garcia Cantu

Xalapa, Veracruz, Mexico

Sep 11 2008 - 2:17am

Web Letter

Given the ways by which History works itself out, it is several decades too early to say that the Bush "Global War On Terror" has either failed or succeeded. Judging by several secondary factors, I would say it has a quite decent chance to do a lot of good. So let us see in about 2035 or so.

In the foreign policy field, the greatest enemy is your own stupid impatience.

John D. Froelich

Upper Darby, PA

Sep 11 2008 - 12:08am

Before commenting, please read our Community Guidelines.