118ham

HERE’S THE DEAL
by RB Ham

I don't doubt for one second the patriotism of the average American, or his/her right to protect
themselves from criminal acts of terrorism.
If, indeed, Osama bin Laden is THE one that masterminded the whole thing and is THE linchpin of this
whole Al Qaeda network, and he's so valuable to the Taliban that they'd rather be annihilated than
surrender him, and there is clear evidence that would be accepted in an international court of law -
then, by all means, I would also support this action. BUT...everything is too convenient - Occum's
Razor be damned.

Serious questions have been raised, as noted above, and there's ANOTHER angle yet to be explored
(although hinted at by some, usually right wing isolationists).
CHINA.
ISRAEL.
RUSSIA.

However, if that is a possibility - why does it seem that the CIA, the FBI, the NSA, John Ashcroft,
George W Bush, the entire mainstream media and the majority of the population BELIEVE SO
FIRMLY that Islamic Extremists are responsible? How can they so easily accept these outrageously
fortunate pieces of evidence?

If I were an FBI agent I would certainly wonder aloud.
Additionally, if these guys were so determined to leave evidence behind (why take luggage on a suicide
mission, loaded with incriminating evidence, jeopardizing the mission at the gate)why hasn't Osama or
the Taliban claim responsibility and play Politics?
The PLO, Hamas, the Kurds, etc. have all, in the past, done this. Isn't there some kind of code they
have like that? You know - honour among thieves.

I heard that reporter who interviewed Osama on the Letterman show, and he told Dave that these
"Mujahadeen" types are big on the Honour thing and think of Americans as cowards because we
bomb them from miles away.

I'm just saying that the American people have been led down this path before. The Spanish/American
War was started on the pretext of a terrorist-type act. Randolph William Hearst's newspaper - the
Faux News of the time - played it up with outright lies and distorted propaganda. Hearst told one of
his photographers, "You supply the pictures, I'll supply the war."

Not to mention the Pearl Harbour thing, the Gulf of Tonkin, JFK-MLK-MalcolmX-RFK, the Phoney
Drug War, Iran-Contra, the KLA-Taliban-Golden Triangle connection...
You know?

Sure, I'm just some Canuck with absolutely no right to tell you how to react to such a grievous assault
on your home soil.
But consider that the American revolution, the Civil War and reconstruction, the Civil Rights
Movement and the Militia Movement have all been accompanied by political violence.
Canada will march in lockstep with Britain and America whichever way we're told. We're allies, plus
you'd kick our ass economically if we didn't.

I'm just a lone, cynical, nut-job truck driver who dares to ask the questions that need to be asked.
If I can be this analytical and thoughtful, with nothing more than a high school degree and the College
of Hard Knocks certificate (bad back), how can it be beyond the ken of the political leadership of the "Allies".

It can be argued that Tony Blair is even scarier than Dubya in his rhetoric, and he's a Social Democrat,
so this isn't even a "Right Wing versus Left Wing" debate.
There's something else afoot, my friends.
Something big. So big that elections need to be stolen, events arranged, attacks perpetrated and wars fostered.

Perhaps...to ready the world for a Great Change?
Why are Weapons In Space so important?
Why is the Hubble Telescope such a big deal that trillions of dollars have been spent to maintain it
AND to control who sees what on it?

Why did the Vatican rush to construct their very own telescope on a mountain in Arizona, all red tape
quickly disposed of, while the rhetoric of the Pope has changed to that of mystic?
Talking about the end of the world, the third secret of Fatima, reconciling hundreds of years of enmity
between the three western traditional religions?
Points to ponder, indeed.

10-09-01