Toh, who will review: Paul Wolfowitz ... Interviewed by the press correspondents, Maurizio Molinari, that, during the reign George W. Bush, was number two in the Pentagon "neocons" and the first prominent ideologue of the "endless war", says his killing of Osama Bin Laden. It says - it is not clear based on what logic, even more than on the basis of such sources - that the relevant information to reach the big boss of Al Qaeda came from interviews conducted in the prison at Guantanamo Bay.
Or, more precisely, from that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed who was, at the time, one of the most important lieutenants of bin Laden. Which, Wolfowitz stresses, without hesitation during the interview, "should give pause to those who have previously criticized the management of these interviews, coming up to talk about torture, and professing the need to close Guantanamo.
I hope that those who have supported these positions are now aware of the importance of this election we were creating a military prison to lock up the super-terrorists. " Brilliant. And that statement would be even more brilliant if Wolfowitz spending of a few words to explain to the crowd how a person locked up since March of 2003 in a state of total isolation in the most isolated prison on the planet (the gulag at Guantanamo for the note) has failed to provide elements for an operation which took place eight years later, almost the antipodes of the planet.
But not really, in this context, the case to go into details. The details - and more generally of the facts, or reality whatsoever to contradict his view of the world - the good Paul has always been a sworn enemy. And what is pressed in an interview with him, obviously, do not reconstruct the events, but redeem himself from the proverbial "dustbin of history" which just by events - ie: just the outcome of the war in Iraq that he himself with enlightening words predicted short, victorious and almost free - it had been shipped with improper delay well before the Bush presidency would turn over.
The Iraqis, he said with prophetic energy Wolfowitz on the eve of the conflict, "will welcome us as liberators." And the necessary military operations (swift and almost painless) will pay for themselves, through "re-entry into the Iraqi oil." The war in Iraq - with unusual candor admitted the Pentagon's number two in an interview with Vanity Fair in the spring of 2003 - was not, as its leaders were saying, the response to an emergency (the famous "on rmi of mass destruction "that Saddam was preparing to use), but part of a new global strategy.
That, precisely, of "endless war" against terror. A war in which Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda were not a very transient episode. And here is the point. The hunt for Osama and the country of Afghanistan were not in the vision of "neocon", that the pretext, the starting point of an overall strategy that had in the Iraq war - and not in destroying the terrorist network of Al Qaeda - his focal point.
Try to refresh your memory to be affected (click here for video), what, 16 March 2003, George W. responded to a reporter who asked about the hunt for Bin Laden. "You know, That I just do not spend much time on HIM ...." You know what? I just do not lose too much time thinking about him ....
" No, Osama was not reached and punished by the courts (I will not discuss here because this is really just so much like justice to revenge) through Guantanamo and all that Guantánamo has become a symbol. No, the substance of Obama was not - as in the "compliment" with the President have very slippery supported many old tools of the gang that gave the world the war in Iraq - to "continue the Bush policy," but to try (albeit with great timidity) to close it, to put on his legs that anti-terrorist strategy in Iraq, terrorism had become the breeding grounds.
Osama has been reached and punished due to a carefully prepared by a police intelligence work. And the real question is why, to get to this police operation, it took ten years, two wars (with a death toll that - with the exception of the five thousand fallen "Western" - no one has ever bothered to count ) and, finally, the shame of Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo.
That this connection is worth mentioning that in the case of Khalid Sheik Mohammed, it has been - as with almost surreal cockiness reminds Wolfowitz - "even to speak of torture, for the simple fact that he has been on for over sixty times practiced the "waterboarding", a technique considered this (torture) since the time of the Inquisition ...
No, dear neocons of all latitudes. I'm sorry, but there is no punishment that fits, there is no revenge, no "victory" real or fake, who can redeem the shame ... 
Or, more precisely, from that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed who was, at the time, one of the most important lieutenants of bin Laden. Which, Wolfowitz stresses, without hesitation during the interview, "should give pause to those who have previously criticized the management of these interviews, coming up to talk about torture, and professing the need to close Guantanamo.
I hope that those who have supported these positions are now aware of the importance of this election we were creating a military prison to lock up the super-terrorists. " Brilliant. And that statement would be even more brilliant if Wolfowitz spending of a few words to explain to the crowd how a person locked up since March of 2003 in a state of total isolation in the most isolated prison on the planet (the gulag at Guantanamo for the note) has failed to provide elements for an operation which took place eight years later, almost the antipodes of the planet.
But not really, in this context, the case to go into details. The details - and more generally of the facts, or reality whatsoever to contradict his view of the world - the good Paul has always been a sworn enemy. And what is pressed in an interview with him, obviously, do not reconstruct the events, but redeem himself from the proverbial "dustbin of history" which just by events - ie: just the outcome of the war in Iraq that he himself with enlightening words predicted short, victorious and almost free - it had been shipped with improper delay well before the Bush presidency would turn over.
The Iraqis, he said with prophetic energy Wolfowitz on the eve of the conflict, "will welcome us as liberators." And the necessary military operations (swift and almost painless) will pay for themselves, through "re-entry into the Iraqi oil." The war in Iraq - with unusual candor admitted the Pentagon's number two in an interview with Vanity Fair in the spring of 2003 - was not, as its leaders were saying, the response to an emergency (the famous "on rmi of mass destruction "that Saddam was preparing to use), but part of a new global strategy.
That, precisely, of "endless war" against terror. A war in which Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda were not a very transient episode. And here is the point. The hunt for Osama and the country of Afghanistan were not in the vision of "neocon", that the pretext, the starting point of an overall strategy that had in the Iraq war - and not in destroying the terrorist network of Al Qaeda - his focal point.
Try to refresh your memory to be affected (click here for video), what, 16 March 2003, George W. responded to a reporter who asked about the hunt for Bin Laden. "You know, That I just do not spend much time on HIM ...." You know what? I just do not lose too much time thinking about him ....
" No, Osama was not reached and punished by the courts (I will not discuss here because this is really just so much like justice to revenge) through Guantanamo and all that Guantánamo has become a symbol. No, the substance of Obama was not - as in the "compliment" with the President have very slippery supported many old tools of the gang that gave the world the war in Iraq - to "continue the Bush policy," but to try (albeit with great timidity) to close it, to put on his legs that anti-terrorist strategy in Iraq, terrorism had become the breeding grounds.
Osama has been reached and punished due to a carefully prepared by a police intelligence work. And the real question is why, to get to this police operation, it took ten years, two wars (with a death toll that - with the exception of the five thousand fallen "Western" - no one has ever bothered to count ) and, finally, the shame of Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo.
That this connection is worth mentioning that in the case of Khalid Sheik Mohammed, it has been - as with almost surreal cockiness reminds Wolfowitz - "even to speak of torture, for the simple fact that he has been on for over sixty times practiced the "waterboarding", a technique considered this (torture) since the time of the Inquisition ...
No, dear neocons of all latitudes. I'm sorry, but there is no punishment that fits, there is no revenge, no "victory" real or fake, who can redeem the shame ...
No comments:
Post a Comment