- Last defendant sentenced in hockey riot. His lawyer’s not happy about it, claiming that his client was just standing near a car that later got damaged. Yes, I agree that the punishment should be differernt for people who actually did damage vs. those just standing around, but when there’s a riot going on, even spectators (and news crews) are contributing to it by providing an audience.
- Big Storm Is In The Cards: Shovel and ruler ready? was the warning before it started snowing. Beastly storm is also a beauty has today’s dire predictions of snow and doom. Last night was nasty for driving, but mostly because the snow started when the streets were still above freezing, so there was a nice layer of liquid water under the snow. It was slippery out there. There hasn’t been a snow emergency declared yet, but when there is, here are the Snow Emergency Parking Rules (2003-2004). If I were a betting man, I’d bet it gets declared later today, which would mean it would take effect at 9pm this evening, which means I’m parked on the wrong side of the street for tomorrow, and will have to move my car. Dangit. I thought I was okay until 8am Tuesday.
- Lawmakers Approve Expansion of F.B.I.’s Antiterrorism Powers. Sheesh.
- All of a sudden the Patriot Act isn’t just about terrorists anymore. Well, it never was just about terrorism. But it’s proving useful to prosecute topless dancers. Good thing we have that law to
save innocent American lives
from boobies. [endwar] - Who do you believe? Part 3 is Jim’s response to my flurry regarding an Iraq/Al Qaeda connection. Well, it took me a while to respond, but here we go:
First, Jim cites an official statement from the DOD which says in part:
which is not a denial. It simply says that there were no conclusions drawn. It’s still possible for a person to look at the information presented and draw his own conclusions.The classified annex was not an analysis of the substantive issue of the relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda, and it drew no conclusions.
Jim next cites a transcript of a press conference in January 2003, in which President Bush replies to the question:
by sayingOne question for you both. Do you believe that there is a link between Saddam Hussein, a direct link, and the men who attacked on September the 11th?
Again, there’s no denial. President Bush couldn’t make that claim at the time, but that doesn’t mean it’s true or false, just that he couldn’t talk about it. (By the way Jim, you used President Bush as your ultimate source, not penultimate.)I can’t make that claim.
My take on the whole matter is still that there were connections between Saddam Hussein (probably via the Iraqi Intelligence Service) and Al-Qaeda. As another friend said in an email:
and I think that hits the nail right on the head.I’ve been following the Osama/Saddam stuff too, and like you I think that there most certainly were connections–it would be ludicrous to assume there weren’t! But it’s a bit of a leap to assume that Saddam was “responsible” for 9/11, which fact apparently a majority of your countrymen believe. I suspect that certain elements within the House of Saud bear substantially more culpability…
But we couldn’t do anything about the Saudis without finding a backup oil supply first. And Saddam was convenient both for that, as well as being some unfinished business left over from Daddy’s watch.
The other factor that almost certainly figured into the calculations was that the other countries that were supporting Al Qaeda were unsuitable for being first on the list: the Saudis control a large portion of the world’s oil; the Pakistanis have nukes (and getting sucked into the dispute with India over Kashmir wouldn’t be in the US’s best interests anytime soon); the Iranians may change on their own; and while Syria may have been worth looking at, Iraq looked like the best place to start driving a wedge and making real change in the middle east.
I think the biggest thing that Jim (along with many others who think President Bush is too stuipid to tie his own shoes) misses is that there seems to be a long-term (and fairly complex) plan to make substantial changes in the political landscape in the Middle East. It’s a War on Terrorism, not just a war on Al Qaeda, or a war on Saddam Hussein. I fear it’s being used as an excuse for a War on Freedom within the US too, but from what I’ve been able to see, attacking Iraq made a lot of sense. [jim] - Team sets out to find Japanese troops still fighting the war. It’s a quagmire, I tell ya.