That afternoon, American signals operators picked up bin Laden speaking to his followers. Fury kept a careful log of these communications in his notebook, which he would type up at the end of every day and pass up his chain of command. “The time is now,” bin Laden said. “Arm your women and children against the infidel!” Following several hours of high-intensity bombing, the Al Qaeda leader spoke again. Fury paraphrases: “Our prayers have not been answered. Times are dire. We didn’t receive support from the apostate nations who call themselves our Muslim brothers.” Bin Laden apologized to his men for having involved them in the fight and gave them permission to surrender.
posted by jason's_planet
on Jan 29, 2010 -
26 comments
Missile Defense- the biggest security lapse on 9/11. Condoleeza Rice was to deliver a speech regarding the White House's position on national security on September 11th, 2001. The speech contained no mention of al-Qaeda and stated missile defense as the central focus of security, implicating Bill Clinton for "not doing enough about the real threat - long-range missiles." An interesting revelation coming from the campaign claiming their opponents are "wrong on defense."
posted by XQUZYPHYR
on Apr 1, 2004 -
37 comments
John Dean's analysis of the administrations case for War. "What I found, in critically examining Bush's evidence, is not pretty. The African uranium matter is merely indicative of larger problems, and troubling questions of potential and widespread criminality when taking the nation to war. It appears that not only the Niger uranium hoax, but most everything else that Bush said about Saddam Hussein's weapons was false, fabricated, exaggerated, or phony."
posted by thedailygrowl
on Jul 18, 2003 -
73 comments
Plans For Iraq Attack Began On 9/11 "CBS News has learned that barely five hours after American Airlines Flight 77 plowed into the Pentagon, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld was telling his aides to come up with plans for striking Iraq — even though there was no evidence linking Saddam Hussein to the attacks." Rumsfeld: "Go massive ... Sweep it all up. Things related and not."
posted by owillis
on Sep 5, 2002 -
61 comments
Art Fights Back — an exhibit of poster art at Veterans Memorial Auditorium in Des Moines, Iowa — displays images dedicated to the memory of September 11 and support of the Unites States and its troops. Seems like a typical thing to do around war time, right?
Take a close look at the
actual poster design. Don't they seem rather
non-American in their artistic style? In fact, they recall an era of poster design for a
dramatically different context than what was typically thought of as U.S. patriotism.
posted by Down10
on Mar 11, 2002 -
39 comments
"Peaceful Tomorrows" launches tomorrow (Feb 14th). "Peaceful Tomorrows continues the work of family members who took part in the Walk for Healing and Peace from the Pentagon to the World Trade Center (winter 2001) as well as those who met with Afghan families affected by the subsequent bombing campaign (January 2002).
Our goal is to facilitate dialogues on alternatives to war that utilize all of America's collective wisdom, skills and talents. "
Good luck Peaceful Tomorrows!
posted by crasspastor
on Feb 13, 2002 -
1 comment
The New War on Terror Noam
Chomsky has written a book called
9-11. He analyses the situation in a long essay published in
Counterpunch.
Quote:
We certainly want to reduce the level of terror, certainly not escalate it. There is one easy way to do that and therefore it is never discussed. Namely stop participating in it.
posted by alex63
on Oct 26, 2001 -
62 comments
On September 30th, there was a peace protest in Washington D.C. I'm surprised no one else linked to this -- about 50 students from
my college attended and joined the crowd of a few thousand. I would have gone, but I'm dubious about the efficacy of public protest despite the fact that I'm an affirmed pacifist. What do you folks think? Will a totally non-military action be an appropriate response? (And is there any possiblity of the US acting in such a way?) Is the loss of a single additional human life in this new war justifiable?
posted by tweebiscuit
on Oct 3, 2001 -
109 comments
'
AMERICA and Britain are producing secret plans to launch a ten-year “war on terrorism”..' declares
this (otherwise fairly generic) article without citing its sources. Be prepared for the possible oxymoron of a line that is '
the whole focus of the long-term American approach was being driven by Richard Cheney..'
Oh yeah -- hate to promote Murdoch media but also noteworthy in this mornings edition of the London Times are the revelations that whilst 200 British '
are certain to have perished', a further
800 are missing following the disaster and a piece warning of a '
nightmare scenario' in which Pakistan could
lose control of its nuclear weapons to none other than THE TALIBAN.
posted by Kino
on Sep 20, 2001 -
8 comments
9-11peace.org
Working for peace in the wake of September 11.
For those who have wondered just what exactly they can do besides flying the US flag or posting on MeFi (myself included in the latter).
This comprehensive site offers all sorts of concrete actions for those who believe that war is not the answer. You can email your elected officials; sign petitions; browse a list of suggested actions (from donating supplies for rescue dogs to flying the UN flag); and find out about upcoming events.
posted by mapalm
on Sep 18, 2001 -
49 comments
Appeasement. Chamberlain sat at a table with Hitler in 1938 signing a treaty and proclaiming "peace for our time". Shortly after, World War II began.
Killing innocent people does not solve the problem, but sitting at a table with your enemy and proclaiming peace (when he just wants to kill more) does no good either.
posted by owillis
on Sep 15, 2001 -
36 comments
From PVP Online's Forums: "If we do wage war, will we be any better? What happened today, 9-11-01, was atrocious and could not be justified by any means. However, how could we justify violence while abhoring it?"
posted by philulrich
on Sep 12, 2001 -
11 comments
Paratroopers? Or cruise missiles? What will America's military response be if the Taliban are determined to be liable? The Russians certainly didn't too well with a conventional military attack on Afghanistan.
posted by MattD
on Sep 11, 2001 -
34 comments
