Wednesday, November 15, 2006

the peacekeepers are really a Nato army in disguise?

* Fisk:
"The UN troops claim they are in Lebanon to protect the Shia. The Shia think they're there to protect Israel from Hizbollah. Is this because the peacekeepers are really a Nato army in disguise?
[]
So Hizbollah will be the most powerful defenders of the European armies in southern Lebanon. Now there's something to think about."
* kathleen:
"The newly elected Maliki gov't stood up and proposed a Peace Plan, which included an agreement with the Sunnis to lay down their arms if the US withdrew within two years, was the best idea I've heard on how best to exit Iraq. Why we did not support this is beyond my comprehension. That certainly was the moment to declare, Mission Accomplished. How many American servicemen and women have died since then? How many more Iraqis?"
* this via simon:
"In January, the BBC is to broadcast a four-part series focusing on conspiracies, called Conspiracy Files, which will explore inconsistencies in official accounts .... During the four-part TV series, the BBC will also examine the death of Diana, Princess of Wales in 1997; the Oklahoma Bombing of 1995 and the al Qaida attacks of 9/11."

1 comment:

Simon said...

It's kind of notable that the BBC has chosen not to investigate the US Anthrax attacks. Still, OKC remains a mystery. Reports have gone a bit quiet since about 2002. The following was seemingly filed in court but nothing much seems to have happened since:

IV. STATEMENT OF THE CASE

7. The parties hereto, based on their collective knowledge and on the knowledge of other victims of the bombing of April 19, 1995, believe that the attack was not as simple as has been portrayed by the United States government during the criminal trials of Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols. Specifically, upon information and belief, Plaintiffs assert that other individuals were involved in preparation for and execution of the attack. Plaintiffs assert that the entire plot was, in whole or in part, orchestrated, assisted technically and/or financially, and directly aided by agents of The Republic of Iraq. Plaintiffs further assert that this attack was an illegal continuation of the Persian Gulf War. Plaintiffs herein assert that they or their loved ones are, in effect, civilian casualties of said Gulf War in a manner contrary to the Geneva Convention and other applicable international treaties. Plaintiffs assert that the involvement and complicity of Iraq can be proven by both direct and circumstantial evidence in classic application, i.e., means, opportunity and motive, to wit:...


I wonder what the BBC has heard since?