If you look for OBL and Al-Kaida, maybe you look in the wrong country.
How about Jemen? Seems like they hide and train many more terrorist than
Iraq.
Therefore, why not attack Jemen?

Oh, I forget, do they have oil? Guess not.

How long did the US-government stand aside and watch what happend in
Afghanistan?. They killed civilians and nobody incl. Europe did nothing.
Why? Nothing to gain therefore everybody just watched until sept. 11th.

It is always just about money. For the US as well as for Europe and any
other country.
Nothing to gain and nobody will interfer or care.


On Wed, 12 Feb 2003 20:52:49 -0600, Denys Beauchemin <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:

>I like this thread, it is very educational.
>
>So, please explain to me which country had declared war on the USA when the
>USS Cole was attacked.  I was not aware that a state of war existed between
>the USA and another country, and it would seem that neither did the crew of
>the Cole.  Yes, there are dangerous areas in the world and the Cole should
>have been on high alert, especially where they were, but political
>correctness in those days was more important than security.
>
>Now you are going to tell me that no country had declared war on the USA at
>that time nor did any country declare war on the USA immediately after the
>USS Cole was attacked, or since.  If you say that some fanatical group or
>some religious group or some extremist group somewhere was behind the
>attack, then I will point out to you that it was indeed a terrorist act.
It
>was also a terrorist act to attack the Pentagon, even if you think it's a
>legitimate military target.  Since we were not at war when the Pentagon was
>attacked and that no country declared war on us after 9-11, the Pentagon
>attack was an act of terrorism.
>
>Even when Japan attacked Pearl Harbor, the Japanese tried to get the war
>declaration to Washington before the attack itself.  The Japanese
diplomatic
>corps in Washington screwed up and presented the declaration several hours
>after the fact, but they presented the declaration.
>
>As of yet, the only person who declared war on the USA (and actually on the
>entire civilized world,) is Osama bin Ladin, who did not speak for any
>country.  Even the Taliban who ruled Afghanistan tried to tell us they
>didn't have anything to do with bin Ladin.  They certainly did not want to
>declare war on us.
>
>Earlier in this thread, I posted a URL to bin Ladin's full message to
>America.  I repeat it here, so that if you missed it the first time, you
can
>see it now.
http://www.observer.co.uk/worldview/story/0,11581,845725,00.html
>
>This is where OBL explains why he did what he did and what he wants from us
>in order to stop.
>
>As the proud father of three lovely girls, I cannot think of a worse fate
>than having the Western World become Islamic states.
>
>You can debate all you want whether some of OBL's targets where legitimate
>or not or whether what he did was terrorism or not, it's irrelevant.  OBL
>represents a gang of thugs, a gang of terrorists.  He committed terrorist
>acts and none of the targets where legitimate.
>
>Denys
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: HP-3000 Systems Discussion [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf
Of
>Wayne R. Boyer
>Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2003 7:25 PM
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: OT: Terry Jones (from Monty Python) on War
>
>In a message dated 2/12/03 2:41:29 PM Pacific Standard Time,
>[log in to unmask] writes:
>
>
>> The attack on the Pentagon was done with a civilian aircraft...full of
>> civilians...that's terrorism.
>>
>
>Ray, I agree that the use of a plane full of civilians as a weapon adds a
>large element of terrorism to the act even if the target was highly
>military.
> That's why I said "One could also argue..."  I am NOT saying that the
>Pentagon attack was NOT a terrorist attack.  I am just pointing out that it
>is a military target just like Saddam's military headquarters will be and
it
>was logical to consider the Pentagon a target for Osama's men.
>
>The terrorism logic doesn't apply to the attack on the Cole though.  No
>civilians and a 100% military target.  I've heard that attack being
referred
>to as a 'terrorist" attack many times now.  My basic point is that the word
>'terrorism' is being greatly overused.
>
>Wayne
>
>* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
>* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *
>
>* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
>* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *