Having been busy the last couple of days, I haven't had time to catch up -
or respond to - all of the posts that flowed in, or to read them all
properly, so if I cover ground that's already been well dug, forgive me.
:-)

On Wednesday, July 16, 2003 9:17 AM, Lee Bell wrote:

(snip)
> Personally, I think you're greatly underestimating the ability of
> intelligence agencies, ours, yours or anybody else's, to create the
> appearance of whatever they believe most benefits their agenda.  There
were
> lots of military units in the country, lots of transports coming and going
> and, I'm quite sure, lots of supplies that journalists never saw.  I think
> even I could manage to figure out how to plant something incriminating in
> the middle of some desert.

Mate!  Even allowing that intelligence agencies are actually intelligent,
the only way to keep a lid on things with modern communications technology
is to do what the Pharoes did when they built the pyramids and wanted to
protect their secrets!  :-)

They couldn't even sustain the "Saving Private Jessica Lynch" myth, so I
don't think that they'd find it easy - or desirable - to plant incriminating
evidence and then try and ensure that those in the know maintained their
silence.  That'd be a bigger WMD than the WMD's they wanted to plant! :-)

> > And it's not really worth it.

> I'm not sure you're right about this.  Just as the patriotic zeal of the
> U.S. was triggered by our country's actions and the reactions of other
> countries, our patriotic indignation has been triggered by being lied to.

Political animals seldom lie!  They merely adapt the facts to suit their own
purposes.  :-)

Strike