I make no claims about this paper, except, well, the name makes is sound legit. You've got the denial of a man of dubious integrity vs. 2 (alleged) eyewitness accounts. http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/07/16/1089694568757.html?oneclick=true
I think I remember SMH running some pretty dubious stories in the past, altho I don't know of any specific ones off the top of my head. Sure their name sounds legit, but then again so does World Net Daily. I don't believe they're the main Sydney daily, altho I could be wrong.
Uh oh. Given what I know (or think I know) about Allawi's background, this story is plausible. But Alex is right, I have a recollection of seeing some oddball stuff from the SMH.
Thanks. Now I have to wipe up all this coffee. Here's an interview with the guy who wrote it. His journalistic credentials are solid (but then so were Judith Millers...) and if what he says about his sources are true.... http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2004/s1155990.htm
I remember something about this last week, or the week before. It was in a couple different papers, but nothing came of it. The story died as quickly as it was published.
I believe that particular transportation company is represented by the law offices of Emerson, Lake, and Palmer.
Great way to hijack a thread and steer the discussion towards something completely unrelated. And it doesn't matter what I believe, what matters is the law, and under the law, should Osama bin Laden be captured, he is entitled to the same rights and treatment as Charles Manson and every other serial killer we've ever had. The simple fact of the matter is that you cannot claim Iraq to be a beacon of future democracy and whatnot if the leader of Iraq is engaging in such dastardly and egregious acts, and the US should support such a man or any of his associates. Because you would think we would've learned after the last few decades...
The problem with Ian and the other dittoheads is that believe that it IS ok to kill people like this. Hell, they worship the cowboy in the White House. They think Shrub's "shoot first, ask questions later" mentality is something to be emulated, not condemned. Given who Allawi learned "democracy" from, it wouldn't be at all surprising for him to commit such acts.
You guys said it was not our business to get involved in Iraq, now you're trying to dictate how they carry out their affairs. There nation is being attacked by insurgents, killing innocent Iraqis and trying to unstabilize their new government. Check history to see what sort of vigilante justice was given to the British in the American Revolution.
Wow. Vigailante justice against the British in the American Revolution? Wow. I'm continually amazed at your endless supply of ignorance, Ian.
I'm continually amazed at your ability to side with the terrorists, merely because you have a common enemy (Bush).
Iraq became our problem on March 19, 2003. The day we invaded. Progressives aren't afraid of a good fight. However, we do get really annoyed when he have to put up with an administration that has no bearing on reality. When the policy is "regime change," you'd think it should be a change for the better. $200,000,000,000 should buy us a lot of democracy. I wouldn't mind seeing something of value for the $10,000+ I spent on it.
What if one or more of the "insurgents" was in fact nothing of the sort? An Omelettes/eggs issue, I presume? Summary execution is better than no execution? And what of the stated neocon objective/justification that this adventure in Iraq would bestow upon the Iraqis the considerable blessing of American-style freedom? Presumably you do not believe this sort of event to be representative of that ambition? Or perhaps it is and you just don't have a problem with that. I can never fully decide whether a trawl through your fetid little mind is fascinating, repellent, comical or all of the above, tough guy.