Doug Henwood wrote:
>
>
> The only conspiracy element of the quoted bit is the wager, and that
> could be a joke. Appointments like Abrams, Negroponte, and Reich are
> outrages right out in the open - and rather unambiguous symbols that
> Bush has surrounded himself with some of the more egregious thugs
> U.S. imperialism has ever deployed. Just what are you objecting to
> here?
>
Ooops. And I complain about Ian's laconicism. I agree. I was not objecting to this post by Hakki. It's a very interesting post and makes (as you say) an important point. My point was that his earlier barrage of posts pushing various conspiracy theories had created a context in which many were apt to skip this post without reading it. I almost did myself, assuming (incorrectly) that it would be just one more follow-up to his earlier arguments on conspiracy.
Carrol