Pollitt column

hncl at panix.com hncl at panix.com
Fri Oct 19 12:52:45 PDT 2001


Jacob Segal wrote:
>
> Sullivan also mocked Pollitt for stammering at one point, a method he
> defended (in response to a email from me) on the principle that her stammer
> indicated a lack of argument.
>

Yuk. What a creep. Must be 'roid rage. -- Curtiss

PS. When Katha Pollitt writes:


> ...If not war, what? Realistically,
> some of the alternatives that have been proposed would also involve
> military action. Osama bin Laden is not likely to mail himself to the
> International Criminal Court to be tried for crimes against humanity;
> the disarming of both the Taliban and the Northern Alliance by United
> Nations peacekeepers, followed by free and democratic elections--the
> course favored by the Revolutionary Association of the Women of
> Afghanistan--is not likely to happen peacefully either.

I have to ask in turn, why war against Afghanistan now? War against the Taleban and al Qaeda offers the possibility of peace and justice only if al Qaeda is a top-down organization like our own military--but it isn't. We could drag bin Laden out of a cave, put him on trial in Manhattan for the murder of everyone who died in the Trade Center, and have him be the first person that New York executes under our bright shiny new death penalty, and neither have eliminated the threat of terror or brought to justice anyone who enabled the 9/11 hijackers to do their filthy work.

And has she got RAWA's position right? I thought they were calling for an uprising.



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list