Terror Inc.

[Michael McIntyre]

So does that mean we go after ISI next?  Our valiant erstwhile Pakistani allies in the fight against terror?  The ones we let flee down a rathole in Kunduz (taking substantial numbers of al-Qaeda and Taliban cadre with them)?  Track Osama through NWFP and Azad Kashmir?  Or perhaps go to the source and join with our glorious Indian allies in a drive on Allahabad?  Wouldn't anything less be inconsistent, cowardly, morally idiotic, and craven appeasement?

Michael McIntyre


>>> dperrin at comcast.net 05/04/02 06:46 AM >>>
> The principle is similar: local thugs who stepped in where national
> authorities could not or did not step in, who had only the most minimal
> local support, who combined tactical shrewdness and business sense with a
> penchant for terrifying violence, etc. Al-Q could get away with more than
> Al-C, is all. Brecht's "Arturo Ui" may have been wrong about Hitler, but
> got Osama right.
>
> -- Dennis

Al-Qaeda is quite a bit more than Al Capone, and the Taliban (and Saudi
Arabia and its collaborators in the Pakistani ISI) are quite a bit more than
corrupt cops on the beat. Sorry, this comparison just won't take.

DP