<html><body> <DIV>The fact that it wasn't expressed in public rather supports inferences  (1) That such "opposition" wasn't widely held or (2) was not firmly held. While politicos up for election in 2004, no doubt, feared the wrath of Bush and his minions, it is hard to see how others would be so cowed into silence in the face of an approaching debacle - which everyone in hindsight now claims to have seen coming.  I guess I'll have to buy Cockburn's book and to see the sources for the claim. - were these leadership level politicos and ex politicos or lower level functionaries in various governmental agencies?  SR </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid">-------------- Original message -------------- <BR>From: Doug Henwood <dhenwood@panix.com> <BR><BR> The <BR>> Occupation, that privately there was a lot of elite opposition, but <BR>> it wasn't expressed in public. Which means that you wouldn't have <BR>> read about it in the NYT in late2002/early 2003. That's the whole <BR>> point of the story. <BR>> <BR>> Doug <BR>> ___________________________________ <BR>> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk </BLOCKQUOTE></body></html>