June 20, 2005
Aren't Rogues Sovereign?
by Lorraine Berry
I've held off on commenting on the "we know where Bin Laden is" stories that official organ of the Bush administrationTime magazine is touting in its interview with CIA Director Porter Goss. This is the same administration that has had "excellent ideas" where to find just about everything. Problem is, in order to have excellent ideas, they have to be based on reality, and this administration is a little reality-challenged.
The director of the CIA says he has an "excellent idea" where Osama bin Laden is hiding, but that the United States' respect for sovereign nations makes it more difficult to capture the al-Qaida chief.
But this quotation in the lastest news snippet made me spit coffee on my keyboard. We have respect for sovereign nations? Really?
I think this may be one of those semantics problems. A "sovereign nation" is one that allows us to "extraordinary rendition" our human rights issues, takes our money and allows us to place our bases there, or, in general, accepts our current administration's definition of emissions standards, human rights, or science. "Rogue nations" are those who give us the finger. If Bin Laden was hiding in a rogue nation, we'd be invading in a New York minute.
Posted by in Democracy, Empire, Media, Osama Bin Laden, Terrorism, War
Permalink |
Comments (1)
| TrackBack (0) | Technorati Cosmos
Trackbacks
Trackback for this post:http://www.culturekitchen.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.cgi/3043
The following blogs make reference to this post :
Say it loud, say it proud!
I know coming from Canada, that perhaps my opinion is quite jaded, but when did sovereignty ever stop the United States doing what they wanted to do? If it is not overt, it is covert. Even my government will follow suit, if they can get away with it and they do. eg: Haiti
I too choked on that line. Those rogue nations, really?
1
Comment by: rhondda at June 20, 2005 07:06 PM