coincidence and diversion (was Re: anthrax)
febboy at IX.NETCOM.COM
Fri Feb 20 21:00:26 MST 1998
At 07:17 PM 2/20/98 -0500, Dennis Putnam wrote:
>At 09:51 AM 2/20/98 -0700, you wrote:
>>Personally I think this is too much of a coincidence. The scandals in DC
>>are gaining momentum, and the public has already seen wag the dog. I can't
>>help but wonder if this is a scheme to divert attention from the Clinton
>>scandals. It would be just like him to pull something like this. Just
>>think how much attention this will get in the media.
>I agree with the convienent coincidence but not the diversion. I don't
>think this was staged to divert attention from fornigate but rather to drum
>up support, via fear mongering ( the number one tactic of clinton), for an
>attack on Iran.
I know you mean Iraq, but, hell, it wouldn't surprise me if,,,,
More information about the Rushtalk