Declaration of War for Tiarnan

[Musashi Miyamoto]

Another Doug identity? Aw, who cares! String him up, boys!

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Tiarnan O'Corrain" <tiarnan.o'corrain at cmg.nl>
To: <pynchon-l at waste.org>
Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2001 11:21 AM
Subject: Declaration of War for Tiarnan


> 
> > From: The Great Quail [mailto:quail at libyrinth.com]
> 
> > Well, first of all, the evidence supplied evidently
> satisfied the UN
> > and Pakistan.
> 
> I'm not entirely sure who is satisfied about what. If I
> recall correctly,
> the US threatened Pakistan with further sanctions if they refused to
> comply. To date, the US has not sought UN security council approval
> for its actions.
> 
> The dossier of available evidence is pure conjecture. I don't argue
> that bin Laden is blameless, but there doesn't seem to be any
> evidence against him.
> 
> You can get the dossier at: http://www.guardian.co.uk in the Special
> Reports section entitled 'Attack on Afghanistan'.
> 
> > I really can't imagine that the Taliban would accept
> > any evidence at all except for perhaps film of bin Laden pointing
> > Atta and the others at planes; then pointing to a picture of the
> > World Trade Center, and then jumping up and down and making
> explosion
> > noises, and finally cutting them a check for a few million dollars.
> 
> Well, no one tried to supply them with evidence, so it's presumptious
> to predict their response.
> 
> > Mr. bin Laden actually made two formal declarations of Jihad, the
> > first one being the most relevant.
> 
> Bin Laden is not the Taliban. The Taliban are not Bin Laden. It seems,
> among the many Kute Korrespondences and dodgy elisions, that
> differences
> between the enemies are being, ever so slowly, smoothed over.
> The Taliban
> offered Bin Laden sanctuary. That does not inculpate them in the World
> Trade Centre attack.
> 
> As to bin Laden's declaration of war on the US... I've read it with
> interest. His main beef with the US seems to be their occupation of
> Saudi Arabia on behalf of the hopelessly unpopular and corrupt Fahd
> dynasty.
> 
> > >Indeed. The Afghans would probably be happier without the
> > >Taliban, under the peaceful rule of the Mujahadeen, when songbirds
> > >sang in verdant fields and little fauns dipped their ivory hooves
> > >in plashing rills.
> >
> > I think your sarcastic reply is a bit irrelevant. In no way
> was jbor
> > saying that the Mujahadeen, the Northen Alliance, or anyone else
> > represents some perfect golden age.
> 
> No, the sarcasm was aimed at the 'favour' the US were doing the Afghan
> people. Of course, the Taliban *do* think that they represent a
> golden age, along with many Wahabis.
> 
> > --Quail
> 
> Tiarnan
> 
>