From: Peter Ruest (pruest@pop.mysunrise.ch)
Date: Wed Jun 11 2003 - 00:49:14 EDT
Hi, Glenn
some time ago, you expressed your strong conviction that oil was not and
could not be a major motive for the USA to wage the Iraq war - and I
gladly accepted this. So what should we think about the following?
Under the headline, "So then 'a war for oil' after all?", "Der Bund",
one of the leading daylies in Bern, Switzerland, wrote on 7th June (I
translate the end of the article):
"... these days, Wolfowitz literally poured more oil into the fire. At a
Asian security summit in Singapore, he declared last weekend that oil
had been the main reason for the war against Iraq. 'The most important
difference between North Korea and Iraq is that in Iraq we had no other
choice, for commercial reasons. The country is floating on a sea of
oil.' Wolfowitz's most recent disclosures followed shortly after a
provocative interview with the magazine 'Vanity Fair'. There, he had
said that, for reasons which have much to do with governmental
bureaucracy, one had chosen the war motive which all could accept:
weapons of mass destruction."
Is this another case of badly distorted information by the media, which
is all too rampant here in Switzerland (and Europe in general, I
suspect)?
Best,
Peter
-- Dr. Peter Ruest, CH-3148 Lanzenhaeusern, Switzerland <pruest@dplanet.ch> - Biochemistry - Creation and evolution "..the work which God created to evolve it" (Genesis 2:3)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Wed Jun 11 2003 - 00:48:48 EDT