<The quotes are accurate but I cannot believe them literally any more than I can believe in Santa Claus today. It would be nice, but it ain't just true. I do not expect the 9-11 commission to come out and say Islamic terrorism (which is the more popular term used in the USA), a message sent out by the Bush administration and media. It is NOT IslamIST terrorism which I believe is paying lip-service and being politically correct.
I am not saying everyone in the USA is anti-Muslim (there are 6 million American Muslims) but I believe the 9-11 commission blessed the status quo on a number of fronts: the belief that America is innocent in terrorism matters, the bad guys are always the other guys, the roots of terrorism is external to the USA and non-white in nature, capitalism is kind and gentle and that's what the Middle East needs, America's national security is at stake (translation: control of Middle East oil), etc. Hence, I am very apprenhensive about the 9-11 commission's report.> [George Pinto on Dec 25] You may well be right but why should we take your word for it? Where is the evidence? Specifically, what are you "apprehensive" about? Btw, I checked amazon.com for information about the 9/11 Report and found an account of a book (by a Professor Griffin) which has critiqued it heavily. Reviews of the Griffin book, however, do not mention any of the issues you have raised in the second para of your posting. These were probably simply irrelevant to the 9/11 Commission's brief or TOR! I also went back to the 9/11 Report to check on its take on Bin Laden's views on Islam and America. I have concluded that your views would probably come perilously close to the "jihadist theme that portrays the United States as anti-Muslim (p. 375)", as the Report puts it, and hence there may be reason for one to feel slightly apprehensive about your intentions vis a vis Americans! Hope we will be disabused of this line of thinking in due course
