It's hard to know just what to make of the confessions gushing out of Guantanamo this week. First, Khalid Sheikh Mohammad, who allegedly took responsibility for the 9/11 attacks, and now Waleed bin Attash, whom AP's Pauline Jelinek reports as having taken responsibility for blowing up the U.S.S. Cole.
Your blogstress knows nothing of bin Attash, and has no reason to doubt his confession other than the fact that it may have been coerced by torture-like methods. But that doesn't mean it's not true.
More to the point, thinks your écrivaine, are the remarks of Jamal Gunn, a 26-year-old in Virginia Beach who lost his brother, a U.S. sailor, in the Cole attack:
"The thing is, we want accountability from all levels, not just the foreign nationals who pulled off the attack, who masterminded the attack, but those who let it happen within our government as well," said Jamal Gunn, 26, of Virginia Beach, Va., whose brother, Cherone Gunn, was killed aboard the Cole. Gunn said the Cole should not have stopped in Yemen because that country was on a terrorist watch list.This, mes amis, was your cyberscribe's thought, exactly. What on earth was the Cole doing in Yemen in 2000? When news came that, for the first time since the embassy bombings in Africa, the U.S. Navy was docking a ship in Yemen, your net-tête scratched her pretty little tête, saying, "I dunno that's such a great idea." What did your blogstress know that the U.S. military apparently did not? Nothing she hadn't read in the newspapers, that's what. And what the newspapers said was that there was this bad guy named Osama bin Laden who liked to hurt Americans and had ties to Yemen, which was on the safe-harbor-for-terrorists list.
In fact, after the attacks of September 11, 2001, your blogstress was convinced that the U.S. commandos were looking in the wrong place for the tall one as they combed the caves of Tora Bora. She wondered, has anybody checked out Yemen? But what does she know? Sphere: Related Content