Originally posted by Passer By
Silly question but why would the red cross lie? Or do I have the wrong ICRC?
Why would anyone lie?
Broken down into a statement as simple as that, we can kind of see what the issue is.....people have agendas.
What puzzles me the most about your question, Passer By, is why you would automatically attribute honesty to people you have never met....The Red
Cross have plenty of word of mouth and action to back up their noble nature, but that doesn't automatically give them credibility in every
situation.....especially one as fixated as this.
The words of Saddam Hussein, who by the way has become more than a human and more of a concept, are something that many people would be interested in
hearing. Even before the 'Second Gulf War'.......he was labeled in such a way by the rest of the world with regards to the table and how the cards
were stacked. He was a concept because of what he did and what he was equated with. He was/is kind of a celebrity...infamous rather than famous, but
the interest factor is still there if not multiplied.
As such, everyone would want to know when he writes something....
Do you think that this fact is lost on the people managing the whole public relations aspect of the fallen Iraqi?
Especially when you consider
the drama surrounding not only the invasion of Iraq, but the subsequent occupation?
No. It is not. The release of this letter is an orchestrated move to appeal to the dramatic yearnings of a public that has been following this story
from the onset.....
Why would the Red Cross lie? Who's to say that they necassarily did? But the whole point of this post here is to express the need for everyone to
view the information they ingest with a logical and discerning mind.....
A better question may be..
Why would the people working with the Red Cross on this matter have any reason to lie to the Red Cross?....
Or something of that sort....
