I wonder where that fish could be...
Further to yesterday's SMH Pussy Parade, today they printed a far more sensible letter:
Gavin Atkins noted that whereas traditionally fish feed seals, on this occasion it's the other way around.
I'm not sure if Nathan Lee (Letters, May 3) is kidding, with his insistence that ''There should have been a fair trial and proper court process'' of Osama bin Laden. Assuming he is serious, it's just embarrassing to see how little stomach people seem to have. Does Mr Lee realise that bin Laden would have been firing an automatic weapon at the time he was shot? Perhaps the US soldiers should have read him his rights instead? As far as I'm concerned, a bullet to the head was too kind, and I feel sorry for the fish now feasting on him.
Daniel Lewis Rushcutters Bay
Gavin Atkins noted that whereas traditionally fish feed seals, on this occasion it's the other way around.
posted by Dan at 9:47 AM |
3 Comments:
"bin Laden would have been firing an automatic weapon at the time he was shot?"
Wrong! Mr Lee awaits your retraction and apology.
Actually, this works out as a win-win. Mr Lee can still wring his hands over extra-judicial killing while you continue singing endless choruses of ding-dong-the-witch-is-dead.
"Wrong! Mr Lee awaits your retraction and apology."
Obama and his staff keep changing the story. That's hardly Dan Lewis' fault.
Mr. Lee needs to look to John Brennan, the US government’s anti-terrorism chief, for that "retraction", as he's the one who made the initial claims. While he's at it, get him to ask why the hell the White House couldn't have settled on a blessed narrative before going public.
We've had two completely different "narratives" from the White House in as many days. Who knows, there may well be another one or two before the week is out.
The story changed after I sent the letter. However it's largely academic as there was a firefight and the notion they could have told him to "come quietly" is absurd.
Post a Comment
<< Home