....assuming your prejudices concerning Muslims don't interfere....
....So let's not talk about "little fish" who don't do what Bin Laden told them was their duty. Let's talk about the BIG fish who actually kill Americans . . . and, in this country--out of the millions of Muslims who live here, they turn out to be very few. Don't they? And as for the little fish . . . well, you've slipped into the assumption game, big time. And you know what happens when you ASS-U-ME?
My prejudice? Didn't we just get finished 'discussing' how you tip toe around your prejudices by embracing rebranded profiling? You admit to the roll of the little fish, without which the big fish can't fund a cup of coffee, yet you won't quite explain why there is no will to follow the money beyond the prejudices of how you depict intel decisions.
You appreciate examples? What would happen if a spec. counsel would be appointed to 'investigate'? There was a recent one that just disbanded, did they get get their big fish prize, or were the little fish beat down into pleading to process crimes. Did a thirty plus year distinguished General Officer lose his home, savings, anddo just that when his son was threaten?
Big fish bear responsibility, but they never kill, they have little fish do their bidding. Yes, I believe there're are just a handful of big fish, but without prejudice, why can't I ask about the reasoning to enable them through other links in the chain. If there're links in the chain, if there're little fish, then they are breaking the law, right?
